Archive

Minimum wage follies: Maximum fallout | TribLIVE.com
Editorials

Minimum wage follies: Maximum fallout

From Washington, D.C., to Seattle, the $15 minimum wage already has taken a discernible, if not predictable, toll:

• Wal-Mart dumped plans for two locations in D.C.

• Employment rates for low-wage workers in Seattle have dropped by about 1 percentage point in comparison with other regions that didn’t raise wages.

Such is the fallout predicted by “the long-standing economic consensus on the effects of the wage mandates,” writes Richard Berman of the public affairs firm Berman and Co. for The Washington Times.

No less predictable is the response from the apologists for government-mandated wage floors. Among them, union-backed Media Matters reports that overall, Seattle’s job growth is triple the national average. But, just like a good magic trick, that argument shifts attention from job losses at the bottom rung and instead focuses on the overall ladder.

At stake are more than entry-level jobs. For example, Chicago teenagers who landed summer jobs were 43 percent less likely to be charged with violent crimes nearly a year later, according to a 2014 study in the journal Science.

“Hopefully, leftist wage-hike proponents will one day realize that before you can get a good job, you need a first job,” writes Mr. Berman.

Robbing young people of that opportunity in blind pursuit of an artificially inflated wage is an injustice beyond the economic consequences.


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.