The Failed Moral Argument for a “Living Wage”
By Ryan McMaken
September 5, 2015
*** begin quote ***
A Low Wage Is Unacceptable, but a Zero Wage Is Fine
And this leads to the fact that when faced with high wages, employers will seek to replace employers with non-human replacements — such as these automated cashiers at McDonalds — or other labor-saving devices.
But this phenomenon is simply ignored by the living-wage advocates. Thus, the argument that employers are morally obligated to not pay low wages becomes strangely silent in the face of workers earning no wage at all.
Indeed, we see few attempts at passing laws mandating that employers hire human beings instead of machines. While it’s no doubt true that some neo-Luddites would love to see this happen, virtually no one argues that employers not be allowed to employ labor-saving devices. Certainly, anyone making such an argument is likely to be laughed out of the room since most everyone immediately recognizes that it would be absurd to pass laws mandating that a road builder, for example, hire people with shovels instead of using bulldozers and paving machines.
*** end quote ***
The reason that economics is called the “dismal science” is because it rubs our nose in “scarcity”.
It makes no moral arguments; it merely points out that limited resources are a finite constraint upon us.
Like the “Law” of Gravity — and the politicians’ use of the word ‘law’ has really corrupted our understanding that a physical “LAW” has no exceptions — describes how a rock drops. So too the “Laws” of Economics describe how society — not Gooferment — can organize to maximize satisfaction, minimize discomfort, and ensure that everyone is equally “happy”. Laugh.
The truly free market serves to ensure that everyone cooperates.
And, then along comes the gang that calls themselves Gooferment and messes it all up.
Crony Capitalism and corruption makes them interfere with the smooth operation of the market.
SO why are wages any different than apples, cars, plumbers, or any other good or service?
Just by them passing a diktat or regulation, black youth unemployment skyrockets.
Didn’t we have civil rights marches to free the Black population?
Only to put them in welfare poverty!
# – # – # – # – #
Eliminate all licensing requirements for medical schools, hospitals, pharmacies, and medical doctors and other health care personnel. Their supply would almost instantly increase, prices would fall, and a greater variety of health care services would appear on the market. Competing voluntary accreditation agencies would take the place of compulsory government licensing….Eliminate all government restrictions on the production and sale of pharmaceutical products and medical devices. This means no more Food and Drug Administration, which presently hinders innovation and increases costs.… [Our country’s robust legal profession will keep drug companies in line.]Deregulate the health insurance industry. Private enterprise can offer insurance against events over whose outcome the insured possesses no control…. [Like insuring one’s home against fires and floods, buy insurance that covers expenses for major injuries and illnesses, not like current misnamed health “insurance” that covers routine doctor visits.]Eliminate all subsidies to the sick or unhealthy. Subsidies create more of whatever is being subsidized. Subsidies for the ill and diseased breed illness and disease, and promote carelessness, indigence, and dependency. If we eliminate them, we would strengthen the will to live healthy lives and to work for a living. In the first instance, that means abolishing Medicare and Medicaid. [Private charity will once again play an important role in medical care.]