I always get a chuckle considering the Fraser Institute’s opposition to any increases in the minimum wage. After all, this is the organization that is also perennially opposed to any controls on executive compensation. However, my personal comedic moment aside is this not the time to ask what the minimum wage is there for in the first place? Is it there to set a minimum price of labour so to avoid a slippage into the long-discredited economic conditions of the Dickensian age, which produced neither full employment nor wide-spread economic prosperity?
If your answer is “NO” then please continue indulging in the Fraser Institute press releases. Otherwise the next question to ask is: what should such minimal benchmark be set at? An official level of poverty income strikes me as a good place to start without destroying the original intent. However, it does not end there since the real value of poverty income fluctuates with cost living just like at any other wage level. Typically, the cost of living (i.e. inflation) goes up, necessitating upward adjustments from time to time.
Since the last minimum wage reset a number of years ago, the cost of living has increased immensely. This is an undeniable fact. On this basis, it appears completely reasonable to argue for minimum wage increases, whatever the actual number. Above all, is it not what would anybody expect from a civilized society?
In conclusion, during the last decade we have witnessed considerable increases in higher, professional, wage levels without any detriment to the overall level of corresponding employment, negating the main thrust of the Fraser Institute’s argument. If accountants, teachers and doctors have managed to maintain their working hours despite increasing wages why should not fast food workers?
If your answer is “NO” then please continue indulging in the Fraser Institute press releases. Otherwise the next question to ask is: what should such minimal benchmark be set at? An official level of poverty income strikes me as a good place to start without destroying the original intent. However, it does not end there since the real value of poverty income fluctuates with cost living just like at any other wage level. Typically, the cost of living (i.e. inflation) goes up, necessitating upward adjustments from time to time.
Since the last minimum wage reset a number of years ago, the cost of living has increased immensely. This is an undeniable fact. On this basis, it appears completely reasonable to argue for minimum wage increases, whatever the actual number. Above all, is it not what would anybody expect from a civilized society?
In conclusion, during the last decade we have witnessed considerable increases in higher, professional, wage levels without any detriment to the overall level of corresponding employment, negating the main thrust of the Fraser Institute’s argument. If accountants, teachers and doctors have managed to maintain their working hours despite increasing wages why should not fast food workers?
No comments:
Post a Comment