PBS invited GMU Econ alum Mark Perry to respond to Nick Hanauer’s argument for raising the minimum wage. Here’s a slice from Mark’s superb response:
Remember that the real minimum wage is always zero, because that’s the wage that hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of workers will receive following an increase in the minimum wage to $15 an hour, because they will either lose their jobs or fail to find jobs when they enter the labor force. (See Congressional Budget Office report for data.) That’s a very cruel public policy, and I and many economists reject that form of cruelty as a progressive “scam” — and it’s a “scam” that would inflict the most harm on the most vulnerable among us.
The most disadvantaged Americans don’t need the alleged compassion of minimum wage advocates as much as they need entry-level jobs. And to maximize entry-level jobs, economic science tells us that we should allow market forces, not government bureaucrats and politicians, to determine wages in the labor market.
There are many weak arguments against Uncle Sam’s participation in trade agreements. Among these is the argument that such agreements ‘threaten U.S. sovereignty.’ My colleague Tyler Cowen explains why this argument is mistaken.
Yes, Clinton was also awful, but as I said, she’s a little more forthright about her awfulness — she wants free college, but at least she doesn’t try to say that free college is part of her plan to shrink the government.