Raising The Minimum Wage: Both Sides of The Coin: Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange
Raising The Minimum Wage: Both Sides of The Coin: Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange
Raising The Minimum Wage: Both Sides of The Coin: Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange
12-2007
Recommended Citation
Corwin, Conner Mitchell, "Raising the Minimum Wage: Both Sides of the Coin" (2007). University of Tennessee Honors Thesis Projects.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_chanhonoproj/1059
This is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Tennessee Honors Program at Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It
has been accepted for inclusion in University of Tennessee Honors Thesis Projects by an authorized administrator of Trace: Tennessee Research and
Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Raising the
Minimum Wage:
Both Sides of the Coin
VS
An Explanation of
Both Sides of the Argument
Conner Corwin
April 20, 2007
Finance 455
Raising the Minimum Wage:
Both Sides of the Coin
Document Outline
1.) Introduction
6.) References
2
Introduction
Discussion about what do with minimum wage laws here in America has been at a
higher than normal level since the Democratic Party took over as majority leader in both
the House of Representatives and the Senate in the recent midterm elections, giving them
control of Congress. There has been much talk about what good things can come to
America's lowest income workers as a result of an increase in the minimum wage, and
there has also been equally as nluch discussion over what negative effects this legislation
can have on those same people. The purpose of this paper is to bring both sides of this
argument together into one document and to be as objective as possible when analyzing
and describing all of the arguments for and against an increase in the national minimum
wage. After a brief description and background of United States minimum wage policies,
I will first discuss the alleged benefits objectively as possible, then the alleged societal
costs, and in the last section, I will give a touch of personal feeling while explaining my
3
Minimum Wage History and Facts
The first national minimum wage laws in the United States were passed as part of
the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, which also guaranteed time and a half for overtime in
certain jobs and prohibited oppressive child labor. The statutory federal minimum wage
can be defined as the lowest wage that employers may legally pay to their employees. If
employers do in fact try to get away with paying their employees less than this minimum,
these employees are entitled to the wages due to them as well as an equal amount of
Since 1938, there have been quite a nutnber of amendnlents to the Fair Labor
Standards Act that have accomplished many things, such as set rules about vacation time,
The Federal Hourly Minimum Wage more clearly define what kind of
Since Its Inception:
BlJ Associ at ed Press
4
amendment was passed by the Clinton Administration in 1996 and was surrounded by
controversy, just as there is now in the current push to again increase the minimum wage.
The Fair Minimum Wage Act of2007 is legislation to amend the FLSA of 1938 and it
serves to raise the federal minimunl wage from $5.15 to $7.25 in three increments. It was
January 10. The bill passed in the Senate as well on February 1 and is currently awaiting
a signature from President George Bush. There is much talk in the media about what
effects this increase in the minimum wage will have on the economy and on the low-
laws, but with great opposition from large companies and economists (Quigley 1996).
As of 2007, all of the states have some sort of minimum wage law except for South
Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee (The yellow states in the
5
diagram). The greet states have minimum wage laws set higher than federally required
and the blue states have laws that set their wage floor equal to what is required by the
federal government. Kansas, in red, is the one state whose state required minimum wage
is actually lower than is required by the federal minimum. This does not mean that
workers in Kansas make less than federally required. It simply means that the state
legislation has not been modified since the last increase in the federal minimum wage
back in 1996.
A list of state minimum wage laws and current dollar amounts can be found at the
6
Arguments For a Minimum Wage Increase
Introduction
The issue of whether not to increase the minimum wage or to even have one at all
has divided politicians and economists for years. Advocates of an increase in the
minimum wage make arguments that fall mostly into three categories. These categories
are: 1.) Arguments for the social welfare of America's lowest paid workers, 2.)
Arguments that claim corporate structure to be at fault and that federal legislation must be
put in place to force these companies to distribute the wealth more evenly in our
advanced society, and 3.) Arguments that attempt to explain how an increase in the
minimum wage would actually help or have no noticeable effect on the US economy.
"A decision to raise the minimum wage cannot be made on the basis of economic
analysis alone; it also requires the value judgments of elected officials. "
- Preston J. Miller
Vice President and Monetary Advisor
Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis
(Miller 1995 Pg 1)
There are many problems in this world for which there is no one unanimously
correct answer. Because each person is unique, people value certain things in a different
manner than others. These people who hold opposing viewpoints must make
compromises and when the final solution is decided upon, there are sure to be many
tradeoffs between what is gained and what is lost. Some advocates of a minimum wage
7
admit that there are some economic sacrifices that are worth making because, as a leading
economy in today's world, we should be able to support our lowest-income workers and
Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank, "These economists [that approved of the increase]
had to make a number of value judgments in order to reach their conclusion" (Miller
1995, Pg 1). Social welfare advocates of an increase in the minimum wage would say
that the benefits to society of increasing the wage of our lowest-paid workers outweigh
the economic costs to the more wealthy economic segments (this tradeoff is explained in
greater detail in the "Arguments Against an Increase in the Minimum Wage" section).
The following two segments explain more examples of "Social Welfare" arguments.
'6.011
10.00
decided as a country that we value a minimum wage, then this increase is certainly
necessary because of the decline in the value of the minimum wage over the years due to
8
inflation. The graph above shows how the real value of the national minimum wage has
decreased since the last wage increase in the late 90's, with a downward trend since the
late 60's. Basically, this means that even though the current rate of $5.15 is the highest
dollar amount that the minimum wage has been since its inception in 1938, the amount of
goods and services that can be purchased by minimum wage workers has declined about
37.5 percent from its highest level in 1968 (from $8.00 to $5.00, both amounts being
valued in 2006 dollars). Although the actual dollar amounts have increased, the effects of
inflation have decreased these workers' purchasing power at a rate of at least 3 percent a
year. One of the main goals of the advocates of an increase in the national minimum
wage is to increase the purchasing power of the workers who live and support a family on
this small amount of money. According to Figure 4 supplied from the Economic Policies
Institute, the average annual earnings (adjusted for inflation) of someone paid the
minimum wage has been below the poverty level for a family of three since 1969, and the
discrepancy between the poverty threshold and the annual earnings of a minimum wage-
I StO.OGti
government's 2004 estimate was
J7.!iGO
9
considered to be an "adequate standard of living." While some of the people living under
the poverty line own some type of home and have adequate food and clothing, others
can't afford to do basic things such as receive proper medical care, obtain any type of
non-government subsidized education, or in some cases, even eat. Things that most
Americans take for granted can be considered luxuries to around 10 to 12 percent of our
population, and this number is only going to increase as inflation rises and the purchasing
minimunl wage to improve the living standards of the lowest earning workers above what
it would otherwise be in a completely unregulated labor market. The main argument that
all minimum wage supporters share is that the current level of earnings for minimum
wage workers cannot be considered a living wage and should therefore be increased. The
problem with poverty in America is something that certainly needs to be dealt with, and
advocates of an increase in the national minimum wage would say that an increase in the
amount required to be paid to these low-income workers is certainly a step in the right
direction.
Federal Minimum Lags the Avg. State Minimum, and Not by a Little
10
poverty line. It simply says that since there are so many states that see the need to
increase the social welfare of their lowest-paid workers by setting a minimum wage
above the level that the national government has currently set, the nlajority of America
sees it fit to have a higher minimum wage and therefore our federal government's
legislation should reflect this view. There are currently a whopping 30 states that have
their minimum wage level set higher than that of the federal government. Many
advocates of the minimum wage would say that it is time for the federal government to
step up and even out the playing field a little bit (US DOL).
"U.S. companies are about to wrap up their fourth consecutive year of spectacular
profit growth, filling corporate coffers with cash and keeping the bull market alive
on Wall Street. But to many rank-and-file workers, the booming bottom line may
only serve as a reminder of what has been missingfrom their own paychecks."
In many cases, big businesses have an extremely large net income and CEO
reasonably possible for their shareholders. They would therefore in many cases not pay
their employees more than they think is the most economically efficient amount (Some
companies pay minimum wage and others pay more to retain more employees to decrease
turnover and therefore decrease training costs, etc.). If these companies are to stand true
11
to their fiduciary duties, they will not pay more than is required to make the most profit
for their shareholders. If the government were to increase the nlinimum wage that was
required to be paid by these big companies, the living standards of America's lowest-
earning workers could be improved at the cost of lower returns to shareholders. This
12
These two Princeton colleagues set out to see if an increase in the minimum wage
level of New Jersey (as well as other cross-state studies) would produce results as
neutral or positive correlation between wage growth and employment. They collected
employment information from managers of fast food restaurants during this four year
study and they used this data to analyze what actually happened after an increase in the
minimun1 wage was introduced into the selected local and state economies. They found
in this study that, contrary to popular belief and what was expected by classic economic
wisdom, as wages grew, so did employment. This table was taken from their 1997 book,
Myth and Measurement: The New Economics of the Minimum Wage, and these results
from their many small experiments show that there is actually a positive correlation
Card and Kreuger are most famous for their study that focused on the effects of a
New Jersey state minin1um wage increase across the borders of New Jersey and
Pennsylvania. This situation provided these two economists with a perfect example to
study cross-state effects of an increase in the minimum wage. They found that
minimum wage was constant" (Card and Kreuger Pg 1). While their findings are
controversial and other economists have scrutinized their methods, this study has
remained the main source of proof that not all economic problems and scenarios are
13
Arguments Against a Minimum Wage Increase
HThe Evidence from a large body of existing research suggests that minimum
-David Neumark
N ationa! Bureau of Economic Research Associate
Professor of Economics at the University of California
(Neumark 2006 Pg 1)
economists that explain why an increase in the minimum wage could be good for the
American economy and its low-income workers. In this section I will go into an in-depth
discussion of why other economists say that this increase would actually be bad for the
economy and "that minimum wage increases do more harm than good"( above).
-Mike Flynn
Employment Policies Institute
("Hot Topic" WSJ 2006 Pg 1)
14
decreases, given that all else is held constant and the demand for the good isn't perfectly
inelastic. For example, let's say you were a smoker and you normally smoked 2 packs of
cigarettes a day at a price of $4.00 a pack. If overnight the government imposed taxes of
$6.00 per pack on your cigarettes, would you continue to smoke two packs of cigarettes a
day at $10.00 a pack? Even if you were extremely addicted you would probably cut back
on how much you smoked because of the new increase in price. You might even
substitute chewing tobacco for these high-priced cigarettes or be forced to find a new vice
altogether. The point is that as the price of the cigarettes increases, the demand for them
would decrease. This theory of economics can be readily applied to the upconling
Labor can be thought of in the same context. If there is a sudden increase in the
cost of labor, the demand for that labor will decrease and companies will therefore use
less. This could result in decreased overall output or replacement of human workers with
machines when possible. In any case, the increase in the minimum wage would result in
increased wages for those who keep their jobs and unemployment for those who are let
go as a result of higher labor costs. The question is then, "Does an increase in the
minimum wage make the American low-wage worker better off?" Well I guess it would
depend on whether or not you lost your job because of it. Certainly the workers with a
higher wage are better off, but the newly-unemployed individuals are worse off.
There are many other arguments that consider additional ways in which an
increase in the minimum wage could hurt the American economy, but they are all based
on this simple point. The fundamentals of econonlic theory state that, holding everything
15
else constant, an increase in the price of labor will result in a decrease in its use, and
higher unemployment.
According to Gary Becker and Richard Posner, "No." In their article, "How to
Make the Poor Poorer," they explain that "The losers will lose more than the gainers
gain" (Becker & Posner 2007 Pg 1). Yes, the people that are able to keep their jobs after a
federal minimum wage increase now earn more money and can afford a few more things
in life than they could before and might even be considered above the poverty line, but
the people who lose their jobs have lost their entire inconle and are now earning
absolutely nothing. Keep in mind, its not as if these people can just stroll up to another
employer of unskilled labor and get a new job, because the other minimum wage-paying
employers are adapting to the increase in labor costs as well and most likely are not
enough to overcome the now unenlployed losers' losses, low-income workers would be
hurt after the ramifications of price increases came around to them. Companies in an
industry that uses large amounts of unskilled labor wouldn't be able to or would choose
not to layoff employees as a remedy to the increase in labor costs. This would result in
an increase in industry prices on the products and services they offer to offset the higher
cost of labor. Although these workers make more money, they need to spend more of it
to buy what they need because of the inflation of costs that came from the increase in the
16
So instead of X workers making $5.15 an hour and paying a certain price for
goods, we have a portion of X that is now unemployed and the remaining workers are
making a touch more and both are paying more than the pre-wage increase price for the
goods they need to buy. Although economists differ in their views of exactly what
portion of the workforce will lose their jobs, the point is simply that unemployment will
HA minimum wage is equivalent to a wage subsidy for unskilled workers paid for
-Gregory Mankiw
Former Council of Economic Advisors Chairman
Harvard Economics Professor
(Sachdev 2003 Pg 1)
Outside the realm of the relationship between a small business and its employees,
an entire industry can suffer on the whole from an increase in the national minimum
wage. There are certain companies and industries that depend more on labor and are
therefore hurt more than other companies. If managers in this type industry or company
have the option of raising prices on products to compensate for the growth in the cost of
labor, these managers could save their entire workforce and then no one would
immediately lose their job as a result. On the other hand, this increase in price is likely to
be felt in the form of fewer sales for whichever companies choose this option. So by
keeping their employees and raising prices, companies become immediately less
17
competitive with other companies in the industry that simply laid off employees to keep
The effects of decreased competitiveness are felt wider than in just the domestic
increase in the national minimum wage, the entire industry is hurt in the global market.
This effect is also increased if these industries are labor-intensive. For example, if
American T-shirt manufacturers were suddenly forced to pay the cotton pickers an extra
$2 an hour, the price of each individual T-shirt would be certain to rise. This rise in
price, as previously explained, would make a customer somewhere else in the world
discontinue purchasing from their American supplier and buy from another country
whose labor costs aren't so high. The T-shirt manufacturer would also lose money in a
second way because their American customers, who previously bought from them
because they cost just barely less than having to pay for the extra shipping costs on T-
shirts from abroad, will now go ahead and buy abroad because they aren't saving any
There was a study done on the effects of Oregon's mandatory annual minimunl
wage increases to keep up with inflation. While a local eatery owner in Portland says
that "I don't worry about it, because if I have to raise prices, next door will have to do the
same thing," people who work in industries on a larger scale have run into financial
distress. Oregon's $4 Billion farm industry has been hurt the most, says the study. "The
biggest yelps have come from Oregon's farm industry... So while a competing blueberry
farm in New Jersey can pay $6.15 an hour and one in Chile may pay even less, Oregon
farmers pay $7.50" (Solomon Pg 1). And a local farmer Barb Iverson said, "Why grow a
18
potato here when you can do it in Idaho for $5.15 [an hour]?" (Solomon Pg 1). How can
they expect to compete? Without government subsidization in today's flat world, they
can't.
therefore increased labor costs would say that it is clearly not good for business because
out the current minimum wage level's Source: http://W\¥.W.caglecartoons.com/arch ive.asp? Arti stID= {F8 ECF 45 B-DEF 5-
4444-93C3-BO I E3607 ACFB I
inadequacy to provide enough money for a family. In reality, most workers who receive
Source: http://www.house.gov/jec/cost-gov/regs/minimum/againstlfig-2.gif
19
percent are between 16-19 years old. Many of the people who are included in the
"minimum wage or lower earners" are tipped workers. Restaurants in many states are
allowed to pay their servers less than the minimunl wage because the servers earn tips,
which bring them above the hourly minimum wage. Even though these workers can earn
loads of money, they are sometimes included in the "minimum wage or lower earners",
and this skews the number of people who would be affected by a change in the minimunl
wage to make it look bigger. Although economists aren't sure to what degree this skews
the data, it is important to note that these measurements are sometimes slightly
Any way you look at it, an increase in the minimum wage increases the income of
many teenagers and other youngsters that work only part-time and have the job only as a
source of extra spending money. While this isn't inherently bad, the purpose of
increasing the minimum wage is to help out the poverty-stricken people who are trying to
survive on these wages. Looking at the pie chart provided by the Employment Policies
Institute, we can see that the single parents trying to support a family by themselves and
the married, single-earner families together make up only about 11 percent of the total
number of people who earn wages in the range of$5.15 to $7.25 an hour and would
therefore be affected by an increase in the minimum wage. This number compares with a
Whopping 35.5 percent of earners in this range that live with their parents and are most
likely not a major contributor to the household income. According to opponents of the
minimum wage, there are better, more efficient ways of distributing wealth to the poor
without loading teenager's pockets at the cost of adding financial strain to many
20
companies, unemployment of people who really need the money, and decreased industry
For most all economists, the question is not whether or not to help the poor, but
professor at the University of Chicago, and Richard Posner, a law professor at the same
institution, "As a means of raising people from poverty or near poverty, the minimum
wage is inferior to the Earned Income Tax Credit, which compensates for low wages
without interfering with the labor market or conferring windfalls on the non-poor"
The Earned Income Tax Credit is a refundable tax credit that either reduces or
eliminates federal income tax on low-income workers. It has become one of the biggest
part or all of a low-income individual's taxes and therefore giving them more spending
power by reducing the amount of money that they would have otherwise paid out to the
federal government in the form of taxes. The Earned Income Tax Credit also works as a
type of subsidy to workers who currently earn too little to pay taxes in the first place.
These low-income workers, in effect, pay a "negative" tax on their earned income. Many
economists seek an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit instead of an increase in
the minimum wage because the EITC is a direct link between the taxpayers, the
government, and low-income families. These economists favor the EITC because there is
21
also minimal interference in free trade and there is no industry-wide increase in
unemployment.
There is of course still debate about whether or not this is the perfect solution to
all of America's poverty problems, because the Earned Income Tax Credit has faults as
well, including the fact that the EITC places the burden on taxpayers and reduces
governnlent income. However the main argument for the Earned Income Tax Credit as
opposed to the minimum wage is that it distributes wealth to poor workers and their
families without putting an unnecessarily large burden on employers. For the purposes of
this paper, just know that not all opponents of the minimum wage are against helping
low-income individuals. Many of them simply think that the minimum wage isn't what
"While it is not yet clear why Card, Katz and Krueger got the results that they did,
it is clear that their findings are directly contrary to virtually every empirical
"Both economic common sense and past research contradict the Princeton
the federal minimum wage shows that rumors of the death of the conventional
22
-Donald Deere, Kevin Murphy, and Finis Weltch
Texas A&M and University of Chicago Professors
(Deere, Murphy, & Weltch 1995 Pg 1)
As explained earlier in the "Studies Show ... " section of the arguments for an
increase in the minimum wage, Card and Kreuger found that an increase in New Jersey's
Many minimum wage supporters use this study as proof that conventional economics can
more than to find flaws in the Card and Kreuger Study? According to many economists,
this study was poorly done they are out to prove it.
The problem with the Card and Kreuger study was not their results, but rather
their methodology. According to Deere, Murphy and Weltch, the Card and Kreuger
Study examined only a single state in most of their experiments and they only looked at
one industry. One of the most widely scrutinized parts of their experinlent was the fact
that they didn't use actual payroll data. They instead used a telephone survey approach
where they simply asked managers about the number of workers that they employed and
nothing about the number of hours that these workers did in fact work (Millstead). To
correctly measure the effects of an increase in the minimum wage, it is important to know
how many hours they worked. Card and Kreuger neglected to collect this information. If
the number of employees for a given fast-food restaurant rises from 4 to 5, that shows a
25% increase in employment, but if each employee only works 32 hours a week instead
of their usual 40, the actual hours worked by the employees as a whole didn't change at
all. In this situation, the actual employment can hardly be said to have been changed and
many economists claim that the Card and Kreuger study is flawed because it does not
23
take this into account by not collecting infonnation on actual hours worked by the
methodology and then redid their study using actual payroll data from the same region
and time period. Not surprisingly, they came up with the opposite, traditional conclusion.
When accounting for actual hours worked and not just number of employees, they found
that the hours worked in New Jersey fast-food restaurants did in fact decline after the
When advocates of a policy use only one study that shows results contradicting
economic thought and many other academic studies on the same topic, one can't help but
be suspicious of this single study's findings. Opponents of the minimum wage would say
that this study is flawed and can therefore not be considered to be evidence that disproves
In the last section, I explained that the Card and Kreuger study showed results
"contradicting economic thought and many other academic studies on the topic." Because
of this claim, I deemed it worthy to have a section describing the results fronl a few of
these other studies. One of these such studies was done in 2006 by the Show-Me
Institute in Missouri. This policy study was done by David Neumark, a professor of
National Bureau of Economic Research. This policy study corrlbined the research of
many economists nation-wide and found that: 1) Minimum wages do in fact reduce
24
employment of young and less-skilled workers, 2) Minimum wages, in many
may make them worse off, increasing poverty, and 3) Minimum wages have longer-run
adverse effects, lowering the acquisition of skills and therefore lowering wages and
earnings even beyond the age when individuals are most directly affected by a higher
minimum (Neumark 2006 Pg 3). The reasoning behind the first has already been
more in-dept discussion on finding number 3 can be seen in the following section
entitled: "Lower Long-Term Skills." Point number 2 is one that is central to the
argument against an increase in the minimum wage. After summarizing many economic
studies that supported this claim and others that didn't, Neumark "took a direct approach"
(Neumark 2006 Pg 18) and did a study himself to find the overall effectiveness of the
minimum wage as a tool against poverty. His more direct approach examined both state
and federal minimum wage increases and he "used methods that provide very flexible
(Neumark 2006 Pg 18). He then explains that, "Although direct evidence on the effects
on low-skill workers differentiated by family income has not been offered, these results
are consistent with more of the adverse effects of minimum wages falling on low-skill
In a separate, slightly different study done by two well published PhD economists
from Chicago, Aaronson and French examined government-collected price data and
found that the effects of both reducing total output because of raised prices and the
substitution of other inputs rather than labor because of higher labor costs are important
25
(Aaronson and French). As described earlier in "Unemployment: Fundamental
Economics," labor is just like any other input. If the costs of one of the inputs of a good
are increased, the producers of that good will seek to either reduce the amount of that
input used and/or discontinue use of that input and find another to replace it. For
example, if all of Smoothie King's top-selling products contain oranges, what would be
the natural thing for them to do if there was an awful freeze and all of the oranges in
Florida were ruined? They could just continue to sell their orange-containing smoothies
at regular price and try to make it until the price of oranges came down, even if they were
forced to sell their snl00thies at a loss for some indefinite period of time. Smoothie King
with tangerines or some other fruit that "Where do you want the new guy to start,"
lose a few sales on that type of smoothie. As the study explains, labor can be compared
to this smoothie example. If the price of labor is suddenly and permanently raised,
employers are possibly forced to cut back on this type of labor and if possible replace
human work with machines to do the same type of work (as the political cartoon explains
26
By using this government-collected price data, they showed that a 10 percent
increase in the minimum wage should, on average, reduce minimum wage employment
also by about 10 percent. Because only 30 percent of all restaurant industry workers
would be affected by this increase, this should reduce restaurant industry employment by
about 3 percent. Taking this projection into account, the current legislation raising the
minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 (a 41 percent increase) would result in a 12.3 percent
decrease in restaurant industry employment. The Aaronson and French study was then
compared to other surveys published in the Journal ofEconomic Literature and its
results were found to be within 0.5 percent of the average loss in employment found by
other such studies (Aaronson and French). Opponents of an increase in the minimum
wage base their arguments both on sound economic academic theory as well as the many
"Over the longer-term minimum wages lead to lower skill levels and therefore
-David Neumark
National Bureau of Economic Research Associate
Professor of Economics at the University of California
(Neumark 2006 Pg 3)
overlooked, even by staunch opponents, is that these higher nlininlum wages can actually
lead to lower wages down the road for affected workers. Higher minimum wages
27
encourage employers to cut training expenses and also students to leave school in search
of these higher wages, therefore limiting their education, training, and long-term income.
If employers all of a sudden have to pay their employees more than what they currently
do, they may be forced to cut employee training, thus depriving these low-income
are trading in their opportunity for long-term advancement and higher wages for a small
increase in their current income. While living the minimum wage lifestyle is often not
completely by choice, some high school students may see these slightly higher wages and
choose for themselves that going to college or even receiving more of any type of
training looks a touch less inviting because the gap between what they could potentially
receive and what they are forced by law to receive is made that much smaller because of
this increase in the minimum wage. As was said in the report by the Joint Economic
Committee of the United States Congress, "For many workers this is a very bad trade-off,
but one for which the law provides no alternative" (Joint Economic Committee 1995 Pg
1).
28
Summary and Personal Conclusions
After all of my research, I've discovered many things about the hotly-debated
minimum wage issue. First, almost all of the arguments nlade by opponents of the
minimum wage are based on the economic effects of such legislation on the national
economy and its low-income workers. They argue that, as a result of a minimum wage
increase (or the existence of a minimum wage in general), 1) Unemployment among the
poor is increased, 2) Low-inconle workers as a group do not benefit and may more than
likely be negatively affected, 3) The economy as a whole suffers, and that 4) There are
other, more efficient ways of fighting poverty. On the other hand, most of the arguments
for a minimum wage are based on the idea of social welfare. Advocates of a minimum
wage argue among other things that, even if there are potential negative economic effects,
it is not ethically or morally right in a nation as advanced and powerful as ours to leave a
portion of our nation's citizens living under the poverty level when they work full-time.
These advocates say that what is currently being paid to America's lowest earning
families is not enough to be considered a living wage, and that the raising the nlinimum
amount that these workers are required to eanl is, ifnot a solution, at least a step in the
right direction.
While both sides of the issue have strong points, I personally find the arguments
put forth by opponents of the minimum wage to be more convincing. The fundamentals
of economic theory state that, holding everything else constant, an increase in the price of
labor will result in a decrease in its use, and therefore higher unemployment among
minimum wage workers is the result. I understand and appreciate the benefits gained by
the workers that are able to keep their jobs and earn a higher income to help improve
29
their standard of living, but I think that the workers who lose their jobs and the
individuals that are not able to find a job because of a depressed market for unskilled
labor experience losses that outweigh the benefits gained by those who retain their jobs.
Almost everyone who earns the minimum wage would be thrilled if the federal
government were to require their employers to pay them an extra two dollars an hour, but
I guarantee that their take on the minimum wage would change in a heartbeat if they were
the in the group of individuals who lost their job because of it.
30
References
Aaronson, Daniel and Eric French. Output Prices and the Minimum Wage. Employment Policies
Institute. June 2006.
Becker, Gary and Richard Posner. "How to make the Poor Poorer." The Wall Street Journal. 26
January 2007.
Card, David and Alan Kruger. Myth and Measurement: The New Economics of the Minimum Wage.
Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton University Press, 1997.
Hot Topic. "Time for the $5.15 Minimum wage to Punch Out?" The Wall Street Journal. 11
November 2006.
Joint Economic Committee. "50 Years of Research on the Minimum Wage." Congress of the United
States. 15 February 1995.
Miller, Preston. "The New Economics ofa Minimum Wage Hike." Federal Gazette. October 1995.
Millstead, David. "Amendment 42's Effect? In the Middle." Rocky Mountain News. 26 October
2006.
Neumark, David. "Policy Study: The Economic Effects of Minimum Wages." Show-me Institute. 2
October 2006.
Petruno, Tom. "Wages of Average Workers Trailing Far Behind Surge in Corporate Profits." The
Seattle Times. 19 December 2006.
Quigley, William. "A Fair Day's Pay for a Fair Day's Work: Time to Raise and Index the Minimum
Wage." St. Mary's L. J. 1996.
Rector, Robert and Kirk Johnson. "Understanding Poverty in America." Heritage Foundation. 15
January 2004.
Sachdev, Sanjiv. "Raising the rate: An Evaluation of the Uprating Mechanism for the Minimum
Wage." Employee Relations. 2003.
Solomon, Deborah. "Weighing Minimum Wage Hikes." The Wall Street Journal. November 3, 2006.
Williams, Bo. "Where Knox Co. Stands in Area Teacher Salaries." WATE 6 News. 21 March 2007.
31