Letter writer: The economics of a living wage

Graphic by Lori Deaton

It’s like magic. Mention starvation wages, and a troll will appear wielding his shibboleth — “If wages go up, employment goes down. QED.”

In 1994, Card and Krueger demonstrated that employment rose after the minimum wage was raised in New Jersey. In the quarter-century since, a variety of follow-up studies have come to a variety of conclusions. The important point, though, is that it’s not an open-and-shut case.

The open-and-shut wording seems to be an I-heard-it-in-a-bar simplification of something like “At the margin, ceteris paribus, the incremental cost of labor will equal its incremental value.” The two qualifications — invariably lost in translation — are important.

First, “at the margin.” What happens at the margin — in this case, whether one extra person is hired or not — need bear no relation to what happens overall — how many people are hired in total. High-income folk — like recent Republican candidates for president — face the federal marginal income tax rate of 39.6 percent, and yet neither paid anything like that as their average rate. Indeed one boasted of having paid an overall income tax rate of 0 percent.

Second, “ceteris paribus” — other things being equal. But are they? Consider a thought experiment. Two $10 bills are lying on the sidewalk in Pack Square. One is picked up by someone who works less than 20 hours a week at a starvation wage. She rushes off and spends the money on food for her kids. Spending that $10 generates — because of the multiplier — extra economic activity in the city of (let’s use the International Monetary Fund’s [median] estimate) $6 over three years.

The other is picked up by a member of the downtown gentry who doesn’t really need the extra, puts it in a bank savings account and after three years has accumulated 3 cents in interest. (Once upon a time the bank would have loaned the money out to a business creating new wealth, but nowadays it would go to a property speculator and create only inflation).

So the effect of giving extra money to the poorer person can be 200 times the effect of giving it to the richer one. Things are not equal.

If a business pays living rather than starvation wages, it raises the level of economic activity — which would tend to increase hiring — and reduces the tax levied on us all for subsidized housing and transport, food banks and the like — which would tend to increase economic activity and hence hiring.

Econ 101 describes a free market in terms that make it clear that lasting profits are impossible. And yet all around, we see businesses declaring obscene profits year after year. Clearly, those businesses are not operating in textbook free markets and have found a way to evade competition — perhaps through what Warren Buffet calls a “moat” around their business, perhaps through collusion with their “competitors,” perhaps by the judicious purchase of a politician or two.

A business that buys and sells in nonfree markets, but spouts free market propaganda when dealing with its workers is dealing in hypocrisy. A business that declares a profit while paying its workers so little that they remain a charge on local taxpayers is a fraud. A business that declares a profit and ships it off to Head Office while leaving us to house and feed its workers is worse.

A manager who will not pay her workers enough to feed and house themselves, let alone their families, deserves to be tarred, feathered and drummed out of town.

— Geoff Kemmish


Thanks for reading through to the end…

We share your inclination to get the whole story. For the past 25 years, Xpress has been committed to in-depth, balanced reporting about the greater Asheville area. We want everyone to have access to our stories. That’s a big part of why we've never charged for the paper or put up a paywall.

We’re pretty sure that you know journalism faces big challenges these days. Advertising no longer pays the whole cost. Media outlets around the country are asking their readers to chip in. Xpress needs help, too. We hope you’ll consider signing up to be a member of Xpress. For as little as $5 a month — the cost of a craft beer or kombucha — you can help keep local journalism strong. It only takes a moment.

About Letters
We want to hear from you! Send your letters and commentary to letters@mountainx.com

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

2 thoughts on “Letter writer: The economics of a living wage

  1. Lulz

    LOL, how are you supposed to have living wages in Asheville? The politicians are too busy selling the place out to corporations and special interests. They’re the only one’s that can afford the faux liberalism here.

  2. Deplorable Infidel

    LOL…true but lots of builders are getting rich building regular non appealing houses that go for $400,000 and up …amazing…some of these new ones are just awful…

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.