That Cold, Cruel Monster the State
By Thomas Sowell
This coverage is scheduled to begin in
January 2015 — that is, after the 2014 elections and nearly two years before
the 2016 elections. Politicians show a lot of cleverness in protecting their
own interests, even if they show very little wisdom as far as serving the
public interest.
If making
household workers subject to the minimum wage law is expected to produce good
results, why not let those good results begin early, so that voters will know
about them before the next election?
But, if
this new extension of the minimum wage law opens a whole new can of worms — as
is more likely — politicians who support this extension want to insulate
themselves from a voter backlash. Hence artfully choosing January 2015 as the
effective date, to minimize the political risks to themselves
The reason
this particular extension of the minimum wage law is likely to open a can of
worms is that both household workers and those who employ them will face more
complications than employers and employees in industry or commerce.
First of
all, ill or elderly individuals who need someone to help them from time to time
are not like employers who have a business that regularly hires people and may
have a personnel department to handle all the paperwork and keep up with all
the legal requirements when government bureaucrats are involved.
Often the
very reason for hiring part-time household workers is that some ill or elderly
individuals have limited energy or capacity for handling things that were easy
to handle when they were younger or in better health. Bureaucratic paperwork
and legal technicalities are the last thing they need to have to add to their
existing problems.
The people
being hired to do household chores also have special problems.
Often such
people have limited education, and may also have limited knowledge of the
English language.
Why make
it harder for ill or elderly people to get some much-needed help in their
homes, and harder for low-skilled people to get some much-needed jobs?
Despite
all the talk about how we need more people with high-tech skills, there is also
a need for people who can help clean a home or carry groceries or do other
things that need doing, and which do not require years of schooling. As the
elderly become an ever growing proportion of the population, there will be a
growing demand for such people.
More
precisely, there would be more jobs for such people if the government did not
step in to complicate the hiring process and price potential workers out of
jobs, with minimum wages set by third parties who do not, and cannot, know what
the economic realities are for either the ill and the elderly or for those whom
the ill and the elderly wish to hire.
Minimum
wage laws in general are usually set with no real knowledge of the economic
realities and alternatives for either employers or employees. Third parties are
simply enabled to indulge themselves by imagining what is “fair” — and pay no
price for being wrong about the actual economic consequences.That is why
countries with minimum wage laws usually have much higher rates of unemployment
than those few places where there have been no minimum wage laws, such as
Switzerland or Singapore — or the United States, before the first federal
minimum wage law was passed in 1931.
Government interventions in labor
markets have already created needless complications, and not just by minimum
wage laws. The welfare state has already taken out of the labor market millions
of people who could perform work that would be well within the capacity of
inexperienced young people or people with limited education.
With
welfare, such people can stay home, watch television, do drugs or whatever — or
else they can hang out in the streets, often confirming the old adage that the
devil finds work for idle hands.
No comments:
Post a Comment