Guest Commentary
by Eric Andersen
Dear Council President Gloria,
Perhaps no man has had a bigger impact on classical liberal thinking than French political economist Frederic Bastiat (1801 -1850). Bastiat pinned his hopes for liberty on the United States because he saw no place where law was kept more within its proper domain: the protection of every person’s liberty and property. The result of using law defensively, as opposed to coercively, created more opportunity and prosperity for the poor than any civilization in 5,000 years of human history.
I think Bastiat would be disappointed if he were alive today and could observe what you are attempting to accomplish with minimum wage legislation.
Your proposed law would permit the city to use coercive force against those of us whose only offense is employing our fellow San Diegans, and would criminalize both business owners and laborers who defend their liberty interest in freely negotiating their own terms of employment.
In your political career you’ve been an ardent defender of minority rights. The most vulnerable minority in our community is the individual seeking to preserve his unalienable right to the product of his effort against coercive forces of the government.
I think our community is missing a wonderful opportunity to help the poor by not addressing the root of our affordability issues – legislators acting arbitrarily and behaving as if the laws of economics do not apply to them. This is insensitive to both individual liberty and economic reality. I think we are in agreement — we should not be using San Diegans as raw material for economic experiments.
“There are thousands hacking at the branches
to the one striking at the root.”
– Henry David Thoreau
Laws which restrict peaceful voluntary exchange between individuals are the problem- not business owners. Laws which fail to treat all San Diegans as equals are the problem – not the owner of our local restaurant or market.
San Diego business owners have never been the cause of affordability issues – they are simply a scapegoat. I believe business owners are real life super heroes creating prosperity for themselves and others at great risk to themselves and their families.
Behavioral science tells us we get more of what we incentivize and less of what we tax. Do we believe penalizing business owners and redistributing their property is the road to prosperity? I have to be honest the legislative penalty being considered by the city doesn’t motivate me to work harder or incline me to hire more staff. Raising the minimum wage is a disincentive for me to hire more staff and creates an incentive for me to relocate where my liberty is respected and business conditions are more favorable.
This proposal is a waste of time and resources. It delays the discourse our city leaders should be having about eliminating unnecessary regulation here and in Sacramento. This proposal gives the poor a false hope that affordability issues are being addressed. I guarantee you it is not.
When you use law coercively to take a dollar from one man’s pocket and give it to another you haven’t created wealth. You have only removed it from the one who was putting it at risk and creating prosperity and given it to someone who wasn’t. That is not a net gain for San Diego.
Just societies condemn attempts to coerce people against their will. This legislation attempts to use the law as an instrument of plunder and its supporters deserve our condemnation.
Eric Andersen,
Small Business Owner
Comments 37
Show me a Socialist Democrat like Todd Gloria, and I will show you someone who has no clue how the Economy works. This whole minimum wage push by the Socialist Todd Gloria is part of a larger National Socialist Democrat scheme to get their base of low information voters to the polls in November of 2014. The very group of people the Socialist Todd Gloria is trying to help, will be hurt. Walmart in North Dakota pays $17.50 an hour to start because the Free Market dictates what they should pay. The Free Market is vital to a fully functioning Economy because it sets the proper price for goods and services. When the Government attempts to interfere with the Free Market, mal-investment occurs and over time a slow sluggish economy is the result. The Socialist Democrats are trying to whip up the emotions of their base without regard to any Economic Principles.
Man can build along an earthquake zone, a flood area or along a hurricane riddled coast, but Mother Nature almost always reclaims her territory. The Free Markets act in the same way, and their are plenty of examples in our 200 + year history. The Socialist Democrats and some wayward Republicans have interfered in the Free Markets and the results are not pretty. Like a tornado, the Free Markets have leveled Detroit and now has it’s sites set on Illinois and Califorina. The Top three states since 1997 for AGI (adjusted gross income) migration are New York, California and Illinois.
We have tried the Socialist Democrat way for almost 100 years in the United States and it has brought us to where we are now: A slow erosion in our Liberty and a phony weak Economy. It is time to turn the page on Socialist Liberalism and use the Free Markets Model for our countries approach. We can not just flip a switch and go in the Free Market direction, but we can start to bring the change about slowly at first and then more strongly once the foundation is in.
Eric,
Serious questions:
1. Do you believe that there should be any minimum wage requirement?
2. Do you believe there should be overtime pay?
3. Do you believe there is a need for safety regulations in the work place?
I ask these questions because I believe that a yes answer to any of these questions would also “criminalize both business owners and laborers who defend their liberty interest in freely negotiating their own terms of employment.”
Thank you Eric.
Daniel,
“We have tried the Socialist Democrat way for almost 100 years in the United States and it has brought us to where we are now:”
Where we are now: We are the most prosperous country in recorded history.
Hypocrisy,
Refuse to see the Forest for the Trees at your own peril. Our Economy has some major structural problems, some obvious, some not so obvious.
“Serious questions:”
Aren’t those questions best directed at your employer? Frankly, it’s none of my business what compensation you and she negotiate and neither is it yours to intervene in others’ private affairs
Brian,
I can respect that response. At least it shows a belief in a consistent principle. I, on the other hand, happen to believe minimum wage laws, overtime requirements and safety regulations are the signs of an advanced society and that “every man for himself” is not a philosophy to build an economy on.
“that “every man for himself” is not a philosophy to build an economy on.”
That has never been an economic philosophy. To suggest that shows a puerile understanding of the interdependent nature of free and voluntary trade.
People need one another to trade, produce, sell, and market. People who believe in Liberty understand that everyone has value in this world. When we inhibit the opportunities for people to learn their highest and best value (as minimum wage laws do), we limit human potential.
I’m against classifying people because of their present situation and a huge believer in the extraordinary potential which exists in every human soul, I want each person th realize that potential and understand that mistakes, mishaps, misfires, and miscues are all indicators, along the way, to that realization
“Where we are now: We are the most prosperous country in recorded history.”
REALLY? $18 TRILLION dollars in debt with no way to ever get out of debt and you still think spending 2 to 3 times your income is sound and financially secure. YOU Sir clearly do not have Children and do not care about the future of this up and coming Banana Republic.
Hi Hypocrisy –
A few questions for you…
Who is better and/or more equipped to determine the appropriate wages and working conditions than a prospective employee and their employer?
If an employer was willing to offer me a job for $5 an hour working 50 hours a week and I was willing to accept it, do you believe you (or the government) have a right to stop that transaction?
Do you think you know what is better for me than I do? The answer to this question is definitely “no” because only my wife knows that.
I would counter the “every man for himself” philosophy with a “to each his own” philosophy.
Look forward to your thoughts.
MaryAnne,
Actually I do have children and all are doing fairly well. Thank you for your concern.
As for our debt, it is certainly a concern as is the more important debt to GDP ratio which by the way was even higher in 1945 than it is now.
Every generation has had its concerns for the future, but I do not see how you argue objectively that from a strictly materialistic point of view, we are not living in the most prosperous country ever.
Richard,
You are assuming that there is a level playing field when it comes to the employee-employer relationship. I would argue that there never was but today it is even worse as outsourcing and automation have made available jobs very scarce.
In direct answer to your question: I do believe there is a role for government in regulating the employer-employee relationship and I believe you do too. Or do you believe that a truck driver should be allowed to drive 30 straight hours? That is just one example.
It is not a question of regulation or no regulation. It is a question of how much is appropriate.
Hypocrisy.
Wanted to respond to you.
1. I am a proponent of liberty, free markets and limited government – government limited to protecting life and property and fraud. Minimum wage would violate the jurisdiction of a lawmaker and the right of contract for an employer/employee.
2. OT pay is a private decision between the same two parties.
3. Safety Regulations. Sure – if they originate with the individual employer. In Andersenville we don’t support government intervention in the marketplace. That is not to say the employer shouldn’t be liable if he causes harm to an employee.
Hypocrisy-
The playing field changes as the economy changes -when the economy is growing employees tend to have more leverage in negotiations than when the economy is shrinking.
I believe the role of government in regards to the employer-employee relationship should be limited to arbitrating contract disputes but nothing further.
In response to your question, I do not believe I have the authority as an individual to tell you how how many consecutive hours it is appropriate for you to drive your automobile whether you are delivering shipments for commercial activity or driving across country on a family road trip.
So should the government intervene if an employer offers me a $5 hr job working 50 hours per week?
Thank you for your response.
“Or do you believe that a truck driver should be allowed to drive 30 straight hours? ”
Of course not and no serious employer does either. More importantly, which entity has the largest financial interest in operating a business safely?
HINT: it ain’t the gov’t–the gov’t usually protects these entities
Brian,
“and no serious employer does either.”
And therein lies the problem. Not all employers are “serious.”
As for businesses having a financial interest in operating successfully – Tell that to GM or Ford (Pinto). Businesses make decisions every day that the health and welfare of their customers and employees are secondary to the health and welfare of their profit margin.
Do you honestly think that the workplace was as safe when we had no government mandated safety regulations?
Eric,
Thank you for an honest response. I am however amazed to find that there are people who believe that all businesses, if left to their own devices, would operate in a manner that protected the safety of their employees and customers.
Hypocrisy, people have Free Will to extract themselves from unsafe working conditions, and find another job. The Free Market will dictate to the unsafe employer to square his processes away, lest he no longer has any employees who wish to work for him.
I like the sounds of Andersonville. I wonder what the gas tax would be in Andersonville?
HQ, if you owned a business would you overwork your underpaid employees in unsafe conditions?
HQ – I have the same concerns. I don’t have a tolerance for the rights of any employee to be encroached. However, there are no Utopias. We are concerned about finding a market system that minimizes those encroachments. .
The character of our lawmakers is not greater than that of our lawmakers. The poor, we are both concerned about, are hurt more by minimum wage legislation and well intentioned legislators who have ignored the laws of economics. The successful business owner must offer higher wages and better conditions to attract and retain a labor force better than his competitors.
HQ, you think the employer has the upper hand more so today because of outsourcing and automation. But ironically such government impositions of above market wages has been and is today a subsidy to foreign providers and the automation industry. Your cherished “living wage” policy will only accelerate this push from using local labor to using “foreign” labor (including labor in more business friendly states) and investing in labor saving devices.
Minimum wage is bad policy, but CITY minimum wage (especially a minimum wage that is substantially above surrounding communities) is an INSANE policy.
The only bright spot is that Democrats can then blame evil business owners, while putting more people on the welfare plantation. Once ensconced on the massa’s plantation, these unfortunates will cluelessly continue to vote for their benefactors. So, in THAT sense, Todd Gloria’s policy (and yours) makes perverse sense — at least in the short term.
HQ,
We don’t know one another IRL so you don’t know that I use the Socratic method a lot. Know that my line of questioning is genuine when I ask you this again:
“More importantly, which entity has the largest financial interest in operating a business safely?:
I don’t deny that there are bad actors in business but I will argue that government regulations protect rather than expose those bad actors they way a truly free market would.
Humor me and take a stab at my question, please. I’ll give you some more hints:
1- which entity has the greatest interest in promoting safe driving?
2- which entity has the greatest interest in promoting personal health?
3- which entity has the greatest interest in having good, functioning fire departments?
Daniel,
So are you saying to just let them eat cake?
Michael,
I wouldn’t, but if my competitors did I would be at a disavantage.
What is the main (some would say sole) purpose of business? I have heard the answer here repeatedly – it is to make a profit, the more the better.
What is the main purpose of government? I have also heard that answer on this blog – to provide for the common defense.
Taking the above into consideration, who has the better incentive to ensure the safety of workers and the consuming public?
HQ, Weak!
This whole minimum wage issue being pushed out there mere months before an election where the Democrats are looking vulnerable is all about getting the low information voter motivated to go to the polls.
The main purpose of Government is to preserve our Liberty, not to take from the producers and give to the takers.
I suggest those who are not satisfied with their current pay levels stop their whining, pack up and head to where the jobs and pay are plentiful ———– North Dakota. The Free Markets dictate that McDonald’s pay $15 there. A person with even a minimum amount of skill can make 6 figures up in North Dakota.
Dear Todd,
It’s not certain that increasing the minimum wage will provide the benefits you hope for and because there is a plausible risk it will do harm instead, the precautionary principle requires that you not do it. The precautionary principle holds that policy makers have a social responsibility not to enact policies that plausibly could harm the public. The first key finding of a recent study in San Diego found that small businesses predict they will have to downsize and cut hours as a result of minimum wage increases. The best that can be said for your proposal to increase the minimum wage is that there is no scientific consensus as to its benefits and harms. So, follow the precautionary principle and don’t increase the minimum wage. First, do no harm.
Daniel,
So $15 per hour equates to a six-figure salary? I now understand why you think there is no need to raise the minimum wage.
Dave,
Your proof of the impending doom of a minimum wage increase is that SOME small business owners PREDICT they will have to downsize and cut hours. And this study was paid for by the CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. LOL!
Please show me a city whose unemployment increased after raising the minimum wage or a state with a higher minimum wage that does not also have a higher standard of living. Or even easier, show me the dire consequences that befell San Diego when the Living Wage Ordinance passed.
I don’t know if you are more like Chicken Little or The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
If you count the digits after the decimal point, a six figure salary is very achievable. Not just in North Dakota.
Got it. A man who refuses to use his real name is now accusing small business owners of lying.
HQ, do a little research, your posts are becoming annoying. The people working on the oil rigs and driving the trucks are making that. You Liberals and Socialists have no ideas, you just want to play victim and stealthily take down the Middle Class. Ever since the Liberals broke away from the Progressives circa 1917, that has been your objective. If you understood Economic Law, you would not be on this thread writing what you do. Or, maybe you do understand Economic Law and are in the destroy America camp, I don’t know you; however, most people on the Free Market side want to help poor people, just not the same way liberals do. I want to expand the economic pie, not take a piece from someone who has earned it and give it to someone who has not.
HQ, a minimum wage is primarily for UNSKILLED labor. Note what Daniel said: A person with EVEN A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF SKILL can make 6 figures up in North Dakota.”
Yes, it’s a bit of an exaggeration, but not by much. A nonunion truck driver in ND can make $70-$90K easily (vs. $40-$50K in the rest of the country) — over $100K with reasonable (20% or less) overtime.
Daniel,
I believe it is you who needs to do a little research. I will re-post my challenge to Dave:
Please show me a city whose unemployment increased after raising the minimum wage or a state with a higher minimum wage that does not also have a higher standard of living. Or even easier, show me the dire consequences that befell San Diego when the Living Wage Ordinance passed.
As for North Dakota, the oil boom has certainly been a blessing, but it is not all roses and unicorns. A simple Google search will turn up dozens of articles describing the increased crime, lack of needed services and the increasing number of people literally living in their cars due to a lack of housing.
Dave,
Did you read the article in the UT about the business owners (again SOME business owners) who think raising the minimum wage is a good idea. I was not accusing anyone of lying. I was simply pointing out that SOME and PREDICTING does not make a study and that the financier of any study generally gets the results they want.
Now can you answer the challenged I posed to you previously?
Yes, some businesses do think that, according to the UT story…
http://sdrostra.com/?p=38525
Minimum wage. Hmm. I just flipped a home and was at the County Credit Union to deposit the money. Whatever happened to that 17 percent interest on $100,000.
Minimum wage is relative to where you live. I chatted with the Heritage Security guard for a minute or two. We talked wages, and I told the kid that if he moved to Minn. He could afford a nice home with a job as a manager at a Starbucks.
I like the idea of increasing minimum wage and COLAs. As Im a double dipper. If a business cant hang with an increase in wage then screw him. Look at the fiat currency we play with now. .
Hey, Richard Ryder, when is the last time you shopped at a mom and pop store? All of us shop at stores that end up in a Mitt Romney or Soros HEDGEFUND
Lend a hand People. Charity. Give a buck to the guy on the corner. Quit acting like cheap hedonistic pigs. I may live on Mount Soledad, but Ill never forget my roots and minimum waqge. $!5.00 dollars buys 3 gallons of milk. 4 gallons of gas. One week of DADA Manchesters UT. May God have mercy on the person willing to rob a family of milk.
Mike Erl — Hey genius. You go to your corner mom and pop store and pay $5 a gallon for milk (your figure). I’ll shop at Costco and buy TWO gallons of milk for $5.49 (6/18/14) — and LOL thinking of you overpaying.
Of course, you don’t want people — especially nonunion poor and working class people — to have that Costco/Walmart low cost option. No surprise. Turns out it’s YOU who want to rob the poor of their milk!!!
I’ve always loved the claim — “compassionate liberal.” In your case, it’s CLUELESS liberal.