Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The danger of looking past economics and raising the minimum wage
The danger of looking past economics and raising the minimum wage
Apr 9, 2026 1:03 AM

This past week, one of the rising political figures in the Democratic Party, Mayor Peter Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana penned an op-ed for the South Bend Tribune arguing that raising the minimum wage is “the right thing to do.”

Mayor Buttigieg, cites three reasons why he believes raising the minimum-wage is the right thing to do: It’s good for business, good for the economy, and good for family. All these “goods” assume that raising the minimum-wage does not reduce employment.

So what do basic economic principles say about raising the minimum wage? Take a look at this graph.

What you see is a graphical representation of what a labor market looks like with a minimum-wage. The curve marked with an “S” represents the supply of labor at the given price and quantity and the curve marked with a “D” represents the demand for labor at the given price and quantity. Where those two curves intersect is what economists refer to as market equilibrium, it is what the market wage would be without any external interference. The dashed line above the equilibrium represents a price floor and in a labor market it is also known as the minimum-wage. The minimum-wage means that labor cannot be bought or sold on the market below that level. The distance between the demand curve and the supply curve at the minimum-wage line represents a surplus and in a labor market this is called unemployment. As you can see, the amount of labor being supplied is greater than the amount of labor being demanded. According to this economic theory, when an artificial price floor is put in place, unemployment is created. And when the price floor is increased, so is unemployment. None of this theory matters, according to Buttigieg. Later in the editorial, he makes the claim that we don’t need to rely on economic theory because historical data shows us that “increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers.”

What Buttigieg is claiming, doesn’t make any sense. First he says that we don’t need to rely on economic theory, which shows us the negative effects of a minimum wage, because we have historical data. Then he says that this historical data of increases in the minimum-wage show little or no negative effect. So why does Mayor Buttigieg suggest that we continue down this path, that according to economic theory and historical data, produce negative effects?

The most bizarre aspect of the fight to increase minimum-wage is that its proponents are advocating for policies that put the very people they claim to care about at the most risk of losing their jobs. This study conducted by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, offers empirical evidence of how increasing the minimum wage creates higher unemployment among the least-skilled, least-experienced, and least educated workers. Not only is this fight counterintuitive, but it is also the continuation of a historically racist movement.

Economist Thomas Sowell has written about this in the New York Post:

In South Africa during the era of apartheid, white labor unions urged that a minimum-wage law be applied to all races, to keep black workers from taking jobs away from white unionized workers by working for less than the union pay scale.

Some supporters of the first federal minimum-wage law in the United States — the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 — used exactly the same rationale, citing the fact that Southern panies, using non-union black workers, were able e north and underbid panies using unionized white labor.

It’s amazing that supporters of a minimum-wage once understood that it could be used to price certain people out of the market, and today the supporters of increasing the minimum-wage claim to care the most about those same people.

Increasing the minimum-wage is not the right thing to do. It would only have further negative effects on employment which would result in a domino effect on the economy, business, and families. Ignoring economic theory is not how we should care for the “least of these” in society, and instead of creating more economic barriers we should be taking steps to remove what is already holding back the most vulnerable from reaching their full potential.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The ‘nudge’ that separated families
Richard Thaler, the co-author of Nudge, has won the Nobel Prize for his contributions to behavioral economics. While he decides how best to spend his $1.1 million in prize money, less prosperous families are paying the price for government policies advancing economic paternalism. Thaler suggested in a 2012 New York Times op-ed that the United States follow Europe’s lead in raising the price of gasoline in order to preserve the environment. Hiking the gas tax would be a more efficient...
Samuel Gregg: Ideas, intellectuals and the free economy
In another round of conservative debate on the virtues — or vices — of the market economy, Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg published a new piece at Public Discourse in which he takes on the critiques of writer Matthew McManus. MacManus’ criticisms were written in reply to an earlier piece in which Gregg addresses the growing criticisms of a free economy by editors and writers at First Things magazine. In Gregg’s article, Capitalism, Conservatives, and the Intellectuals: A Reply to...
Should we be nudged toward libertarian paternalism?
If the boy is father to the man, then I was raised by a profligate dunce. Even though I had learned the power pound interest in high school, I foolishly squandered my trivial savings at a time when the “eighth wonder of the world,” as Albert Einstein called it, would have had the greatest impact. Had I invested a mere $2,000 in Apple stock on my 18th birthday I would now be $252,039 richer and well on my way to...
More victims of the $15 minimum wage
The deleterious side effects of the $15-per-hour minimum wage have continued to manifest across the country, affecting cities from Seattle to Minneapolis and states from California to New York. To illustrate the damage, the Employment Policies Instituteis maintaining a catalog of suffering businesses across the country, highlighting stories of raised consumer prices, increased unemployment, reduced working hours, and outright business closures. I’ve pointed to several of those stories in the past, and in four new videos, EPI offers fresh glimpses...
Radio Free Acton: Ben DeGrow on school choice; Econ Quiz on tax reform; Upstream on Ray Bradbury
On this episode of Radio Free Acton, Caroline Roberts talks with Ben DeGrow, Director of Education Policy at The Mackinac Center for Public Policy, about school choice, previewing his panel presentation at Acton’s ingEducation & Freedom conference. Then, Caroline Roberts hosts another Econ Quiz with guest Dave Hebert, Professor of Economics at Aquinas college on the topic of the week: tax reform. Finally, on the Upstream segment, Bruce Edward Walker talks with Jonathan R. Eller, Chancellors Professor of English at...
Marketers ‘nudge’ us, but should government?
On Monday the University of Chicago’s Richard Thaler won a Nobel Prize for his work in behavioral economics. “Thaler’s work raises important questions about the state’s influence over human action,” says Victor V. Claar in this week’s Acton Commentary. In some years two or three economists share the prize for their collective contributions to a specific line of inquiry, but this year the 72-year-old Thaler was the sole recipient for his accumulated plishments in behavioral economics. Put simply, behavioral economics...
Does tying benefit social welfare?
Note: This is post #52 in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. What is tying and how is this a form of price discrimination? An example of a tied good is an HP printer and the HP ink you need for that printer. The printer (the base good) is often relatively cheap whereas the ink (the variable good) has a high markup, and eventually costs you far more than what you paid for the printer. Why panies tie their...
Who’s afraid of the robot revolution?
Forecasters disagree over whether ing wave of robotic automation will usher in a utopia or a wasteland, but none questions a future where automotons increasingly put human beings out of work.“What Jobs Will Still be Around in 20 Years?” asks the Guardian. “The Future Has Lots of Robots, Few Jobs for Humans,”Wired forecast.Robots and artificial intelligence will take up to 38 percent of all jobs in the United States and 30 to 35 percent of jobs in the EU, according...
3 Reasons income tax cuts (almost) always benefit the wealthy
Death and taxes may be the only certainties in life, but there is a close third: e tax cuts mostly benefit e workers. As Congress discusses tax reform, the debate about who will benefit from tax cuts is back in the news. And many people are concerned with how the changes will favor high e earners. Even President Trump has promised that the reforms won’t give wealthy Americans a massive tax cut. The reality is that there is almost no...
Kuyper the anti-revolutionary
Abraham Kuyper knew that revolutions almost always make life worse, says WORLD magazine’s Marvin Olasky: Theologically, Kuyper followed John Calvin and other Reformers. Politically, he said government must not obstruct proclamation of the gospel, promote a counter-gospel, take away religious freedom, or coerce conscience. Reliance on central government “begets a slow process of dissolution that cannot but end in the demoralization of government and people alike.” Kuyper’s alternative was “sphere sovereignty.” That meant leaders in education, business, religion, media, and...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved