Another Amazingly Unforeseen Consequence That Plenty Of Us Foresaw (Wizbang)

A couple of years ago, when Congress was debating raising the national minimum wage, quite a few detractors of the plan (myself included) said that the move -- couched as a boon to the people on the lowest rungs of the job ladder -- would end up eventually hurting them far more than it would help them.

Naturally, us pessimistic doom-and-gloomers and knee-jerk naysayers and tools of the corporate masters and poor-haters and oppressors were all shouted down, and the minimum raise was raised to something closer to a "living wage."

And now that the economy has taken a bit of a hit, in an astonishing coincidence that so many of us predicted by only the craziest of flukes, a hefty chunk of the people at the bottom rungs -- workers ages 16 to 24 -- are unemployed at the highest level in decades.

Why, it's almost as if employers simply don't think that these workers are worth the minimum wage rate, and are taking advantage of the economic slowdown (more people looking for work) to be a bit more selective and hire people with more skills and more of a proven work record.

But that can't be. That would mean that the liberals and progressives and social engineers and the ones that really care about people were wrong, and that simply can't happen.

So there must be some other explanation. Something that exonerates all those right-thinking people who ratcheted up the minimum wage and finds someone else to blame -- maybe those stupid teabaggers, or the RAAAAACISTS, or the obstructionist Republicans, or maybe the JOOOOOS, or the creationists, or the Birthers, or George W. Bush and the Neocons...

But we all know whose fingerprints are all over those unemployment figures, don't we?

As Jim Hoft noted, there is a remarkable overlap between "young people who voted for Obama" and "young people who can't find a job." As so many like to say, "elections have consequences."

One wonders how many of them will connect the dots between the policies they voted for, and the policies that are currently screwing them over.

My cynical prediction: some, but not enough to cause a sea change.

_{About The Author: Jay Tea's new computer rocks, it's got the clocks, but it was obsolete before he opened the box.}

Comments (15)

Why should I take something... (Below threshold)

1. Posted by klrtz1 | January 5, 2010 12:37 PM | Score: 2 (4 votes cast)

klrtz1:

Why should I take something written by a liberal troll as my starting point and then reply as if I am going to somehow convince that troll of something? I know the liberal troll is no more likely to change his mind than gravity will suddenly change its direction. Far more valuable to me is to look for the truth behind what the troll says and write about that. Usually there are certain assumptions that are evident in the troll comments and I can explicate on those. Maybe I can learn something new about my understanding of those assumptions either from the reaction by the liberal troll or more likely from the reaction by other conservatives/moderates/thinkers. That result seems far more likely than changing the mind of a troll.

Posted on January 5, 2010 12:37

Here's an alternative view ... (Below threshold)

2. Posted by James H | January 5, 2010 12:43 PM | Score: -1 (5 votes cast)

James H:

Here's an alternative view on wages and economic growth from a decidedly liberal source. Offered without endorsement or commentary, but simply for discussion.

Posted on January 5, 2010 12:43

I would have put my above c... (Below threshold)

3. Posted by klrtz1 | January 5, 2010 12:44 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)

I would have put my above comment on the previous thread but I couldn't scroll far enough to find the Post a comment inputs. My scroll finger got tired.

Sorry. Please don't sue me.

Posted on January 5, 2010 12:44

kirtz- You a moby or a conc... (Below threshold)

4. Posted by zaugg | January 5, 2010 12:49 PM | Score: 2 (4 votes cast)

zaugg:

kirtz- You a moby or a concern troll yourself? I don't know many interweb users that can't scroll down and post a comment on the right thread. It seems you found a way to post two here.

Posted on January 5, 2010 12:49

Concerning this thread, I m... (Below threshold)

5. Posted by zaugg | January 5, 2010 12:51 PM | Score: 8 (8 votes cast)

Concerning this thread, I made the minimum wage is going to hurt the entry level worker to many people I know (i.e. liberals)and they do not get the logic. They only 'feel' like raising the wage can help.
I am sick of liberals and their feelings, they face no consequences for bad policy. At least, not yet.

Posted on January 5, 2010 12:51

A liberal would respond tha... (Below threshold)

6. Posted by GarandFan | January 5, 2010 12:57 PM | Score: 9 (9 votes cast)

GarandFan:

A liberal would respond that it's all about 'those greedy CEO's'.

As for elections having consequences; the poor bastards who voted for Barry haven't seen anything yet. He's got 3 more years to tank the economy.

Posted on January 5, 2010 12:57

"One wonders how many of th... (Below threshold)

7. Posted by wright | January 5, 2010 1:10 PM | Score: 11 (11 votes cast)

wright:

"One wonders how many of them will connect the dots between the policies they voted for, and the policies that are currently screwing them over." One, if they were smart enough to connect the dots, they wouldn't have been dumb enough to fall for Obama's shell game, and two, they wouldn't be working for minimum wage.

Posted on January 5, 2010 13:10

maybe those stupid teaba... (Below threshold)

8. Posted by Falze | January 5, 2010 1:11 PM | Score: 8 (8 votes cast)

Falze:

maybe those stupid teabaggers, or the RAAAAACISTS, or the obstructionist Republicans, or maybe the JOOOOOS, or the creationists, or the Birthers, or George W. Bush and the Neocons...

Boy, your bloggerating skills really are out of date, Jay. The boogey(wo)man you're looking for is 'Sarah Palin'.

Posted on January 5, 2010 13:11

Yeah, Jay. How are we supp... (Below threshold)

9. Posted by Oyster | January 5, 2010 1:32 PM | Score: 7 (9 votes cast)

Oyster:

Yeah, Jay. How are we supposed to take you seriously if you leave Palin off the list?

Posted on January 5, 2010 13:32

Jay, I too am concerned tha... (Below threshold)

10. Posted by klrtz1 | January 5, 2010 2:00 PM | Score: 3 (5 votes cast)

Jay, I too am concerned that Ms. Palin's name isn't on your list. What gives? Are you some kind of moby?

Posted on January 5, 2010 14:00

Barry, Jooooss, bad economy... (Below threshold)

11. Posted by 914 | January 5, 2010 3:34 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

914:

Barry, Jooooss, bad economy, dum dems... Where do I begin?

Fuc it! Why bother? some nincompoop named steve will just come along and fuc things up!

Posted on January 5, 2010 15:34

"That would mean that the l... (Below threshold)

12. Posted by DaveD | January 5, 2010 4:11 PM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)

DaveD:

"That would mean that the liberals and progressives and social engineers and the ones that really care about people...."

And the fact that this fantasy is still accepted bothers me beyond words. The libs love this label but what in the long run is valid evidence for it? First, their so called "care" is right there for you until you disagree with any single aspect of the liberal agenda and then you are a pariah before you can take your next breath. Second the material expression of their "care" generates legislation which is merely a front - a Trojan horse - for limiting free flow of capital, stifling freedom of innovation and centralizing power. But this has all been said before. The "care" in the socialist/liberal agenda is a false luxury. Seemingly nice message on the ears in the here and now but impractical economically in the long term. We all notice how well it is received when the economy is in its leanest times. It boggles my mind that the leviathan the Obama administration wants to impose is so dependent on a healthy economy and their policies are so counterproductive to that end.

Not only is it hard for young people to find jobs now, if they find employment they will be expected to contribute more of their limited resources to healthcare should that debacle pass in its present form. They'll be contributing more in the future to support healthcare for the elderly. Maybe the younger generation will complain about the old farts robbing their future while conveniently forgetting it was the Democrats that committed them to this transfer of the fruits of their labor. But class warfare has always been a convenient ploy of the Democrat agenda.

Posted on January 5, 2010 16:11

<a href="http://www.youtube... (Below threshold)

13. Posted by Jeff Blogworthy | January 5, 2010 5:11 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)

Jeff Blogworthy:

A YouTube video of Milton Friedman on the minimum wage. It is a beautiful thing. Some things never change.

Posted on January 5, 2010 17:11

The dirty little secret of ... (Below threshold)

14. Posted by hcddbz | January 5, 2010 5:11 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

hcddbz:

The dirty little secret of the Minimum wage was it was created to protect White jobs and force blacks out back in 1938

http://www.conciseguidetoeconomics.com/minimumwage/chapter11