It's surreal and frightening when you can pull the curtain, look back, and hear these debates and see where we are now in the grand scheme of things. It's amazing just how prophetic and on point Friedman, Williams, and other older gentleman were and still are.
The man was a fuckin' prophet. Because the problem of "sincere" advocates for terrible ideas has only gotten worse...and provided a mighty shield for those who are insincere in their motives.
Because the media, both right and left, are big government fanatics. How often to you see Tom Wood, Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, Judge Andrew Napolitano...on a major network? These people should be the most common commentators on TV and have their own shows. But they don't adhere to the big government, pro-war, statist narrative.
We don't have debates like this because the folks whining for academic freedom in the 60's and got it didn't let anyone who disagreed with them have the same privilige. Kids are now raised like pets and are taught what to believe by people they dare not question. Note: The new $15 minimum wage isn't designed to help Americans - it is to encourage more illegals to come and work at substandard wages.
Is that why if you get a bunch of noble prize winning economists in a room and ask them 1 question you get a dozen answers? Not all economists agree and many economists in history have been proven wrong and forgotten. Keynesian economics cannot explain everything going on in current economic conditions because he could not predict how the world’s economies would look in 100 years.
@@richiemello3447 All of the prosperity ( that the Union bosses are sitting on ) was created by thousands of years prior + technological development aka Industrialization, by a World market that didn't even have a notion about what a "minimum wage" is, and the only reason that the US can sport a minimum wage in 2023 ( without completely imploding ) is because of said historical development, while the minimum wage and countless social programs have strangled free enterprise and strangled the free movement in the economy. The social programs are a hidden tax that is payed by everyone, but most of all, the people at the bottom who become fully dependent on the legislation and the social programs. It's help for the poor. To stay poor. And to die poor.
Basically, minimum wage not only hurts low skilled and poor, but also small business owners and favors big corporations because small business owners can't afford to pay the minimum wage. Wow...
Not the best summation. The one who pays the biggest price for the "minimum wage" are the poorest of the poor, who are so poor that you can't produce a statistical valid model for them, because of the exclusion. This issue is about an artificial barrier that STOPS the excluded from getting a foothold in the "market of workers" and about welfare and other social programs that help the poor to stay poor, and to die poor, not only in economical terms but to die poor without trying your wings. Without trying and failing, the poor can never improve and they can never learn a real World experience. It's like being stuck in a ghetto of the mind, forever. Regardless if the immediate needs are met ( food, shelter etc. ) this is the essence of the word "poor" in 2023. Being poor is a mental and psychological state and the syndicates, they play into the American peoples fear and greed, for their own benefit. Well. This doesn't work in States that have a well established personal freedom and a personal mindset. It may work in Cali and NY to some degree, unfortunately.
Starting at around 10:30, Freedman completely ripped his opposer down to his absolute core, humiliating his intelligence in the process. Fantastic and accurate work. Is it possible for the next Milton to exist in today's society? I don't believe it is, as we've been trained improperly to deal with complex issues with which we disagree, a disagreement based solely on something we've heard in days gone by, namely, our school years, taught by the very people who profit from our ignorance
dude..i just finished watching one of his lecturese on why income inequality is no problem at all. It was so great and reasonable that even an 18 year old dimwit like me had no problem understanding.
+silkhead44 It's because they operate on emotions and feelings. Exactly as Milton said, the do-gooders. Here's a great quote from C.S. Lewis:"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
Don't engage the trolls. The quote was confusing enough for them to disregard and just go after you personally. Great insight from CS there, hadn't seen that before. Thank you
"How many kids do you have?" Possible response 1: "None" Then you can´t speak for the youth. Possible response 2: "Two" Your kids are far above the minimum wage.
The thing about a true free market system, is that it operates naturally. Nature is based on harmony and balance. When you institute government intervention, it throws it out of whack.
+Chris Parker Free market systems fail to operate efficiently due to the existence of externalities that are not compensated for in the price system. Some form of government intervention is needed in markets to correct this and to ensure markets operate in a better way.
+Ben Bonning Ideally, government intervention would correct these inefficiencies, but more often than not, these "corrective" interventions have unintended consequences that almost entirely distort the market. In choosing the least of two evils, it seems better to keep the free market.
Great debate. One aspect of the situation that was clearly missing was a young man and your lady looking for part time work. At the end of the day, any minimum wage law reduces people's access to employment.
I would simply advise being careful with the paradigmatic approach you seek to employ. Economics can be useful in many considerations, but it is necessary to keep in mind that the situatedness of economies is not geographically and historically irrelevant.
The free market doesn't "fix" inequality. On the contrary, it rewards productivity, skill, ingenuity and innovation, and thus is inherently unequal - for the simple fact that people do not perform equally. But the point of contention is that it is equitable. Prosperity is not judged by merely the level of income inequality, but in the general productivity and abundance afforded by the capital investments that lead to a strong workforce, granted by the freedom to employ. Switzerland's inequality of income is irrelevant. The point is that they are a prosperous nation without minimum wage laws, and empirical evidence suggests that they would only be less prosperous had they mandated a minimum wage law. And to that point, so would we, and so we are.
Chris Ward The biggest difference between capitalism and socialism is that capitalism depends upon mans desire to improve his personal conditions and socialism rejects it.
I adore Friedman's ability to keep cool under pressure - and simply let his opponent stumble on their own. Sometimes that's far more effective than shredding your opposition. Of course, he can do that too, and often with a smile. The man was a legend.
I am a Puerto rican..living in Connecticut...raised in New haven..i was poor and didn't know it. I saw my mom and dad stuggle..they divorced when I was 13.. hard childhood. Today I'm 30...6 years in the armys infantry and I started an electrical apprenticeship when I was 19...got my license about 5 years ago..now I'm a high voltage electrician/engineer slamming 6 figures a year...don't ever ever let anyone tell you that race holds you back. Engineering is a (white job) to some people...so explain why I'm keeping power on in Connecticuts capital? race has ZERO to do with what kind of job you get...i wanted to work with electricity because no one likes to. And there is an extremely high demand for legit electricians in the northeast...i simply chose a career that didn't involve crime...or drugs or fucking off with the wrong people. I chose to keep my head in them electrical books till I met my goals. Everyone can do this.
The exploitation of the worker ended the day a worker was allowed to find the best job he could for himself. It also ended the day he was allowed to take a gamble on his own labor and invest in himself with his own resources as self-employed rather than outsource that investment to a job creator.
the government has no problem hiring interns for no money...slavery (internship) is ok with your consent but you can't work for less than min wage with your consent...how asinine is that...it goes agianst your right to contract at whatever price you desire even it's below legislated min wage
at the end of the day, it is not increase in wages but the improvement in technology that improves the quality of life. It is not poverty but lack of jobs that lead people to crime. Minimum wage raises the cost of doing business and increase unemployment. these two things cause a lack of progress in technology and crime.
I always enjoy reading the comments of Milton Friedman videos. It restores my hope that there are other intelligent human beings in this world that, even though they may disagree with Milton, are at least compelled enough to give a crap.
In the 21st century, everybody is unhappy and egoistic so we cannot have a Suttle debate without someone getting triggered. Discussions and debates are important for the progression of society.
The executives at the top keep getting bailed out by the government, and thus insulated from the consequences of the free market. If those at the top recieve protection from the government at the expense of the taxpayers, why shouldn't entry level workers recieve protection from the government at the expense of those on top? Without the minimum wage, only those are the bottom of the economic ladder are subject to the fluctuations of the "free" market. This double standard leads to an inequitable distribution of wealth amongst those who already hold wealth and power. Corrupt politicians aren't going to stop bailing out the people who fund their campaigns and they aren't going to deny legislature that favors the people that vote them into office. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The low price of goods is sustained on the back of labor outsourced to poor countries where there is little to no enforcement of worker's rights. Once these countries save up enough wealth, they too introduce legislation to protect their workers. When these companies run out of slave labor markets to outsource their work to, they will either have to slash their profit margins, increase prices, rely on government subsidies, or try to develop more advanced technologies to automate their skilled workforce. Automation is the only peaceful option, since the first two are unrealistic and the third option is unsustainable. Powers of the world have gone to war in times of past economic hardship, and due to the nature of man it's likely to happen again, many times over.
We need to take the sharp edges off capitalism and the excesses of neoliberalism. See the works of John Rawls (who I do not entirely or even majoratively agree with). I like Milton but this argument is extreme. The measure of society is how we treat the less fortunate. As a well-paid person, I will happily give up some tax to ensure others have some measure of decency and respect. Go to Thailand or Cambodia and see what a truly unregulated and harsh market does. It's disgusting and leads to poverty which breeds crime and abolishes any notion of law and order. A minimum wage is a small price to pay. In this day and age, employers are big corporate entities making billions of dollars...
"The measure of a society is how we treat the less fortunate." You are right, but I see no reason why the government needs to be involved in this issue. In a society such as the US where we value charity and lending a hand to those in need (though that is begin destroyed by welfare and other left-wing policies), it is the people's responsibility to make sure that the less fortunate need to get back up on their feet.
I agree with Milton Friedman when it comes to his negative income tax. Which is to give people on public assistance up to a certain point. More financial assistance for the more they are able to do for themselves which is one reason why I'm in favor of the. Minimum wage and would even raise it under certain circumstances.
I understand the basic premise of repealing minimum wage laws - however i'm still slightly confused. Could someone explain how employers would not exploit their workers to minimize costs?
+MrGeeetar It's quite simple my good man. In the (abundantly evident) competitive market, businesses must compete for resources, This interaction of supply and demand results in the price of those resources equating to their actual value. Labor services or, more correctly, the return generated by them - which is what employers compete for - is no different. Self-interested employers seek to maximize profits which means that they will never overpay for resources (including labor services - which is why minimum wage laws only result in disemployment), but it also means that they cannot incur excessive turnover costs - which inevitably occurs if they try to underpay workers. Thus, as has been empirically demonstrated, competing employers bid *UP* the price of labor until it reaches the risk adjusted marginal revenue product of the labor services provided or, in layman;s terms, what those labor services are actually worth. The minimum wage is responsible neither for increasing pay levels or preventing them from falling.
If the free market will not provide wages that pay the rent and food bills, then the free market should be taxed and the proceeds used to top up insufficient wages.
paul mitchell It’s not the job of the free market to pay your rent and food bills. It is your job to go out and find a career that can supply the necessary funds to support your chosen lifestyle. If you can’t afford your current bills and expenses, then you need to cut your expenses, or learn more skills and make yourself a more valuable asset to the company for which you work.
No, I'm saying they're less able to get work AS A RESULT OF MINIMUM WAGE. A better analogy would be that people who can walk are capable of going to the grocery store; minimum wage makes some people walk a little faster but breaks the legs of other people.
There should be no minimum wage. There should be no wage at all. Everyone should work for free. In fact, everything should be free. Businesses would not have to pay for expenses and consumers would not have to pay for anything and the economy would explode. It's just basic economics, something Milton Friedman never understood.
Walter Williams completely crushed their arguments with his Bangladesh point. İt is rather astonishing that we are still having the exact same arguments with the statists.
You won't have to but you will only have the option of shopping at a select few monopolies. Higher minimum wages at this time will without a doubt put nearly every single small business out of business. I employ 6 and if the democrats get their way with minimum wage and employer paid benefits I'll shut down and work for a monopoly.
He sounds reasonable and intelligent, if you are as idealistic and naive about our capitalist system. Perhaps if a true free market capitalist system actually existed these theories might be viable. However the reality is we have nothing even remotely close to a free market capitalist system.
If you understood the points Milton was making here and want to hear and learn more. Check out Milton Fredman and Phil Donahue show. Part one and part two.
Walter Williams, Thomas Friedman, and Thomas Sowell, are three men I have the utmost respect for. Liberal economists and democrats in general, have been destroying this country for decades. I have worked for unions and I have worked for non-union positions. Unions at times might be a necessary evil. If one can do without them then they should do without them.
The facts are in. He's wrong, on this and so many other things It's is a fact that increasing the minimum wage doesn't increase unemployment. If you disagree you're as wrong as if you disagreed with evolution
Eco 101: People get laid off anytime the cost of their employment exceeds their productive output. So, of course, if arbitrary wage increases cause that threshold to be crossed, the result is unemployment. Go back to the drawing board, Darwin.
@@fzqlcs there's a reason they call it econ 101... i'm not going to argue with you, i literally have a MA in economics and an MSc in financial economics it's beneath me. instead i'll give you these studies to read. read them or don't 🤷♂ not my problem, but don't pretend you know what you're talking about when you clearly don't "Impacts of minimum wages: review of the international evidence, chapter 4" "Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, David Card and Alan Krueger"
@@afgor1088 You are not going to argue because you know I am right. Otherwise, you would explain why an employer would take a loss in order to not to fire an employee. Claiming credentials does not bolster an irrational premise. Fauci tried that.
@@fzqlcs not going to work. i'm not giving you attention, you're not entitled to my time or an argument. i knew you wouldn't read the studies, thought i'd try anyway 🤷♂ goodbye, have a nice day
This makes no sense to me. Because we're talking about people flipping hamburgers and those jobs will always exist so why not have a minimum wage to protect them from getting paid 3$ an hour? Minimum wage sounds good for these menial jobs.
You would think that businesses would welcome more people with disposable income in the communities where they do business. So why in the hell would they want people to accept lower wages? The United States is a big market for the rest of the world but at some point the workers here will not be able to afford those widgets you are making overseas. At one time Americans were able to buy American made products and provide their neighbors with gainful employment. Not anymore, now you will see more derelict infrastructure, third world appearing communities, empty mainstreets and shuttered businesses. The unions had nothing to do with it, the big corporations and the stockholders stiffed the American worker in favor of big profits by moving production overseas. It did not matter if they were unionized or not. Lowering wages will not bring those factories back. If you want to survive in this country, you have to make your labor valuable to someone or something. There is a difference between a non-union workforce and a union workforce. I am grateful I was able to recognize that difference and am now comfortably retired with a union pension.
If the free market worked so well. We wouldnt have 15% of Americans in poverty and 50% of the population making less then 40 grand a yr. production is at a record high but the wages haven’t went up.
Can anyone make out what Milton is saying at around 6:19? He says "... then you are simultaneously saying..." I can't make out what he's saying. Thanks.
The problem is there's no balance between high productivity, inflation, cost of living, and the list goes on and on. However, the only people not suffering are the higher class
No, you misunderstand. Nothing you said contradicts what I said. As you said, minimum wage is a guaranteed amount for people who work. But what I'm saying is there's no guarantee that people will have work. In fact, minimum wage can cause more people to be without work.
Not sure why I love this stuff (maybe it touches a geek nerve I didn’t know I had) but I could listen to these debates a couple times a week. Okay, actually I just figured it out while I was typing, this is from a time when people with opposing views could actually face one another and engage in an intellectually honest discussion. I miss those day before panels of group thinkers sat around in echo chamber whining about how unfair life is.
Government has ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what the cost of labor is. To put an arbitrary price on labor is absurd! In addition, you can't get exploited because only YOU can CHOOSE to work there or not. What makes a job NOT slavery? CONSENT!
When I started working in 1978 minimum wage was roughly 2.60/hr. Now, with little to no skills, like a HS student they can get 20.00 per hour, at least in CA. CA is special for its special governor, too. He has granted 20.00 per hour for high school and unskilled. When I started working as an LVN, skilled, in CA, I made 12.00/hr and that was back in 1993. I was considered skilled with three semesters of trade school and an associates degree. I was a health care professional in 1993 in an acute care hospital. What kind of sense is 20.00 per hour to a kid with no training and no skills? That hurts the economy, but given the governor of CA anything he does hurts this economy. CA voted for him three times, including a failed recall. That spells I-D-I-O-T-S.
The day I see that lack of regulation, i.e. free market, produces anything else apart from higher profits for a few, I'll believe what Milton says. The problem is, he only mentions how on a global terms, minimum wage has hurt the middle and lower classes. My question is: can he, or anyone, show me anywhere in the world where free market ideas produce better conditions and salaries for workers? I'm really interested.
You don't have to look further than the United States and England. The 8 hour work day originated from the free market, not the government. The government doesn't mandate air conditioning but it's commonplace. Bear this in mind when considering the massive increase in productivity since the industrial revolution, and the major closing of wealth inequality thanks to free market innovation. A great economist once said that in the past, the rich traveled by a carriage drawn by four horses, and the poor traveled on foot. Now, the rich travel in fancy cars and the poor travel in beat up cars. This has only happened since the explosion of capitalism and people like Henry Ford being free to pursue their own self-interest. And as far as increasing wages, eliminating the minimum wage would increase the income of people who are currently making zero.
Richard Parks If by "the free market" you mean the unions, than yes, the government wasn't the origin of the minimum wage law. If you want to know how great the so called free market helped workers, do some reading. They rewarded the workers who wanted a living wage with the end of billy clubs. Oh, and wasn't old Milton the one who oversaw the deregulation of Wall street and our financial melt down. Now there's an expert worth listening to.
Will Hirsch I didn't say minimum wage. Did you read my comment? And billy clubs have nothing to do with the free market, that's force and violence and is thus by definition antithetical to the free market. And deregulation didn't lead to the financial meltdown, the Federal Reserve caused that.
Regardless of the level at which the federal or state governments set a legally mandated minimum wage, the real-world minimum wage will always be $0.00/hr. Imagine being a poor, undereducated, inner city 16 year old with no skills. If your choices were 1) having no legally mandated minimum wage and working for $5.00/hr or 2) having a minimum wage of $10.10/hr and being unemployed, which would you choose?
Richard Parks "The 8 hour work day originated from the free market, not the government. ... Bear this in mind when considering the massive increase in productivity since the industrial revolution, and the major closing of wealth inequality thanks to free market innovation." I could almost agree, except that you just pick one example of an improvement on the working conditions to make a general statement, which does not follow. I have one issue with the industrial revolution that now allows us to produce hundreds of times more that we could before creating more wealth, more rapidly and yet people need to work for 8h a day... with all these innovation, couldn't we just improve the quality of living for everyone? Isn't there enough growth in productivity to afford it? The way I see it, the amount of work needed from everyone should have decreased "considering the massive increase in productivity since the industrial revolution." What's stopping us? I have recently watched this documentary that could explain a great deal: PsyWar (How they create hate) Full Movie Part 1.avi "And as far as increasing wages, eliminating the minimum wage would increase the income of people who are currently making zero." Because these people would magically get paid or be supported by ...? That's a nice phrase that means nothing.
Minimum age opponants assume if one employer doesn't hire a worker because he's too expense, a job is lost. This is false, some other employer can find better use of this worker so that he produces more value than the minumum wage. It's a different kind of competition.
Machiel Groeneveld that can happen all by itself through business competition. Whoever has the better mouse trap wins. You don’t need the government to make that happen.
If Bernie Sanders or another candidate represented me on the following issue in writing and with a strong vocal output on the subject, I will consider voting for him or any other candidate that uses this. Only raise minimum wage on law-abiding citizens, that means violent and dishonest Americans and Illegals should be exempted. Milder crimes can endure a waiting period. It's time to include crime prevention and rewards in our laws. It would help to create the republic we need as a foundation for the democracy we could have had by now. People will feel freer to vote their conscience in a world with less violence and crime. Establishing our republic means no slaves because slaves do not govern nor should they. Violent and dishonest people serve as the slave masters of all our communities, helping our versions of Middle Eastern Shaeks maintain a tight grip on male dominating values, in other words, slavery.
Another way to look at the minimum wage is that it simply makes it illegal to hire somebody at a rate below that wage. That's all you've done. You haven't made it so that anybody makes any more money than they otherwise would. People who are worth a certain wage simply cannot be hired at a higher wage for the business to sustain itself. And if they are worth lower than the minimum wage, then it is illegal to hire them at the wage they are worth, so they won't be hired.
5:00 This is what happens when you have a D.A. in a position of a Authority. Facts are Facts but some people will still try and Lie about the Truth. There are so many things wrong with promoting minimum wage. One simple example is that when prices increase it always effects people who are on a set Income and the poor in a negative way.
When productivity of the US has increased by 90% and the increase in pay has been 8%, there's little point arguing against an increase in wages. The rich have declared war on the workers and the result is they've become far richer while the vast majority of workers have gotten poorer. How about a maximum wage?!
Will Hirsch First off everyone has gotten richer recently, just the rich even more so than the poor. Secondly, I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you say the rich (the chunk of the population that employs all of the low income workers) have "waged war on the poor" (who's incomes have been trending upwards.) Also, do you honestly think a maximum wage is a good idea? Really? You want to hurt employers? Employers are the ones who pay the low income workers, in the end it hurts THEM! The POOR! Lastly when you say "there's little point arguing against an increase in wages" I'm pretty sure you didn't actually watch the video, as if you did you would see that high minimum wage has NEGATIVE affects on the income of low-skilled workers. It RAISES unemployment (among teens and low-skilled workers). Please refer to this 2.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/S5JaCvJvXVI/AAAAAAAAM8o/meY3TSpmJMY/s1600-h/minwage1.jpg
Arthur Wright That's simply not true. The average middle class family has actually seen their wealth decrease by an average of $5,000 over the past decade alone, and if you go back and look at the incomes of working families compared to the elite since the late 70's you'll notice that while middle class wages have stagnated the wealthiest have only continued to do better over the past 40 years. Furthermore, if you compare the minimum wage from that time and adjust it for inflation in today's dollars, you'd see that minimum wage workers should actually be making at least $10.50 in today's market.
Arthur Wright The really damning flaw to the one gentleman's argument in the video is that he claims "higher productivity equates to higher wages for the worker." Historically, this is also inaccurate. Go back to the same time in the late 70's and compare middle class wealth and productivity from then until now. You'll notice that while the wealth stagnated, productivity continued to rise. His claim is completely false when juxtapose it to the trends we've seen over the last 40 years.
Scuze me, but, "since unions often frown upon its workers receiving raises through productivity..." ? Where the hell did you get a goofy idea like that from? Union members are smart enough to know that, if the buis dies, so do there jobs. If you're going to make an argument based on that comment, let's have some real world proof. And no, what Bill O spouts on Phaux Noise really doesn't count. Nor does really really wanting that to be true.
The minimum wage should be $500 an hour. Sure this will cause prices to stratospherically rise. But for the few members of the public still employed, they will become millionaires. I once told Milton this idea, and he laughed and responded, "Well, why not raise the minimum wage to $1,000 an hour if you think that's a good idea?"
the union guy has brilliant logic: "we are talking about the needs of the workers, the people who come into society which does not provide them with enough employment -- and what are we going to do?" -- yep, you are going to decrease the amount of employment even more by cutting off the small-wage part. The comparison with South Africa by Walter Williams is very exposing, quite on the spot. They shut him down on the rates of unemployment in 1949 and the time of the debate. People moved-shmoved etc. What about the unemployment now? The effects of moving-shmowing must be over by now. Well, sure they will rephrase it somehow and come up with new complex scheme to explain out the obvious.
Why is it that Americans are the most productive workers on Earth, work the longest hours, and take the least amount of vacations, but the majority of Americans haven't seen an increase in their real wages in the past 30 years? In the recent economic recovery, literally all of the new money generated has gone to the top 1%. This model promoted by Friedman seems to help everyone EXCEPT for the workers.
Michael Hiller In my opinion there's good and bad... globalization has led to better living standards for the poor not in this country. "Slave wages" to us, almost middle class to the Indians or Chinese. Moving jobs? Corporate greed? Certainly. My opinion is it will worsen over the next 30 to 50 years... by then I think you will start to see Americans emigrating to other countries for work.
+Michael Hiller Maybe because the real world bears no relationship to the fairy tales that you have provided. The facts are that US workers work comparable hours per week to other countries, are, depending upon the source of measurement, either the highest paid workers in the world or in the top three and the "stagnation" myth has been long debunked. Total real wages have increased steadily and substantially in every decade since statistics have been kept (at least until the current administration). And the "top 1% idiocy was fallacious at the outset, misconstrues the nature and type of wealth creation and pretends that the top 1% are some static group rather than, as is the reality, ever changing. You've been fed a lot of debunked nonsense.
I love this. If you advocated the abolishment of minimum wage today, people will hurl accusations at you for 'hating the poor'. However, in this discussion, people dont resort to such nonsense and have an actual dialogue. It is recognised that most of us want the same thing and dont hate the poor, but simply have different ideas on what is the best way of helping the poor, and everyone else. I really wish we could see more of these kind of discussion today.
I note that Friedman interviews the management of Sea World, but none of the workers that he says are being hurt. They exist purely as an abstraction, it's just economists and union heads and bosses.
***** how many unemployed people do you think are going to have the expertise and the data to see that it's a minimum wage that lower their chances of being employed, and realise that the only reason they aren't employed is because their skill simply doesn't justify the minimum wage employers are allowed to pay? These are people who have the experience to see the effect.
Yeezy Smalls You're an elitist who thinks people are incapable of understanding their own circumstances and that powerful intellectuals need to do their thinking for them.
I agree that the free market is brilliant in increasing the productivity of the worker, but you are assuming that all workers who are fired can and will be trained to obtain the productivity justifying the minimum wage. If that were true, we could make the factory workers in China much better off by raising their pay to $20/hr.
Minimum wage gives children pocket change while suppressing the incentive to become adult. Corporations soak up the added cost by reducing pay increases for entry level management. Net effect: Pay gap between starting worker and the person managing those starting employees is closed, thus taking away incentive for anyone to progress, particularly preventing children from developing into adults. Those same children who become young adults will soon need a job, and they need to be making more money so they can go to college and/or raise children. Management jobs provide the fuel for responsible young adults, and we should be supporting them and not the children living at home with their parents who already earn $50k-$250k/year.
Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland. - these countries are evidence that a minimum wage isnt necessary for propserity but we still have to consider all of the other surrounding factors that uphold their prosperity. It's not clear to me trade unions are problematic at the offset - particularly given that one of these mentioned countries (I forget which one) automatically signs people up with trade unions to negotiate for wages on their behalf as soon as they are legally employable, which might be why said country is so prosperous - but I do see an argument against minimum wage itself
So let's admit people have different skills. And different level of skill. One skill is negotiation. A purely free wage system benefits the people who possess the best negotiation skills. You would need practically zero employment for it not to matter. Even then all the areas of business that would help a family or individual to move ahead rely on your longevity at a position regardless of income. Both these are obstacles for the worker which leaves them clinging on to a lower paid but long standing job. On with unions and minimum wage to protect workers.
Despite the moral intentions, the outcomes are the same. That the jobs that pay less become illegal. So what happens to the workers? They get fired instead of a raise because their labor and skill are not worth the higher price of the new minimum wage You can also say that the higher skilled workers are protected against competition from the less skilled laborers. Labor Unions produce thsee results. higher paid workers don't have to worry about loosing their jobs to someone who is willing to do it a a cheaper price if they volunteer to learn.
@BillyBlaze The minimum wage is a minimum amount that workers can be paid per hour working. So of course it guarantees them a minimum income for each hour that they work. So your facts are just wrong about that.
Minimum wage != minimum income. Minimum wage is not financial assistance. It does not guarantee a certain amount of money to an individual. It guarantees that individuals whose productivity is less than an arbitrary threshold cannot get a job. That ensures that many people are able to do less for themselves, not more.
"Minimum age opponants assume if one employer doesn't hire a worker because he's too expense, a job is lost" Yup. Of course it is. The job is priced above the demand.
There is detailed data on hours and earnings for workers affected by the minimum wage increase. There were 3 studies conducted in the jurisdiction of Seattle which was the first major city to raise the minimum wage. Two of the studies by UC Berkeley indicated no significant harm. However, they only used data from the food industry. The third study by the University of Washington utilized data from workers of all industries and suggests that the minimum wage has had a far more negative effect on employment. That negative effect was the reduction in hours worked.
damn that thing on if you're gonna have a minimum wage you should have a minimum cost of a product, pretty much killed the argument there should be min wage for me #realtalk
No high minimum wage yet inflation and cost of living goes up, further widening low, middle, and high class. In the future there will not be a middle class
I was thinking the exact same thing about halfway through the video, Kemicutie. One side is loud, interruptive, and assuming. The other side is just trying to say, "Hey hold on a minute, it doesn't quite work like that in the real world of economics."
WOW! It had to do with competition for unions. Makes perfect sense. Now, why didn't I figure that out already? Of course, what the unions perhaps don't realize is that a greater minimum wage also increases inflation and the cost of living, making their union wages worth all the less, so it essentially all evens out to the same as having NO min wage, except that it hurts small businesses, which likewise hurts EVERYONE.
Of course this was before NAFTA and GATT. Minimum wage protects poor people from getting trained in low paying jobs. But it also makes it attractive to ship whole corporations to China where slave wages are legal. Further you can sell the cheap goods back into the developed world with no protective tarriffs.
"Protect" from training in low paying jobs? This assumes that A. The jobs they would get without a minimum wage ones don't often overlap with current low paying jobs and B. That work experience in training in them isn't of use. We need an end to tariffs to maximize prosperity in the age of the global economy, and an end to minimum wage laws to help unskilled labor get a foothold to improve their lot in life, and to boost the economy.
How do you address this problem. 1. Company A trades in America, It is profitable and treats is employees well. All its production is based onshore 2. Company B is offshore. It makes is goods in a country with low wages and as a results the goods are cheaper. It is able to transport goods to the US cheaply and sell them for less than company A. Company A goes bankrupt and company B takes its market share. The idea of a global economy is nonsense unless you are in a very high paying job. Goods can be moved around much more easily than people. If you have a job in an office in your local town, and the job is outsourced to a cheap offshore call centre what are you going to do. You can't jump on a plane and go and work in another country. You can't compete by lowering your salary either. There is a massive cost of living difference across the globe. You could be bankrupted in the US on a wage that you could live comfortably on in China or the far east. Food, electricity, medicine all cost less abroad. Why do you think many Americans shop for meds in Canada or Mexico, or go for surgery in India or the Phillipines? If this were Star Trek and we had transporters, that model might work. But as things stand it is the road to serfdom.
A strong economy and lower prices help the poor as well. In that case the market is pressuring the workers to find a form of labor or some skill in more demand relative to the supply of workers. This means a retraining of the work force, which is hard for some and may require welfare assistance, but we would still be an agrarian society if such a thing had never occurred. EDIT: Also, jobs going abroad doesn't apply to every job: you need someone in the US for much of the service industry, say, to run a burger joint. Your concern chiefly applies to manufacturing and production jobs, not the entirety of low wage positions.
LightofLand A strong economy? What does that mean? You can have a strong economy with 60% unemployment. It is called automation. To cite your example, the reason we are not agrarian any more is due to mechanisation and people being forced off the land. I don't know if you have noticed but corporations are involved in a massive power grab. Through lobbying small business is being phased out with red tape and regulation. To be replaced by big box stores employing many fewer people. The next step is to automate those jobs. This is already well under way. ATM, ticket machines and the internet were just the start. Self service checkouts, Amazon using drones for deliveries and driverless trains and cars are already out there. No new jobs are being created to replace the jobs that are being automated. The economy can be strong,but that is irrelevant. Those people will be stuck on welfare because there is nothing for them to do. This is not economics, this is politics. Designing people out of the economy is a CHOICE not a random event. With full automation the US only needs 3/4 million people, where will you be?
As I said, the solution is the push to retraining the work force for a global economy; and education is crucial. A minimum wage pushes for automation while abolishing it would make hiring workers a more attractive alternative: that point does nothing to support your argument. I'm no fan of corporate cronyism and I agree that it has caused damage to small businesses: but if anything a minimum wage law hits small business harder. Besides, if the economy is truly made stronger as you say there will be more revenues to support welfare programs. The future for a labor force in a global economy lies in education and retraining of the work force: the potential jobs are there, they just aren't the same kind of jobs.
These guys won't shut up and let others have the floor uninterrupted. I won't see the rest of it because some of them don't behave like people who deserve to be heard.
It's surreal and frightening when you can pull the curtain, look back, and hear these debates and see where we are now in the grand scheme of things. It's amazing just how prophetic and on point Friedman, Williams, and other older gentleman were and still are.
"Sincerity is a much overrated virtue in our society." - Milton Friedman
He's so good. As soon as he said that I went to make a comment about that quote and you beat me to it
The man was a fuckin' prophet. Because the problem of "sincere" advocates for terrible ideas has only gotten worse...and provided a mighty shield for those who are insincere in their motives.
Why don't we have debates like this today?
Because the Miltons are dying off and being replaced by marxist univeristy grads.
spinnerpete that's sad
Because the media, both right and left, are big government fanatics. How often to you see Tom Wood, Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, Judge Andrew Napolitano...on a major network? These people should be the most common commentators on TV and have their own shows. But they don't adhere to the big government, pro-war, statist narrative.
Dude, this argument was on the verge of falling apart several times.
We don't have debates like this because the folks whining for academic freedom in the 60's and got it didn't let anyone who disagreed with them have the same privilige. Kids are now raised like pets and are taught what to believe by people they dare not question. Note: The new $15 minimum wage isn't designed to help Americans - it is to encourage more illegals to come and work at substandard wages.
This debate is about people who have a clear self-interest in a minimum wage and economists who quite well know the effects
Is that why if you get a bunch of noble prize winning economists in a room and ask them 1 question you get a dozen answers? Not all economists agree and many economists in history have been proven wrong and forgotten. Keynesian economics cannot explain everything going on in current economic conditions because he could not predict how the world’s economies would look in 100 years.
@@richiemello3447 All of the prosperity ( that the Union bosses are sitting on ) was created by thousands of years prior + technological development aka Industrialization, by a World market that didn't even have a notion about what a "minimum wage" is, and the only reason that the US can sport a minimum wage in 2023 ( without completely imploding ) is because of said historical development, while the minimum wage and countless social programs have strangled free enterprise and strangled the free movement in the economy. The social programs are a hidden tax that is payed by everyone, but most of all, the people at the bottom who become fully dependent on the legislation and the social programs. It's help for the poor. To stay poor. And to die poor.
Basically, minimum wage not only hurts low skilled and poor, but also small business owners and favors big corporations because small business owners can't afford to pay the minimum wage.
Wow...
Not the best summation. The one who pays the biggest price for the "minimum wage" are the poorest of the poor, who are so poor that you can't produce a statistical valid model for them, because of the exclusion. This issue is about an artificial barrier that STOPS the excluded from getting a foothold in the "market of workers" and about welfare and other social programs that help the poor to stay poor, and to die poor, not only in economical terms but to die poor without trying your wings. Without trying and failing, the poor can never improve and they can never learn a real World experience. It's like being stuck in a ghetto of the mind, forever. Regardless if the immediate needs are met ( food, shelter etc. ) this is the essence of the word "poor" in 2023. Being poor is a mental and psychological state and the syndicates, they play into the American peoples fear and greed, for their own benefit. Well. This doesn't work in States that have a well established personal freedom and a personal mindset. It may work in Cali and NY to some degree, unfortunately.
Yup.
wonderful exchange.The atmosphere is electric.
Starting at around 10:30, Freedman completely ripped his opposer down to his absolute core, humiliating his intelligence in the process. Fantastic and accurate work. Is it possible for the next Milton to exist in today's society? I don't believe it is, as we've been trained improperly to deal with complex issues with which we disagree, a disagreement based solely on something we've heard in days gone by, namely, our school years, taught by the very people who profit from our ignorance
Check Yaron Brook, I enjoy a lot watching his speeches and Q&A, his mentor is Ayn Rand but was clearly influenced by the work of Friedman.
dude..i just finished watching one of his lecturese on why income inequality is no problem at all. It was so great and reasonable that even an 18 year old dimwit like me had no problem understanding.
Listen to Thomas Sowell
these pro min wage people use strawman arguments
+silkhead44 It's because they operate on emotions and feelings. Exactly as Milton said, the do-gooders. Here's a great quote from C.S. Lewis:"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
+Chris Parker
Lets my guest your from the south? confederate flag and all
+politics8000 First off, no I'm not from the south. Secondly, what the fuck does that have to do with my comment?Also, learn to spell. Jackass.
Don't engage the trolls. The quote was confusing enough for them to disregard and just go after you personally. Great insight from CS there, hadn't seen that before. Thank you
"How many kids do you have?"
Possible response 1: "None"
Then you can´t speak for the youth.
Possible response 2: "Two"
Your kids are far above the minimum wage.
The thing about a true free market system, is that it operates naturally. Nature is based on harmony and balance. When you institute government intervention, it throws it out of whack.
+Chris Parker nicely said, absolutely true.
+Chris Parker Free market systems fail to operate efficiently due to the existence of externalities that are not compensated for in the price system. Some form of government intervention is needed in markets to correct this and to ensure markets operate in a better way.
+Ben Bonning Ideally, government intervention would correct these inefficiencies, but more often than not, these "corrective" interventions have unintended consequences that almost entirely distort the market. In choosing the least of two evils, it seems better to keep the free market.
Making legal, sound business decisions without having to look behind your back for the blunt force trauma of government ;-)
Also, nature isn’t about equality of outcome.
Great debate. One aspect of the situation that was clearly missing was a young man and your lady looking for part time work.
At the end of the day, any minimum wage law reduces people's access to employment.
"If we didn't have minimum wage, this country wouldn't be as prosperous a place."
How's Singapore doing without one?
Switzerland has no minimum wage laws and their wage rates are about 25 dollars
Their economic inequality isn't that different than the US if you go by the GINI measurement. And the US has minimum wage. So I'm unconvinced.
I would simply advise being careful with the paradigmatic approach you seek to employ. Economics can be useful in many considerations, but it is necessary to keep in mind that the situatedness of economies is not geographically and historically irrelevant.
The free market doesn't "fix" inequality. On the contrary, it rewards productivity, skill, ingenuity and innovation, and thus is inherently unequal - for the simple fact that people do not perform equally. But the point of contention is that it is equitable. Prosperity is not judged by merely the level of income inequality, but in the general productivity and abundance afforded by the capital investments that lead to a strong workforce, granted by the freedom to employ. Switzerland's inequality of income is irrelevant. The point is that they are a prosperous nation without minimum wage laws, and empirical evidence suggests that they would only be less prosperous had they mandated a minimum wage law. And to that point, so would we, and so we are.
Chris Ward The biggest difference between capitalism and socialism is that capitalism depends upon mans desire to improve his personal conditions and socialism rejects it.
I adore Friedman's ability to keep cool under pressure - and simply let his opponent stumble on their own. Sometimes that's far more effective than shredding your opposition.
Of course, he can do that too, and often with a smile. The man was a legend.
"Sincerity is a much overrated virtue in our society." Oh my gosh, this. So much this.
This guy is a genius... i'm only thirteen but now i'm fully Liberitarian.
We call that wise beyond your years. Welcome aboard.
Thank You for Having me.
Wombat OfCombat
Give it a few more years and you'll be a glorious ancap.
Well friedman was not an archist. So let's go with your a minarchist
Wombat OfCombat proud of ya bud.
I am a Puerto rican..living in Connecticut...raised in New haven..i was poor and didn't know it. I saw my mom and dad stuggle..they divorced when I was 13.. hard childhood. Today I'm 30...6 years in the armys infantry and I started an electrical apprenticeship when I was 19...got my license about 5 years ago..now I'm a high voltage electrician/engineer slamming 6 figures a year...don't ever ever let anyone tell you that race holds you back. Engineering is a (white job) to some people...so explain why I'm keeping power on in Connecticuts capital? race has ZERO to do with what kind of job you get...i wanted to work with electricity because no one likes to. And there is an extremely high demand for legit electricians in the northeast...i simply chose a career that didn't involve crime...or drugs or fucking off with the wrong people. I chose to keep my head in them electrical books till I met my goals. Everyone can do this.
Friedman sold me at "Sincerity is a much overated virtue in our society"
Thanks for uploading this old gem of a video.
The exploitation of the worker ended the day a worker was allowed to find the best job he could for himself. It also ended the day he was allowed to take a gamble on his own labor and invest in himself with his own resources as self-employed rather than outsource that investment to a job creator.
Literally not true
the government has no problem hiring interns for no money...slavery (internship) is ok with your consent but you can't work for less than min wage with your consent...how asinine is that...it goes agianst your right to contract at whatever price you desire even it's below legislated min wage
+silkhead44, internship is not slavery. Slavery, by definition, is not voluntary.
I stand corrected but my point is valid...you should be able to contract at whatever price even if it's zero
+silkhead44, ok. Never mind. You and I agree, and I misread your statement.
Spirited, passionate, civil. This is the way debate between kindred professionals should be.
at the end of the day, it is not increase in wages but the improvement in technology that improves the quality of life. It is not poverty but lack of jobs that lead people to crime.
Minimum wage raises the cost of doing business and increase unemployment. these two things cause a lack of progress in technology and crime.
yes sir. criminals(we) are technologically the most advanced.
I always enjoy reading the comments of Milton Friedman videos. It restores my hope that there are other intelligent human beings in this world that, even though they may disagree with Milton, are at least compelled enough to give a crap.
the black guy sounds a lot like thomas sowell
Heron Myer That's his BFF Walter E Williams
In the 21st century, everybody is unhappy and egoistic so we cannot have a Suttle debate without someone getting triggered. Discussions and debates are important for the progression of society.
Exactly how would trade unions have to deal with competition from lesser skilled people? Is that concept a new free market principle?
The executives at the top keep getting bailed out by the government, and thus insulated from the consequences of the free market. If those at the top recieve protection from the government at the expense of the taxpayers, why shouldn't entry level workers recieve protection from the government at the expense of those on top? Without the minimum wage, only those are the bottom of the economic ladder are subject to the fluctuations of the "free" market. This double standard leads to an inequitable distribution of wealth amongst those who already hold wealth and power. Corrupt politicians aren't going to stop bailing out the people who fund their campaigns and they aren't going to deny legislature that favors the people that vote them into office. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The low price of goods is sustained on the back of labor outsourced to poor countries where there is little to no enforcement of worker's rights. Once these countries save up enough wealth, they too introduce legislation to protect their workers. When these companies run out of slave labor markets to outsource their work to, they will either have to slash their profit margins, increase prices, rely on government subsidies, or try to develop more advanced technologies to automate their skilled workforce. Automation is the only peaceful option, since the first two are unrealistic and the third option is unsustainable. Powers of the world have gone to war in times of past economic hardship, and due to the nature of man it's likely to happen again, many times over.
So why not have apply minimum wage only on big businesses and corporations?
Is there anything that unions don't destroy?
Also, a lot of union contracts stated a MULTIPLE of minimum wages.
We need to take the sharp edges off capitalism and the excesses of neoliberalism. See the works of John Rawls (who I do not entirely or even majoratively agree with). I like Milton but this argument is extreme. The measure of society is how we treat the less fortunate. As a well-paid person, I will happily give up some tax to ensure others have some measure of decency and respect. Go to Thailand or Cambodia and see what a truly unregulated and harsh market does. It's disgusting and leads to poverty which breeds crime and abolishes any notion of law and order. A minimum wage is a small price to pay. In this day and age, employers are big corporate entities making billions of dollars...
"The measure of a society is how we treat the less fortunate." You are right, but I see no reason why the government needs to be involved in this issue. In a society such as the US where we value charity and lending a hand to those in need (though that is begin destroyed by welfare and other left-wing policies), it is the people's responsibility to make sure that the less fortunate need to get back up on their feet.
I agree with Milton Friedman when it comes to his negative income tax. Which is to give people on public assistance up to a certain point. More financial assistance for the more they are able to do for themselves which is one reason why I'm in favor of the. Minimum wage and would even raise it under certain circumstances.
Jesus everyone's just interrupting each other. Would've been nice if they took turns so I could understand each of their positions.
+Winston T Atleast they weren't shouting profanity and insults at each other.
what song is in the intro? Wonderful!
That last word was spot-on and great.
Good overall.
Thanks for the video.
I understand the basic premise of repealing minimum wage laws - however i'm still slightly confused. Could someone explain how employers would not exploit their workers to minimize costs?
+MrGeeetar It's quite simple my good man. In the (abundantly evident) competitive market, businesses must compete for resources, This interaction of supply and demand results in the price of those resources equating to their actual value. Labor services or, more correctly, the return generated by them - which is what employers compete for - is no different. Self-interested employers seek to maximize profits which means that they will never overpay for resources (including labor services - which is why minimum wage laws only result in disemployment), but it also means that they cannot incur excessive turnover costs - which inevitably occurs if they try to underpay workers. Thus, as has been empirically demonstrated, competing employers bid *UP* the price of labor until it reaches the risk adjusted marginal revenue product of the labor services provided or, in layman;s terms, what those labor services are actually worth. The minimum wage is responsible neither for increasing pay levels or preventing them from falling.
FletchforFreedom Thorough and thoughtful. Thanks!
FletchforFreedom Thank you for this.
If the free market will not provide wages that pay the rent and food bills, then the free market should be taxed and the proceeds used to top up insufficient wages.
paul mitchell It’s not the job of the free market to pay your rent and food bills. It is your job to go out and find a career that can supply the necessary funds to support your chosen lifestyle. If you can’t afford your current bills and expenses, then you need to cut your expenses, or learn more skills and make yourself a more valuable asset to the company for which you work.
No, I'm saying they're less able to get work AS A RESULT OF MINIMUM WAGE. A better analogy would be that people who can walk are capable of going to the grocery store; minimum wage makes some people walk a little faster but breaks the legs of other people.
There should be no minimum wage. There should be no wage at all. Everyone should work for free. In fact, everything should be free. Businesses would not have to pay for expenses and consumers would not have to pay for anything and the economy would explode. It's just basic economics, something Milton Friedman never understood.
Walter Williams completely crushed their arguments with his Bangladesh point.
İt is rather astonishing that we are still having the exact same arguments with the statists.
I'm not going to pay $15 for a burger and fries.
Is somebody asking you to pay $15 for a burger and fries?
You won't have to but you will only have the option of shopping at a select few monopolies. Higher minimum wages at this time will without a doubt put nearly every single small business out of business. I employ 6 and if the democrats get their way with minimum wage and employer paid benefits I'll shut down and work for a monopoly.
robotnik77 Then don't ever eat at the airport!
+robotnik77 THANK YOU! LOL
Give it ~15 years for the inflation to catch up.
What no one is bringing up is money and fair distribution. This would scare the hell out of the business owners.
He sounds reasonable and intelligent, if you are as idealistic and naive about our capitalist system. Perhaps if a true free market capitalist system actually existed these theories might be viable. However the reality is we have nothing even remotely close to a free market capitalist system.
Is this kind of content still being made because I would love to watch it.
If you understood the points Milton was making here and want to hear and learn more. Check out Milton Fredman and Phil Donahue show. Part one and part two.
10:59 that dude was giving Friedman the death glare
Walter Williams, Thomas Friedman, and Thomas Sowell, are three men I have the utmost respect for. Liberal economists and democrats in general, have been destroying this country for decades. I have worked for unions and I have worked for non-union positions. Unions at times might be a necessary evil. If one can do without them then they should do without them.
basic economics vs emotion
I love Walter E. Williams. So glad I was able to meet him.
Using perpetually depreciating U.S. company script (aka Federal Reserve Notes) also doesn't help those who receive the lowest wages.
Milton looks both like a young child and an old man at the same time!
Whos that at 3:43?
An idiot!
Bob Kay "He disagrees with my beliefs. That means he's an idiot!"
Walter Williams
DreamAboutSpace Walter Williams, and he often guest hosts for Rush Limbaugh when he is unable to do the show.
The facts are in. He's wrong, on this and so many other things
It's is a fact that increasing the minimum wage doesn't increase unemployment. If you disagree you're as wrong as if you disagreed with evolution
Eco 101: People get laid off anytime the cost of their employment exceeds their productive output. So, of course, if arbitrary wage increases cause that threshold to be crossed, the result is unemployment. Go back to the drawing board, Darwin.
@@fzqlcs there's a reason they call it econ 101...
i'm not going to argue with you, i literally have a MA in economics and an MSc in financial economics it's beneath me.
instead i'll give you these studies to read. read them or don't 🤷♂ not my problem, but don't pretend you know what you're talking about when you clearly don't
"Impacts of minimum wages:
review of the international evidence, chapter 4"
"Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, David Card and Alan Krueger"
@@afgor1088 You are not going to argue because you know I am right. Otherwise, you would explain why an employer would take a loss in order to not to fire an employee. Claiming credentials does not bolster an irrational premise. Fauci tried that.
@@fzqlcs not going to work. i'm not giving you attention, you're not entitled to my time or an argument. i knew you wouldn't read the studies, thought i'd try anyway 🤷♂
goodbye, have a nice day
This makes no sense to me. Because we're talking about people flipping hamburgers and those jobs will always exist so why not have a minimum wage to protect them from getting paid 3$ an hour? Minimum wage sounds good for these menial jobs.
Minimum wage crowds out less skilled worker, whose only instrument to get hired is to work at a lower wage
Walter Williams and Milton Friedman vs. two people I've never heard of. It's not even fair
You would think that businesses would welcome more people with disposable income in the communities where they do business. So why in the hell would they want people to accept lower wages? The United States is a big market for the rest of the world but at some point the workers here will not be able to afford those widgets you are making overseas. At one time Americans were able to buy American made products and provide their neighbors with gainful employment. Not anymore, now you will see more derelict infrastructure, third world appearing communities, empty mainstreets and shuttered businesses. The unions had nothing to do with it, the big corporations and the stockholders stiffed the American worker in favor of big profits by moving production overseas. It did not matter if they were unionized or not. Lowering wages will not bring those factories back. If you want to survive in this country, you have to make your labor valuable to someone or something. There is a difference between a non-union workforce and a union workforce. I am grateful I was able to recognize that difference and am now comfortably retired with a union pension.
If the free market worked so well. We wouldnt have 15% of Americans in poverty and 50% of the population making less then 40 grand a yr. production is at a record high but the wages haven’t went up.
We don't have a free market.
Can anyone make out what Milton is saying at around 6:19? He says "... then you are simultaneously saying..." I can't make out what he's saying. Thanks.
The problem is there's no balance between high productivity, inflation, cost of living, and the list goes on and on. However, the only people not suffering are the higher class
No, you misunderstand. Nothing you said contradicts what I said. As you said, minimum wage is a guaranteed amount for people who work. But what I'm saying is there's no guarantee that people will have work. In fact, minimum wage can cause more people to be without work.
Not sure why I love this stuff (maybe it touches a geek nerve I didn’t know I had) but I could listen to these debates a couple times a week. Okay, actually I just figured it out while I was typing, this is from a time when people with opposing views could actually face one another and engage in an intellectually honest discussion. I miss those day before panels of group thinkers sat around in echo chamber whining about how unfair life is.
What is the name of the African American man making the case against minimum wage?
Government has ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what the cost of labor is. To put an arbitrary price on labor is absurd! In addition, you can't get exploited because only YOU can CHOOSE to work there or not. What makes a job NOT slavery? CONSENT!
To be a fly on the wall in this room
When I started working in 1978 minimum wage was roughly 2.60/hr. Now, with little to no skills, like a HS student they can get 20.00 per hour, at least in CA. CA is special for its special governor, too. He has granted 20.00 per hour for high school and unskilled. When I started working as an LVN, skilled, in CA, I made 12.00/hr and that was back in 1993. I was considered skilled with three semesters of trade school and an associates degree. I was a health care professional in 1993 in an acute care hospital.
What kind of sense is 20.00 per hour to a kid with no training and no skills? That hurts the economy, but given the governor of CA anything he does hurts this economy. CA voted for him three times, including a failed recall. That spells I-D-I-O-T-S.
The day I see that lack of regulation, i.e. free market, produces anything else apart from higher profits for a few, I'll believe what Milton says. The problem is, he only mentions how on a global terms, minimum wage has hurt the middle and lower classes. My question is: can he, or anyone, show me anywhere in the world where free market ideas produce better conditions and salaries for workers? I'm really interested.
You don't have to look further than the United States and England. The 8 hour work day originated from the free market, not the government. The government doesn't mandate air conditioning but it's commonplace. Bear this in mind when considering the massive increase in productivity since the industrial revolution, and the major closing of wealth inequality thanks to free market innovation. A great economist once said that in the past, the rich traveled by a carriage drawn by four horses, and the poor traveled on foot. Now, the rich travel in fancy cars and the poor travel in beat up cars. This has only happened since the explosion of capitalism and people like Henry Ford being free to pursue their own self-interest. And as far as increasing wages, eliminating the minimum wage would increase the income of people who are currently making zero.
Richard Parks If by "the free market" you mean the unions, than yes, the government wasn't the origin of the minimum wage law. If you want to know how great the so called free market helped workers, do some reading. They rewarded the workers who wanted a living wage with the end of billy clubs. Oh, and wasn't old Milton the one who oversaw the deregulation of Wall street and our financial melt down. Now there's an expert worth listening to.
Will Hirsch I didn't say minimum wage. Did you read my comment? And billy clubs have nothing to do with the free market, that's force and violence and is thus by definition antithetical to the free market. And deregulation didn't lead to the financial meltdown, the Federal Reserve caused that.
Regardless of the level at which the federal or state governments set a legally mandated minimum wage, the real-world minimum wage will always be $0.00/hr. Imagine being a poor, undereducated, inner city 16 year old with no skills. If your choices were 1) having no legally mandated minimum wage and working for $5.00/hr or 2) having a minimum wage of $10.10/hr and being unemployed, which would you choose?
Richard Parks "The 8 hour work day originated from the free market, not the government.
...
Bear this in mind when considering the massive increase in productivity since the industrial revolution, and the major closing of wealth inequality thanks to free market innovation."
I could almost agree, except that you just pick one example of an improvement on the working conditions to make a general statement, which does not follow.
I have one issue with the industrial revolution that now allows us to produce hundreds of times more that we could before creating more wealth, more rapidly and yet people need to work for 8h a day... with all these innovation, couldn't we just improve the quality of living for everyone? Isn't there enough growth in productivity to afford it?
The way I see it, the amount of work needed from everyone should have decreased "considering the massive increase in productivity since the industrial revolution." What's stopping us? I have recently watched this documentary that could explain a great deal:
PsyWar (How they create hate) Full Movie Part 1.avi
"And as far as increasing wages, eliminating the minimum wage would increase the income of people who are currently making zero."
Because these people would magically get paid or be supported by ...?
That's a nice phrase that means nothing.
Minimum age opponants assume if one employer doesn't hire a worker because he's too expense, a job is lost. This is false, some other employer can find better use of this worker so that he produces more value than the minumum wage. It's a different kind of competition.
Machiel Groeneveld that can happen all by itself through business competition. Whoever has the better mouse trap wins. You don’t need the government to make that happen.
If Bernie Sanders or another candidate represented me on the following issue in writing and with a strong vocal output on the subject, I will consider voting for him or any other candidate that uses this. Only raise minimum wage on law-abiding citizens, that means violent and dishonest Americans and Illegals should be exempted. Milder crimes can endure a waiting period. It's time to include crime prevention and rewards in our laws. It would help to create the republic we need as a foundation for the democracy we could have had by now. People will feel freer to vote their conscience in a world with less violence and crime. Establishing our republic means no slaves because slaves do not govern nor should they. Violent and dishonest people serve as the slave masters of all our communities, helping our versions of Middle Eastern Shaeks maintain a tight grip on male dominating values, in other words, slavery.
Another way to look at the minimum wage is that it simply makes it illegal to hire somebody at a rate below that wage. That's all you've done. You haven't made it so that anybody makes any more money than they otherwise would. People who are worth a certain wage simply cannot be hired at a higher wage for the business to sustain itself. And if they are worth lower than the minimum wage, then it is illegal to hire them at the wage they are worth, so they won't be hired.
Only Milton could use this word in context. RIP Legend. 10:00-11:00
That was the cleanest burn I’ve even seen.
5:00 This is what happens when you have a D.A. in a position of a Authority. Facts are Facts but some people will still try and Lie about the Truth. There are so many things wrong with promoting minimum wage. One simple example is that when prices increase it always effects people who are on a set Income and the poor in a negative way.
Minimum wage for workers and multimillion dollar salaries with stock options for CEOs and executives.
For the Minimum Wage!!!!✌️✌️✌️
If it's unfair for the government to intervene on behalf of business, how is it any less unfair for it to intervene on behalf of workers?
When productivity of the US has increased by 90% and the increase in pay has been 8%, there's little point arguing against an increase in wages. The rich have declared war on the workers and the result is they've become far richer while the vast majority of workers have gotten poorer. How about a maximum wage?!
Will Hirsch First off everyone has gotten richer recently, just the rich even more so than the poor. Secondly, I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you say the rich (the chunk of the population that employs all of the low income workers) have "waged war on the poor" (who's incomes have been trending upwards.) Also, do you honestly think a maximum wage is a good idea? Really? You want to hurt employers? Employers are the ones who pay the low income workers, in the end it hurts THEM! The POOR! Lastly when you say "there's little point arguing against an increase in wages" I'm pretty sure you didn't actually watch the video, as if you did you would see that high minimum wage has NEGATIVE affects on the income of low-skilled workers. It RAISES unemployment (among teens and low-skilled workers). Please refer to this 2.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/S5JaCvJvXVI/AAAAAAAAM8o/meY3TSpmJMY/s1600-h/minwage1.jpg
Arthur Wright
That's simply not true. The average middle class family has actually seen their wealth decrease by an average of $5,000 over the past decade alone, and if you go back and look at the incomes of working families compared to the elite since the late 70's you'll notice that while middle class wages have stagnated the wealthiest have only continued to do better over the past 40 years. Furthermore, if you compare the minimum wage from that time and adjust it for inflation in today's dollars, you'd see that minimum wage workers should actually be making at least $10.50 in today's market.
Arthur Wright
The really damning flaw to the one gentleman's argument in the video is that he claims "higher productivity equates to higher wages for the worker." Historically, this is also inaccurate. Go back to the same time in the late 70's and compare middle class wealth and productivity from then until now. You'll notice that while the wealth stagnated, productivity continued to rise. His claim is completely false when juxtapose it to the trends we've seen over the last 40 years.
Scuze me, but, "since unions often frown upon its workers receiving raises through productivity..." ? Where the hell did you get a goofy idea like that from? Union members are smart enough to know that, if the buis dies, so do there jobs. If you're going to make an argument based on that comment, let's have some real world proof. And no, what Bill O spouts on Phaux Noise really doesn't count. Nor does really really wanting that to be true.
Notice how the pro-minimum wage folks never mention the before and after unemployment rates.
This is the View in the 70's. Except that it's all men...and they actually all know something.
The minimum wage should be $500 an hour. Sure this will cause prices to stratospherically rise. But for the few members of the public still employed, they will become millionaires. I once told Milton this idea, and he laughed and responded, "Well, why not raise the minimum wage to $1,000 an hour if you think that's a good idea?"
Higher wages can really be of someone's expense, especially in markets that are hard to penetrate and companies are asking the highest possible price.
the union guy has brilliant logic: "we are talking about the needs of the workers, the people who come into society which does not provide them with enough employment -- and what are we going to do?" -- yep, you are going to decrease the amount of employment even more by cutting off the small-wage part.
The comparison with South Africa by Walter Williams is very exposing, quite on the spot.
They shut him down on the rates of unemployment in 1949 and the time of the debate. People moved-shmoved etc. What about the unemployment now? The effects of moving-shmowing must be over by now. Well, sure they will rephrase it somehow and come up with new complex scheme to explain out the obvious.
Why is it that Americans are the most productive workers on Earth, work the longest hours, and take the least amount of vacations, but the majority of Americans haven't seen an increase in their real wages in the past 30 years? In the recent economic recovery, literally all of the new money generated has gone to the top 1%.
This model promoted by Friedman seems to help everyone EXCEPT for the workers.
Michael Hiller In my opinion there's good and bad... globalization has led to better living standards for the poor not in this country. "Slave wages" to us, almost middle class to the Indians or Chinese. Moving jobs? Corporate greed? Certainly. My opinion is it will worsen over the next 30 to 50 years... by then I think you will start to see Americans emigrating to other countries for work.
jjj indeed
+Michael Hiller, that's not true. We haven't used the model promoted by Friedman.
+Ken Mills Jaja, it was the Freimann Modell. Jesus, get over it, he was just another jew fucking you over :D
+Michael Hiller Maybe because the real world bears no relationship to the fairy tales that you have provided. The facts are that US workers work comparable hours per week to other countries, are, depending upon the source of measurement, either the highest paid workers in the world or in the top three and the "stagnation" myth has been long debunked. Total real wages have increased steadily and substantially in every decade since statistics have been kept (at least until the current administration). And the "top 1% idiocy was fallacious at the outset, misconstrues the nature and type of wealth creation and pretends that the top 1% are some static group rather than, as is the reality, ever changing. You've been fed a lot of debunked nonsense.
I love this. If you advocated the abolishment of minimum wage today, people will hurl accusations at you for 'hating the poor'. However, in this discussion, people dont resort to such nonsense and have an actual dialogue. It is recognised that most of us want the same thing and dont hate the poor, but simply have different ideas on what is the best way of helping the poor, and everyone else. I really wish we could see more of these kind of discussion today.
I note that Friedman interviews the management of Sea World, but none of the workers that he says are being hurt. They exist purely as an abstraction, it's just economists and union heads and bosses.
Also this discussion is an unproductive disaster from which nothing good came.
it's not employed workers hurt by minimum wage - it's unemployed people with very little skill. Minimum wage keeps them that way
Yeezy Smalls You'd think he could find one of these unemployed victims to testify, but they're strangely absent from the video.
***** how many unemployed people do you think are going to have the expertise and the data to see that it's a minimum wage that lower their chances of being employed, and realise that the only reason they aren't employed is because their skill simply doesn't justify the minimum wage employers are allowed to pay? These are people who have the experience to see the effect.
Yeezy Smalls You're an elitist who thinks people are incapable of understanding their own circumstances and that powerful intellectuals need to do their thinking for them.
I agree that the free market is brilliant in increasing the productivity of the worker, but you are assuming that all workers who are fired can and will be trained to obtain the productivity justifying the minimum wage. If that were true, we could make the factory workers in China much better off by raising their pay to $20/hr.
damn. These gentlemen are spittin heat!
Minimum wage gives children pocket change while suppressing the incentive to become adult. Corporations soak up the added cost by reducing pay increases for entry level management. Net effect: Pay gap between starting worker and the person managing those starting employees is closed, thus taking away incentive for anyone to progress, particularly preventing children from developing into adults. Those same children who become young adults will soon need a job, and they need to be making more money so they can go to college and/or raise children. Management jobs provide the fuel for responsible young adults, and we should be supporting them and not the children living at home with their parents who already earn $50k-$250k/year.
Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland. - these countries are evidence that a minimum wage isnt necessary for propserity but we still have to consider all of the other surrounding factors that uphold their prosperity. It's not clear to me trade unions are problematic at the offset - particularly given that one of these mentioned countries (I forget which one) automatically signs people up with trade unions to negotiate for wages on their behalf as soon as they are legally employable, which might be why said country is so prosperous - but I do see an argument against minimum wage itself
Trade unions are a phenomenon in free societies. Provided the government does not impose wage floors, market forces are at play.
So let's admit people have different skills. And different level of skill. One skill is negotiation. A purely free wage system benefits the people who possess the best negotiation skills. You would need practically zero employment for it not to matter. Even then all the areas of business that would help a family or individual to move ahead rely on your longevity at a position regardless of income. Both these are obstacles for the worker which leaves them clinging on to a lower paid but long standing job. On with unions and minimum wage to protect workers.
Despite the moral intentions, the outcomes are the same. That the jobs that pay less become illegal. So what happens to the workers?
They get fired instead of a raise because their labor and skill are not worth the higher price of the new minimum wage
You can also say that the higher skilled workers are protected against competition from the less skilled laborers. Labor Unions produce thsee results. higher paid workers don't have to worry about loosing their jobs to someone who is willing to do it a a cheaper price if they volunteer to learn.
@BillyBlaze The minimum wage is a minimum amount that workers can be paid per hour working. So of course it guarantees them a minimum income for each hour that they work. So your facts are just wrong about that.
Milton Friedman is a beast.
Minimum wage != minimum income. Minimum wage is not financial assistance. It does not guarantee a certain amount of money to an individual. It guarantees that individuals whose productivity is less than an arbitrary threshold cannot get a job. That ensures that many people are able to do less for themselves, not more.
"Minimum age opponants assume if one employer doesn't hire a worker because he's too expense, a job is lost"
Yup. Of course it is. The job is priced above the demand.
The truth is that nobody knows is increasing min wage good or bad
There is detailed data on hours and earnings for workers affected by the minimum wage increase. There were 3 studies conducted in the jurisdiction of Seattle which was the first major city to raise the minimum wage. Two of the studies by UC Berkeley indicated no significant harm. However, they only used data from the food industry. The third study by the University of Washington utilized data from workers of all industries and suggests that the minimum wage has had a far more negative effect on employment. That negative effect was the reduction in hours worked.
damn that thing on if you're gonna have a minimum wage you should have a minimum cost of a product, pretty much killed the argument there should be min wage for me #realtalk
No high minimum wage yet inflation and cost of living goes up, further widening low, middle, and high class. In the future there will not be a middle class
@BillyBlaze You are right that is a better analogy. We still disagree but at least you are not saying things like people need water and air to live.
Word.
I was thinking the exact same thing about halfway through the video, Kemicutie. One side is loud, interruptive, and assuming. The other side is just trying to say, "Hey hold on a minute, it doesn't quite work like that in the real world of economics."
They speak of jobs moving from the cities to the suburbs. Is this the original outsourcing?
WOW! It had to do with competition for unions. Makes perfect sense. Now, why didn't I figure that out already?
Of course, what the unions perhaps don't realize is that a greater minimum wage also increases inflation and the cost of living, making their union wages worth all the less, so it essentially all evens out to the same as having NO min wage, except that it hurts small businesses, which likewise hurts EVERYONE.
Of course this was before NAFTA and GATT. Minimum wage protects poor people from getting trained in low paying jobs. But it also makes it attractive to ship whole corporations to China where slave wages are legal.
Further you can sell the cheap goods back into the developed world with no protective tarriffs.
"Protect" from training in low paying jobs? This assumes that A. The jobs they would get without a minimum wage ones don't often overlap with current low paying jobs and B. That work experience in training in them isn't of use.
We need an end to tariffs to maximize prosperity in the age of the global economy, and an end to minimum wage laws to help unskilled labor get a foothold to improve their lot in life, and to boost the economy.
How do you address this problem.
1. Company A trades in America, It is profitable and treats is employees well.
All its production is based onshore
2. Company B is offshore. It makes is goods in a country with low wages and as a results the goods are cheaper. It is able to transport goods to the US cheaply and sell them for less than company A.
Company A goes bankrupt and company B takes its market share.
The idea of a global economy is nonsense unless you are in a very high paying job. Goods can be moved around much more easily than people.
If you have a job in an office in your local town, and the job is outsourced to a cheap offshore call centre what are you going to do.
You can't jump on a plane and go and work in another country. You can't compete by lowering your salary either. There is a massive cost of living difference across the globe.
You could be bankrupted in the US on a wage that you could live comfortably on in China or the far east.
Food, electricity, medicine all cost less abroad. Why do you think many Americans shop for meds in Canada or Mexico, or go for surgery in India or the Phillipines?
If this were Star Trek and we had transporters, that model might work. But as things stand it is the road to serfdom.
A strong economy and lower prices help the poor as well.
In that case the market is pressuring the workers to find a form of labor or some skill in more demand relative to the supply of workers.
This means a retraining of the work force, which is hard for some and may require welfare assistance, but we would still be an agrarian society if such a thing had never occurred.
EDIT: Also, jobs going abroad doesn't apply to every job: you need someone in the US for much of the service industry, say, to run a burger joint.
Your concern chiefly applies to manufacturing and production jobs, not the entirety of low wage positions.
LightofLand
A strong economy? What does that mean?
You can have a strong economy with 60% unemployment. It is called automation.
To cite your example, the reason we are not agrarian any more is due to mechanisation and people being forced off the land.
I don't know if you have noticed but corporations are involved in a massive power grab.
Through lobbying small business is being phased out with red tape and regulation. To be replaced by big box stores employing many fewer people.
The next step is to automate those jobs. This is already well under way. ATM, ticket machines and the internet were just the start.
Self service checkouts, Amazon using drones for deliveries and driverless trains and cars are already out there.
No new jobs are being created to replace the jobs that are being automated. The economy can be strong,but that is irrelevant.
Those people will be stuck on welfare because there is nothing for them to do. This is not economics, this is politics.
Designing people out of the economy is a CHOICE not a random event. With full automation the US only needs 3/4 million people, where will you be?
As I said, the solution is the push to retraining the work force for a global economy; and education is crucial.
A minimum wage pushes for automation while abolishing it would make hiring workers a more attractive alternative: that point does nothing to support your argument.
I'm no fan of corporate cronyism and I agree that it has caused damage to small businesses: but if anything a minimum wage law hits small business harder.
Besides, if the economy is truly made stronger as you say there will be more revenues to support welfare programs.
The future for a labor force in a global economy lies in education and retraining of the work force: the potential jobs are there, they just aren't the same kind of jobs.
These guys won't shut up and let others have the floor uninterrupted. I won't see the rest of it because some of them don't behave like people who deserve to be heard.