Raise Minimum Wage to $14 an Hour Using This One Weird Trick!

012714_dobbs_rogers2Democrats believe they’ve hit on the perfect issue to distract from the horror of Obamacare in the 2014 elections: the minimum wage.

Apparently, increasing the minimum wage was not important for American workers during the first five years of Obama’s presidency — least of all his first two years, when Democrats controlled Congress and could have passed anything. (And did!)

No. The minimum wage did not become a pressing concern until an election year in which the public’s hatred of Obamacare is expected to be the central issue.

As The New York Times explained, Democrats see the minimum wage as an issue that “will place Republican candidates in a difficult position,” and also as a tool “to enlarge the electorate in a nonpresidential election, when turnout among minorities and youths typically drops off.”

(Unlike Republicans, Democrats consider it important to win elections.)

To most people, it seems as if the Democrats are giving workers something for nothing. But there are always tradeoffs. No serious economist denies that increasing the minimum wage will cost jobs. If it’s not worth paying someone $10 an hour to do something, the job will be eliminated — or it simply won’t be created.

The minimum wage is the perfect Democratic issue. It will screw the very people it claims to help, while making Democrats look like saviors of the working class, either by getting them a higher wage or providing them with generous government benefits when they lose their jobs because of the mandatory wage hike.

Of course, the reason American workers’ wages are so low in the first place is because of the Democrats’ policies on immigration. Republicans might want to point that out.

Since the late 1960s, the Democrats have been dumping about a million low-skilled immigrants on the country every year, driving down wages, especially at the lower end of the spectrum.

According to Harvard economist George Borjas, our immigration policies have reduced American wages by $402 billion a year — while increasing profits for employers by $437 billion a year. (That’s minus what they have to pay to the government in taxes to support their out-of-work former employees. Of course, we’re all forced to share that tax burden.)

Or, as the White House puts it on its website promoting an increase in the minimum wage, “Today, the real value of the minimum wage has fallen by nearly one-third since its peak in 1968.”

Why were wages so high until 1968? Because that’s when Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act kicked in, bringing in about a million immigrants a year, almost 90 percent of them unskilled workers from the Third World.

Our immigration policies massively redistribute wealth from the poorest Americans to the richest. It’s a basic law of economics that when the supply goes up, the price goes down. More workers means the price of their labor plummets.

Unfortunately, politicians spend a lot more time talking to rich employers than to working-class Americans. And the rich apparently have an insatiable appetite for cheap labor.

Having artificially created a glut of low-wage workers, now Democrats want to artificially raise their wages.

It’s win-win-win-win-win for Democrats.

– Employees who get a higher minimum wage are grateful to the Democrats.

– Employees who lose their jobs because of the minimum wage hike are grateful to the Democrats for generous government handouts.

– Poor immigrants who need government benefits are grateful to the Democrats.

– American businesses enjoying the deluge of cheap labor are grateful to the Democrats.

– Democratic politicians guaranteed re-election by virtue of ethnic bloc voting are grateful to the Democrats.

Do Republicans have any principles at all? Why isn’t the GOP demanding an end to this dump of unskilled workers/Democratic voters on the country?

Democrats show how much they love the poor by importing a million more of them to America each year. But then they prevent the last batch of poor immigrants from getting decent, well-paying jobs by bringing in another million poor people the next year.

You want a higher minimum wage? Turn off the spigot of low-wage workers pouring in to the U.S. and it will rise on its own through the iron law of supply and demand.

In response to the Democrats’ minimum wage proposal, Republicans should introduce a bill ending both legal and illegal immigration until the minimum wage rises naturally to $14 an hour.

Australia has a $15 minimum wage for adults — more than twice the U.S. minimum wage. Meanwhile, their official unemployment rate is lower than ours: 6 percent compared to 6.6 percent in the U.S. — and that’s with a lousy $7.25 minimum wage.

Sound good? Try immigrating there. Australia has some of the most restrictive immigration policies in the world. Their approach to immigration is to admit only people who will be good for Australia. (Weird!) Applicants are evaluated on a point system that gives preference to youth, English proficiency, education and skill level.

Similarly, New Zealand will soon have an official minimum wage of $14.25 for adults. Even our Democrats aren’t proposing that! New Zealand’s minimum wage hit $10.10 — the Democrats’ current proposal for us — back in 2006. Their unemployment rate is also 6 percent — up from several years of 4 percent unemployment a few years ago.

Like Australia, New Zealand’s immigration laws are based on helping New Zealand, not on helping other countries get rid of their poor people, which is our policy.

Instead of training the citizenry to look at the government as our paternal benefactor, distributing minimum wage laws and unemployment benefits in important election years, why don’t Republicans put an end to the artificial glut of low-wage, low-skilled workers being imposed on the country by our immigration laws?

Republicans could guarantee a $14 minimum wage simply by closing the pipeline of more than 1 million poor immigrants coming in every year.

Businessmen will gripe, but maybe the GOP could explain to their Chamber of Commerce friends that they will help them by slashing oppressive regulations, reining in government bureaucracies, passing tort reform, etc. They’ll also be able to cut taxes because the welfare state will shrink, a result of Americans going back to work.

But if the plutocrats insist on admitting another 30 million Democratic voters in order to get ever-cheaper labor, then, soon, Republicans won’t be in a position to help them at all.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • oxpoqxo

    If Republicans had any principles, Obama would’ve been impeached on principle the day after the state of the union. No taxation without representation!

  • Sheik Yerbouti

    It’s pretty clear the GOP has been infiltrated.

    • pfbonney

      (I like your alias; it’s quite creative & original! Had I not servered a tour in Iraq, though, I probably still wouldn’t know that “Sheik” is correctly pronounced as “shake”. Kudos!)

      And, yeah, the GOP has BEEN infiltrated, for years, it seems.

      • Sheik Yerbouti

        I can’t take credit, Sheik Yerbouti is a Frank Zappa album

        • pfbonney

          Ah. I liked what I heard from Zappa, but obviously, having been raised in an AM-radio world (mostly), haven’t followed him that much.

  • antisharia

    There’s no point in impeaching someone when you can’t convict them. It’s better to pick your battles and focus on something that can actually lead to victory.

    • pfbonney

      Good point, but still a bitter pill to swallow, nontheless.

  • Demetrius Minneapolis

    If the Republicans want to give something away for an election goodie, how about legislating to leave us honest, hard working plebs alone? Won’t cost the Feds 20 billion dollars and will allow me to sleep a little easier at night.

  • http://tinatrent.com/ Tina Trent

    Coulter for the Supreme Court.

  • pfbonney

    Well said, Ann, well said. Even the website, “NumbersUSA” doesn’t put the case for lower (immigration) numbers that succinctly.

    On another note, I normally cringe & delete whenever I get an email or pop-up with the words “wierd trick” or any of its variables,

    One of the first “wierd tricks” I encountered was to raise your social security payments. And as I understand it, it really works, too. The “wierd trick” consists of paying back all the social security payments you have ever received, then re-file/re-apply at an age where you will be elegible for higher benefits. Wierd, alright, whether it works or not.

    I also cringe & delete/avoid or any ads containing the words, “shocking” or “banned” video. If I watched all of those “shocking” videos I came across, I probably would have heart palpitations or arrythmia by now

    But with Ann Coulter writing this column, I could be assured of a good read!

  • CaoMoo

    America is going to be the worlds largest third world country at this rate. It already kind of is.

  • De Doc

    This party will end sooner or later, somebody will be stuck with the proverbial check and we can be assured it won’t be the plutocrats.

  • GoodBusiness

    Check their income tax rates in Oz and NZ – ouch . . now Ann you did not mention that the minimum wage in the US only applies to about 1.8% and they move up from their with experience – so it is temporary situation for a very small percentage of the worker population.

    However it does affect the many UNIONS as they have contracts that give them automatic increases, sometimes by multiple amounts. Humm Minimum wage is a UNION QUID PRO QUO FROM THE DEMOCRATS?

    http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/the-28th-amendment.html

    • Frau Katze

      A lot of the reason for higher taxes in places like Australia and Canada is the universal, single-payer health system. It’s largely supported by taxes. Citizens pay a token amount monthly.

      • GoodBusiness

        They also pay value added sales tax when the spend the $ 14 per hour. It is not just single payer. I have relatives there – when the Socialist took office they went south – the economy went down and taxes went up.

        So the health care was not the driver of tax hikes.

        • Frau Katze

          I’m in Canada. We have never had socialists federally. But value added tax, yes.

          I’m going by reading that people are paying $600 a month for ObamaCare premiums (in some cases). Low income don’t pay anything I believe.

          In BC, the monthly health care amount is $60/month (low incomes also subsidized). That’s an awfully big difference. Could account for quite a bit of the tax difference.

          • GoodBusiness

            Yes, one must add all the taxes paid . . income tax [what is the starting point] which a family of 4 in the US pays little or none – below the poverty line about $ 24,000 they actually get a check back for the Social security taxes plus additional amounts.

            Then we pay property taxes or between 1.5 to 3% – yes even renters pay through the landlord, next we have State income tax which can be up to 15% in some States, then we have city income tax of 1 to 3%, then we pay Capital gain [investment tax[ of 20% Federal and up to 15% State, then we pay hundreds of special taxes like excise tax, phone tax, utility tax, insurance tax and more.

            So, if one applies all taxes paid they would see the government is just too big as OZ and NZ have decided.

            In America under Obama care a family of four earning could pay $ 1,000 plus per month with varying deductibles from $3,000 to $ 12,000 – many paying only 50% up to that point. All policies are more expensive than before as they have decided to pay subsidies to people earning up to 133% of the poverty rate and to pay 100% of all medical, dental, vision and even mental health cost for those on welfare.

            “Collectivism holds that the individual has no rights, that his life and work belong to the group (to “society,” to the tribe, the state, the nation) and that the group may sacrifice him at its own whim to its own interests. The only way to implement a doctrine of that kind is by means of brute force — and statism has always been the political corollary of collectivism.”
            – Ayn Rand

  • http://www.shugartmedia.com/ Chris Shugart

    Liberals must think that minimum wage salaries are magic dollars from heaven. Preferring to entertain fantasy rather than reality, they choose to ignore that this money has to come from somewhere, and that “somewhere” is the employer struggling to maintain their bottom line. How are they supposed to adjust their ledgers to meet the burden of a sudden and arbitrary increase in their cost of doing business? Just move along, no consequences here.

    • Sussex Girl

      Hey Chris — Actually, a good deal of the cost will come from us. My mom goes to Switzerland every spring to visit her sister and pays US$5.50 for a cup of coffee at restaurants, not five-star places, either. Chicken is $6.00 a pound on sale, $9 when it’s not. European countries have higher minimum wages. Prices for everyday things are also much higher. We’ll pay for the increase in wages, as they do in Europe.

      • http://www.shugartmedia.com/ Chris Shugart

        One of the many consequences of government mandated income redistribution. When will they ever learn?

  • chrissie07

    Yep. True.
    Being from Europe, white, educated, of course fluent in English and several other languages and capable of maintaining yourself and your children will in no way get you a visa to the US.
    Being Muslim, poor and dependent of public welfare will do the trick…

  • guest

    Why does the minimum wage issue work for the leftists, the democrats?

    It works because it’s a big, gigantic outpouring of selflessness.

    It’s the morally big democrats doing something for the ‘other’ poor, poor, minimum wage workers. Never you mind that it destroys jobs.

    Everyone’s learned all their lives, that you are your brother’s keeper, and doing for ‘others’ is the bestest of the best. It’s your highest moral ideal.

    The church going knuckle draggers on the right know better, because they go to church where they learn what parts to take seriously and what not.

    But the leftists are free of the church. And they use the notion of selflessness to literally, slap the right silly.

    Selflessness is why the leftists cannot act in the nations’ best self interest. Selflessness is why we have every ragbag, worthless dirtbag granted free entry with free goodies ga-freaking-lore!

    The leftists have out-churched you. And you are their helpless and hapless bee-och.

    Leftists are the endpoint for selflessness as a moral ideal.

    You can’t fight the leftists on this issue, because to do so would challenge your very identity. And they know this and they use it against you.

    Why did we put people in harms way in Iraq, instead of pulverizing it from the air?
    Selflessness.

    It’s why we do everything that seems stupid. Once someone takes out the guilt-six-shooter of selflessness, people fold immediately against this.

    Acting in the nation’s self interest is low and dirty because of selflessness.

    It’s very interesting to see where abandoning the church has taken us. The church taught us selflessness, but also how seriously or not to practice it.

    The power craving leftists noticed this are milking it for power and the nihilist freak-show of destruction they so enjoy watching from their limo window.

    Doesn’t Pelosi remind you of the woman from the Patriot movie who clapped while the British ship burned in the harbor? Maybe it’s just me.

  • http://www.ronlewenberg.com/ Ron Lewenberg

    The only Republican in Congress talking about this basic reality seem to be Senator Jeff Sessions.

  • Schmitty

    They should encourage welfare recipients to work min wage jobs. Let the welfare budget absorb subsidizing min wage hikes. It would give these people some esteem from looking after themselves. The amount paid out from welfare would drop also. Win win.

  • Ellman48

    “(Unlike Republicans, Democrats consider it important to win elections.)”

    Actually, there are no ‘Republicans’. What we have is ‘Democrats’ and ‘Others’. The Democrats are unified and compliant to the party’s agenda. The Others are all over the place ideologically and politically. Unable to form a consensus they are concerned primarily with individual survival in this contest where only the fittest will survive. The Others instinctively realize that they no longer form a coherent or unified party and that their primary focus must be on local issues and problems, not national ones. This is why no matter what national initiative the Democrats offer the Other party remains mute and focused on individual survival. The Tea Party has produced a lot of confusion among those belonging to the Other Party because they never expected to ever have to deal with principles and values again.

  • Ellman48

    “Since the late 1960s, the Democrats have been dumping about a million
    low-skilled immigrants on the country every year, driving down wages,
    especially at the lower end of the spectrum.”

    Exporting jobs and factories overseas as a result of the obsession with globalism and free trade have also served to reduce wages here. So the Democrats, on the one hand, create the conditions which depress wages and, on the other hand, want to raise the ‘minimum wage’ to improve the lot of the poor (not impacting the middle class whatsoever). American companies, their executives, the Business Roundtable, the Trilateral Commission, etc. have mounted relentless pressure on Washington DC to have policy discriminate against the American worker and for the multinationals and their executives.

    The government and American businesses have conspired to degrade our standard of living while politicians, bureaucrats, business executives and investors prosper like they live in a golden age of prosperity.

    The minimum wage is like a dust mite on an elephant’s rear compared to the really significant economic and standard of living issues which are not even being addressed by either party.