Below, James Sherk of the Heritage Foundation points out a number of the problems with the president’s proposal to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour: It’s far from a proven tactic for poverty reduction, it’s not at historically low levels, and forcing higher wages across the board doesn’t improve productivity.
Over at the Agenda, Reihan has some more: The president has just arbitrarily raised his bid by a substantial amount from what he asked last year (a $9 an hour minimum wage). The president’s new proposal would raise the value of the minimum wage nearly 40 percent, and place it higher than every existing state minimum wage. Check out his post to find out what that means for American workers.
I also explain why the president’s guarantee that “no one who works full time should ever have to raise a family in poverty” has actually been . . . more or less fulfilled. And the right way to make sure they don’t have to scrape by with a family living at the poverty line is certainly not a higher minimum wage, but more jobs (including more flexible ones) and a tax code that’s more generous to families.
On the other hand, Reihan suggests, while the president’s proposal to raise the minimum wage is deeply flawed, indexing it to inflation may be the least bad way to end this debate.