On numerous right-wing blogs, I discovered segments of the controversy final evening between Democrat John Fetterman and Republican Mehmet Oz of their race for Pennsylvania’s open seat within the U.S. Senate. Not surprisingly, they centered on Fetterman’s often-awkward solutions to questions. I used to be interested by their views on the minimal wage, which, in Pennsylvania, remains to be the federal $7.25 an hour.
Right here’s a 4-minute phase, uncut, that properly summarizes their views. Though Fetterman does state the problems awkwardly, I at the very least understood his level. I believed a number of the conservative websites did Oz a disservice by not displaying his cogent reasoning on the minimal wage. Watch the entire thing. As I mentioned, it’s solely 4-minutes lengthy.
I feel that one factor Fetterman mentioned didn’t make sense, and I feel it had nothing to do together with his latest stroke, as a result of I’ve seen many “stroke much less” Democratic politicians say comparable issues. The questioner says:
What do you say to small enterprise homeowners who’ve instructed us that if the minimal wage had been elevated to $15 an hour, it could put them out of enterprise?
Parenthetical remark earlier than we get to Fetterman’s reply, much like the one requested within the film Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Child when they’re being relentlessly chased by a lot of folks on horses: “Who’re these guys?” I’ve by no means seen such a balanced and knowledgeable pair of questioners. They really appear to need to get solutions. And the “if … had been” formulation is grammatical icing on the cake. Their efficiency is healthier than that of any questioners I’ve seen in presidential contests within the final 30 years.
Now to the a part of Fetterman’s reply that I discovered attention-grabbing:
You may’t have companies being sponsored just by not paying people that simply merely can’t evade [I’m pretty sure he means “afford”] to pay their very own approach.
I’ve heard a lot of folks say that paying low wages quantities to a subsidy to companies. I don’t see it. You may say “Effectively, they’ll pay decrease wages than in any other case due to issues like welfare and Medicaid that go to low-income folks.” However many of those packages scale back the availability of labor, making wages increased than in any other case. And to the extent some authorities packages, just like the Earned Revenue Tax Credit score, do enhance labor provide, making wages decrease than in any other case, an try to guage the well-being of these wage earners with out taking account of their acquire from the EITC is not sensible.
Take a look at how Oz lays out the thought of market forces driving wages and the significance of unblocking market forces, particularly within the vitality sector. I feel he overstates the ensuing wage charges, however he makes an excellent level. He additionally makes the purpose that $15 an hour has already been achieved in Pennsylvania by market forces. I guess that’s a little bit of an exaggeration, however not a lot. Furthermore, the place you discover folks incomes considerably lower than $15 an hour, it is best to fear {that a} $15 minimal wage would wipe out their jobs.
By the best way, I do marvel what the names of the questioners are. Just a few searches on Google didn’t give it to me.
