Miami archbishop: raise the minimum wage [CC]

[stinkcat_14]

He quoted the catechism and Pope Francis.

Actually, I reread the letter, and of course the AB does not endorse any particular proposal, so we cannot fault the AB for not being concerned about people who may or may not lose their jobs. They state: “We urge you to consider closely any legislation that begins to heal our broken economy by promoting decent work and ensuring fair and just compensation for all workers.” That is pretty broad and could envision any number of proposals.

 

[catholictiger]

Do you think he would recommend not raising the minimum wage if it meant 900,000 people would be living in poverty who otherwise wouldn’t?

It’s not that black and white this is a complex issue that simple this or that questions can’t suffice in.

When it comes to predicting economic effects, most people are shooting into a dark room. Does that mean that most people should remain silent on economic matters?

yes which makes your question about if raising the minimum wage got 900,000 people out of poverty strange?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Do you think he would recommend not raising the minimum wage if it meant 900,000 people would be living in poverty who otherwise wouldn’t?

When it comes to predicting economic effects, most people are shooting into a dark room. Does that mean that most people should remain silent on economic matters?

I think if the Archbishop knew some number of people like 500,000, perhaps more or less, would lose their jobs entirely, and that some 35% of the people benefitted by the minimum wage change make from three to six times the poverty level already, I think it might have given him pause. And I think it should have.

 

[stinkcat_14]

I think if the Archbishop knew some number of people like 500,000, perhaps more or less, would lose their jobs entirely, and that some 35% of the people benefitted by the minimum wage change make from three to six times the poverty level already, I think it might have given him pause. And I think it should have.

Of course, he did not endorse any particular minimum wage proposal, so we really can’t fault him for the effects of a proposal that he did not endorse.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Of course, he did not endorse any particular minimum wage proposal, so we really can’t fault him for the effects of a proposal that he did not endorse.

Not a particular proposal, but he did endorse raising it. You’re right, though, he did not espouse a particular amount, so we don’t know whether he meant a raise of five dollars or five cents or something in between. And, of course, we don’t know whether whatever he had in his mind would have cost five jobs or five million jobs. His doing it at the time Obama was pronouncing his decree is curious, if not suggestive. The USCCB people have a way of doing this, as they did on gun control immediately before Obama proposed gun control legislation. I well recall arguing on here almost endlessly that the gun control letter was not a pronouncement of Catholic doctrine either as applied to Obama’s proposal. But a lot of people thought it was.

Possibly the USCCB committee heads like Abp Wenski don’t realize that they seem to endorse Obama’s proposals when he comes up with them, and that many of the faithful think they are doing just that.

 

[Ender]

So you see know why I question what has been taken for granted.

No, I don’t. When I copied the bishops statements from the news source you implied the news wasn’t trustworthy and we couldn’t believe what we read. Now when I cite directly from the bishop’s statement you suggest there is some doubt about what he was really saying. Arguing about the meaning of simple sentences isn’t all that interesting. He was calling for an increase in the minimum wage. That was how the news (correctly) reported his statement and that was how the USCCB took it as well in citing his letter in support of their own call for an increase.

Ender

 

[Ender]

He gave the moral foundation, not the economic foundation.

There is no moral foundation for the support of particular policies. The archbishop made his recommendation based on the assumption that raising the minimum wage would be an obvious good. As the CBO analysis makes clear, there is nothing obvious about the good it would do … therefore there cannot be a moral obligation for doing it.

Ender

 

[Ridgerunner]

No, I don’t. When I copied the bishops statements from the news source you implied the news wasn’t trustworthy and we couldn’t believe what we read. Now when I cite directly from the bishop’s statement you suggest there is some doubt about what he was really saying. Arguing about the meaning of simple sentences isn’t all that interesting. He was calling for an increase in the minimum wage. That was how the news (correctly) reported his statement and that was how the USCCB took it as well in citing his letter in support of their own call for an increase.

Ender

Correct, except that the letter “from the USCCB” was also written by him. Nobody can speak for the US bishops as a body without the vote of the whole body. The USCCB is not the same thing as “all the bishops”. All the bishops belong to it, but it is a separate organization. Committee members of USCCB sometimes utter their opinions on USCCB stationery. When it comes to stating the definite teachings of the Church, there’s nothing to which to object. But when it comes to expressing political opinions, it would be better, in my view, if they made it clear they are only speaking for themselves on a matter on which Catholics may exercise prudential judgment.

Issuing letters seeming to represent the position of all bishops, particularly in a political context and on a debateable political issue in which there is no certain Church teaching, can obviously be confusing to Catholics.

 

[markomalley]

If you read the definition posted above, you will notice that envy involves wanting another’s good for oneself. Envy is not an issue here.

Ever hear of “class envy”?

Never perhaps was there more talking about the brotherhood of men than there is today; in fact, men do not hesitate to proclaim that striving after brotherhood is one of the greatest gifts of modern civilization, ignoring the teaching of the Gospel, and setting aside the work of Christ and of His Church. But in reality never was there less brotherly activity amongst men than at the present moment. Race hatred has reached its climax; peoples are more divided by jealousies than by frontiers; within one and the same nation, within the same city there rages the burning envy of class against class; and amongst individuals it is self-love which is the supreme law over-ruling everything.

- Benedict XV, Encyclical Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, 7 (1914)
​

 

[JamesCaruso]

You may feel morally bound to support raising the MW, but to what? There is no magic number.

And most assuredly, there is or will be, an inflection point. If an increase of .25 cents per hour will not cause more unemployment, how about an increase of $10 per hour? At some point the excess labor cost will cause the employer to reduce the labor force. Shall we just try it by trial and error until that point is reached?

Also, the minimum wage is by nature an entry-level wage. If it is too high, maybe nobody gets laid off, but a certain number are foreclosed from entering the labor force. They might be willing to work for less than minimum, but we won’t allow them to. So we will force them to remain unemployed rather than gain entry into the work force.

And if you don’t have a MW at all, allowing market forces alone to determine wages, then in an economy like we now have with a surplus of labor, we may have employers paying such low wages that even with two full time jobs, people are living below the poverty threshold.

 

[pnewton]

Ever hear of “class envy”?

Yes. So? Check the above context, specifically about the need to seek a spiritual director. Sin is personal. “class envy” uses the term differently that of a personal sin.

I do not doubt that envy can and does motivate many people in how they vote and the issues they support. However, that sort of accusation has no place here as it goes beyond looking at the class and judges the heart of the individual. Like the other person to whom this envy comment was directed, I have no personal gain in any change in the minimum wage.

 

[pnewton]

Arguing about the meaning of simple sentences isn’t all that interesting

Then that is another thing I differ on. Words matter. Grammar is essential. When I get bogged down, I even diagram them, especially when dealing with formal writing.

 

[freeRadical]

And if you don’t have a MW at all, allowing market forces alone to determine wages, then in an economy like we now have with a surplus of labor, we may have employers paying such low wages that even with two full time jobs, people are living below the poverty threshold.

You implicitly assume that if there was not a floor on the price of labor, and we allowed the free market to determine wages, then employers would pay their employees very low wages. That’s a statement that people make, but that doesn’t mean its true. Let me ask you this: would you care if people made low wages if the price level reflected the level of wages? Who cares about wages; what matters is the price level. The price level has been steadily rising year after year while wages have remained relatively stagnant. The question is not why wages haven’t caught up with prices, but rather why have prices outpaced wages so much?

 

[freeRadical]

I am against the minimum wage, I just think that some of the arguments against it are not well argued. For example, some think that the MW causes big job loss. But the actual data is not so clear. So when someone makes a claim, it is always good to ask for the numbers.

I know that some of the arguments against it are not well argued but it seems to me like you’re playing devil’s advocate and a lot of people might imply that you are for a minimum wage. I think you’re time would be better well spent informing people about why the minimum wage is bad, economic theories about it, data, etc. instead of playing devil’s advocate against people making outlandish claims about the effect of the minimum wage.

 

[JamesCaruso]

You implicitly assume that if there was not a floor on the price of labor, and we allowed the free market to determine wages, then employers would pay their employees very low wages. That’s a statement that people make, but that doesn’t mean its true. Let me ask you this: would you care if people made low wages if the price level reflected the level of wages? Who cares about wages; what matters is the price level. The price level has been steadily rising year after year while wages have remained relatively stagnant. The question is not why wages haven’t caught up with prices, but rather why have prices outpaced wages so much?

I didn’t say “we would”, I said, “we may”. Do I need to remind you that we have had times when some businesses did pay what amounted to slave wages? It was memorialized in the following lyrics:

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don’t you call me 'cause I can’t go
I owe my soul to the company store

But I do understand what you are saying.

 

[Ridgerunner]

You implicitly assume that if there was not a floor on the price of labor, and we allowed the free market to determine wages, then employers would pay their employees very low wages. That’s a statement that people make, but that doesn’t mean its true. Let me ask you this: would you care if people made low wages if the price level reflected the level of wages? Who cares about wages; what matters is the price level. The price level has been steadily rising year after year while wages have remained relatively stagnant. The question is not why wages haven’t caught up with prices, but rather why have prices outpaced wages so much?

To me, it’s manifestly untrue that a wage floor is the only thing that keeps wages from dropping. Nobody here works for minimum wage. The “floor” isn’t lifting people above it, the demand for labor is.

Well, maybe I had better qualify that. I don’t know what Walmart greeters make. I’ll have to find out.

 

[Laurie_Byron]

When I face difficult moral challenges I follow Jesus’ very clear statement in Matthew 22:37-40

Jesus replied:

“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a]

This is the first and greatest commandment.

And the second is like it:

‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’**

All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

I take part of the second commandment to encourage** Compassion and Empathy for those poor in material goods.**

I see myself as a compassionate capitalist -

But if others can take this as meaning that I’m a leftie - pinko - bleeding heart - socialist - commie, I will take my chances on Judgement Day**

 

[Ender]

Nobody can speak for the US bishops as a body without the vote of the whole body. The USCCB is not the same thing as “all the bishops”.

This is a point that is way too insufficiently understood.

Issuing letters seeming to represent the position of all bishops, particularly in a political context and on a debateable political issue in which there is no certain Church teaching, can obviously be confusing to Catholics.

It is not merely confusing; it harms the nature of the debate by changing its form from “A is better than B because of X,Y, and Z” to “You’re evil”, from a judgment of arguments to a judgment of people.

Ender

 

[Ender]

When I face difficult moral challenges…

What moral challenge does this issue present?

Ender

 

[JamesCaruso]

Somebody please help me. I think I have painted myself into a logical corner and might have to reverse my position. Here is how it happened, but I warn you it is filled with my own personal opinions/biases:

I declared: "What I can’t see for the life of me is how a modest raising of the minimum wage puts people out of work. "

I listed the following considerations:

• I can see how studies show that a raising of the minimum wage is generally accompanied by a reduction in jobs, but I don’t think a causal relationship has ever been established.
• I can see how some businesses might respond to an increase in the minimum wage by reducing their workforce, but that is only one possible way to deal with the added wage expense.
• I can see how pressure from stockholders might influence management to maintain present earnings by reducing the workforce, although this may backfire, since fewer workers may not be able to maintain profit levels.
• I can see how upper management in some cases might refuse to take a hit on large salaries as a way to avoid layoffs.
• I can see how a business might be reluctant to raise the price of products or services to make up for any reduction in net income.
• I can even see how a business model can be constructed that depends on being able to pay poverty level wages to some in order to be profitable, but I see this as a business model that is not in the public interest as it tends to institutionalize poverty.

And I reaffirmed: “But I can’t for the life of me see how a modest raising of the minimum wage causes people to be put out of work.”

I then noted the obvious, that the moral objective of raising the minimum wage can be frustrated by elements of the business community that place profits, either company or personal, over moral considerations.

So, the question then became, “Should I support an action that if cooperated with would achieve an overall moral good, or not support it because others are almost sure to frustrate that moral objective? Is the moral thing to do tantamount to the practical thing to do, or should I persist in my efforts despite the opposition that will almost surely negate my efforts?”

I then thought of an analogous situation. In an election, three parties might run for the office of President. If one candidate stands for nearly everything I stand for including all the moral issues, but has little chance of winning, should I vote for him anyway, or should I vote for another candidate who has a good chance to win and who stands for some of what I stand for, including all of the moral issues? In actual life I choose the latter because I am wasting my vote on the first candidate and by voting for him helping to elect the worst candidate. In this way, I think I have answered my own dilemma about the minimum wage, that the moral thing in both cases is the practical thing to do, based on one’s estimate of the “probable” results.

Is my logic wrong, or must I be forced to eat my humble pie? )