"Penny Foolish" - Yes!

The Liberal Order (Mark Steckbeck): "Penny Foolish" - Yes!

Economics Professor Mark Steckbeck argues why the agreement with Taco Bell and McDonalds concerning wages for South Florida Tomato pickers (which Burger King has rejected) is a bad idea. He is reacting to the story in the New York Times Penny Foolish. Interesting take.

Comments

[Jim MossJim Moss]

What a disturbing argument!

Paying tomato pickers better wages will attract more immigrants across the border. This will cause wages to come back down, since there will be a glut of available labor.

That might make sense from the perspective of neo-classical economics, but it's an atrocious thing to say from a theological and an ethical point of view. It turns human beings made in the image of God into commodities which are to be bought and sold on the open market for the lowest possible price.

The author's argument rests on the assumption that companies will automatically lower their wages when they have the chance. But companies CAN decide to always pay a living wage, no matter what. And we as the consuming public, if we are aware and conscientious, can make sure that companies do this.

I wonder if this guy's getting paid by Burger King...

[Michael W. Kruse]

Hi Jim, I appreciate your passion for justice. From a quick glance at your website I’m guessing you may have been following the specifics of this case closer than I have.

There are several things I would like to explore in your comment as I began to compose my thoughts about them I discovered a new "Economic Fallacies" post I wanted to write. I'll put that up on Monday rather than putting a lengthy response here.

Thanks for chiming in.

[Peter]

Jim,

You write:

"But companies CAN decide to always pay a living wage, no matter what."

But this assumes companies always can pay a living wage. I disagree with that assumption.