Spencer Cox: “the New York Times has editoralized against any minimum wage at all. Their editorial was headlined: The Right Minimum…”

“the New York Times has editoralized against any minimum wage at all. Their editorial was headlined: The Right Minimum Wage: $0.00 Let me quote from that editorial: Raise the legal minimum price of labor above the productivity of the least skilled workers and fewer will be hired. If a higher minimum means fewer jobs, why does it remain on the agenda of some liberals? A higher minimum would undoubtedly raise the living standard of the majority of low-wage workers who could keep their jobs. That gain, it is argued, would justify the sacrifice of the minority who became unemployable. The argument isn't convincing. Those at greatest risk from a higher minimum would be young, poor workers, who already face formidable barriers to getting and keeping jobs. Perhaps the mistake here is to accept the limited terms of the debate. The working poor obviously deserve a better shake. But it should not surpass our ingenuity or generosity to help some of them without hurting others. * * * The idea of using a minimum wage to overcome poverty is old, honorable--and fundamentally flawed. It's time to put this hoary debate behind us, and find a better way to improve the lives of people who work very hard for very little. Tonight's debate is just as hoary as when that editorial was written--in 1987. Indeed, this debate is so hoary that I need only to reproduce here the remarks I made in 1996 and 1989 when Congress debated this same subject.…”