Minimum Wage = Minimum Employment?

One of the first acts of the 110th Congress that convened in January, 2007 was to raise the federal minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour. This raise was to take effect over a two year time span, and we are now seeing the effects of that act of Congress. Many of you work-study students, myself included, might welcome the raise in pay, as a student’s budget can be quite stretched at times. However, one must think about the bigger picture when thinking about such legislation. Did the wage hike really help those struggling in to make ends meet, or has it led to higher unemployment as some pundits have postulated?
Labor costs usually constitute about seventy percent of a business’s total expenses. For small businesses, which form the heart of America’s economy, minimum wage workers form the base of their operations. So a rise in the wage floor would lead to rise in the labor costs. What this translates to is a decrease in the amount of workers that can be hired. For example, a business that has five minimum wage workers that each work forty hours a week at the old $5.15 wage spends $1,030.00 for those five workers. However, at the new wage of $7.25, those same five workers cost $1,450.00 to pay, a $420 increase in labor costs. Simple economics dictates that the rise in expenses must be offset by an increase in profits. In a time of economic downturn, profits are not likely to rise enough to cover these new expenses. So what does a small business owner logically do to stay in the black? Sadly, he or she has to lay off a worker. Many times, these workers tend to be the young, unskilled workers trying to pay for gas money. I’m speaking of the high school and college age men and women that, for many, are working for the first time. Studies have shown that people that held jobs in high school and college are more likely to not only stay employed when they graduate, but also go on to make much more money over the course of their working life.
By raising the minimum wage, Congress has destroyed jobs. Jobs that for the most part go to teenagers and other unskilled laborers. While it is too late now to change the wage floor, a better idea would have been to drop the minimum wage altogether. The laws of supply and demand would dictate that the “minimum” wage or rather equilibrium wage would decrease to about three dollars an hour; however, overall unemployment would fall drastically. Small businesses, large businesses, and non-profits across the board would begin hiring like never before witnessed. One would also see other consequences. Crime, drug-related violence, abortion rates would all fall. People that are employed are not as likely to both consume illegal substances and distribute them. People that have a consistent cash-flow are also more likely to keep unexpected babies. President Obama said during the election cycle that he would like to decrease the rate of abortions here in America. Why don’t we keep him accountable to his statements? Would we rather America’s youth roaming the streets looking for drug money or walking the malls trying to spend money?

Is Racism Still Alive In America?

This is something that I wrote for school paper several months ago and am just now getting around to posting. Sorry for the long hiatus between posts.

In his famous speech on August 28, 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Thankfully, we have progressed as a society to the point where we no longer discriminate against people based on their race…or have we? Shortly after Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina interrupted President Obama during an address to a joint session of Congress on September 9th by saying “You lie,” Many on the left including former president Jimmy Carter and members of the Congressional Black Caucus were quick to suggest a racial undertone to the interjection. While Rep. Wilson’s remark was disrespectful to Mr. Obama, nowhere in the two words that he spoke were there racial undertones. He did not end his sentence with an unspoken “boy,” as Maureen Dowd of the New York Times accused. This sort of racial name calling is both absurd and dangerous. During the Democratic Primary last spring, former president Bill Clinton described then senator Obama’s foreign policy as a joke. The media castigated Mr. Clinton for his remarks. It was as if Mr. Obama had a protective racial shield around him. Any criticism of him was deflected with the so-called “race-card.” These two examples demonstrate how backward America has become in her thinking. How can we engage in political debate if our remarks are constantly being scrutinized for racial connotations? Yes, we should be respectful of President Obama, but that does not mean we cannot disagree with his positions and policies.

With respect to the picture depicting Mr. Obama as the Joker from The Dark Knight, I would agree with Isaiah Smallman that we need to show respect to the President. That being said, the picture is an expression of free-speech guaranteed to all Americans by the First Amendment which is one of the fundamental principles and components of a free government. If Mr. Obama were white, would we still hear the same condemnations from the media and the liberal elite? Maybe, and while we cannot play speculative history, the point is made. Which brings us back to the original question, is racism still alive in America? I would say yes and no. The racism of the 60’s is gone; the white hooded robes have been closeted, never to light of day again. However, this sort of prejudice has been replaced by the racism of the 21st century—the double standard. How can we progress as a society when we do not learn from the faults of our parents? Racism via double standards is still racism; changing the perspective does not change the fact.

The Stimulus Package and Other Things

I know it's been awhile since I've last posted; my apologies. I've been quite busy with the new semester with school work, intramural sports, and the new seasons of 24 and Lost. Any who, I'm going to use this post to lambast the stimulus package, or should I call it the pork package, that was recently passed by Congress and signed by the all-knowing, messianic President Barack Obama. 

This bloated, pork-filled piece of hyper-partisan legislation is simply a way to reward many of the interest groups that supported Obama and the Democrats in the fall. Billions and billions are going to serve special-interests that cannot and will not affect, to any measurable extent, our current economic plight. I will be the first to say that I am not an economic major nor do I have any sort of economic expertise other than a college-level macroeconomics course I took in high school, but to give billions to special-interest groups, of which ACORN which is currently under investigation by the FBI for voter-registration fraud, and call it a stimulus package is flat-out dishonest to the citizens and tax-payers that elected these law-makers. Economic laws and principles dictate that this current recession will not last forever regardless of what kind of government intervention is employed, and when the economy is recovering sometime later this year or next, the Democrats will, without fail, claim credit for the recovery. Again, this will be flat-out dishonesty. Obama says that this stimulus package will create or save three and a half million jobs, but, in reality, no one really knows for sure how many jobs will or will not be created. The Obama Administration, to put it in the words of Karl Rove in an editorial in last week's Wall Street Journal, "is winging it." If you were to ask President Obama, himself, right now if he thought the stimulus package would create or save any jobs, he would probably rattle off some statistics or numbers that his economic team pulled from an outdated and extremely narrow study performed in the 1980s. 

The one thing we can unequivocally say about this stimulus package is that it will dramatically increase the size of the federal government. The package contains provisions for a vast expansion of medicare and medicaid, and also SCHIP, the program that gives free insurance to children whose parents can't afford it. These expansions, alone, greatly increase the future tax burden we are placing on the next generation of the American workforce. A workforce that I, myself, will be entering into in the next several years. Our current national debt is nearing eleven trillion dollars. That's close to seventy-five percent of our annual GDP. And with our current annual budget standing at over a trillion dollars for fiscal 2009, there seems to be no end in sight in which the budget is reigned. This cycle of deficit spending, begun by the Bush Administration, cannot continue indefinitely. Eventually our creditors will stop lending us money. According to Wikipedia.org, China holds close to seven hundred billion U.S. dollars of our debt. Woe be unto us when the day comes that China says that no longer wants to be the leading foreign creditor to the U.S. and floods the world economy with our currency, effectively sending the dollar into a hyper-inflation spiral upwards. The deficit spending must be stopped. The budget must be balanced, and the trend of increasing government involvement in personal life must be reversed. Thomas Jefferson, this nation's third president said, "The government that governs best, governs least." I think we'll all agree that times have changed since the infancy of this "noble experiment" but the premise is still the same. Massive government intervention in the economy and the private sector has never led to anything good. 

Switching gears, last week, Iran launched its first satellite into planetary orbit. U.S. officials basically ignored this launch and equated it with the launch of Sputnik that could only go "beep, beep, beep..." This view is naive and dangerous. The rockets used to carry Sputnik and Explorer 1, the first U.S. satellite, were the same rockets to which our early nuclear warheads were attached. Iran already possesses enough fissile material to create a nuclear bomb, and clearly, they possess the technology to shoot aforementioned bomb into a sub-orbital trajectory. The Obama Administration must act now in response to the launch. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a noted Holocaust denier, has said repeatedly that he would "wipe Israel of the map" if he had the means. Are we going to sit back and let this "president" dictate to us what it will do with its newly acquired WMD's? For our sake and for the sake of Israel, our strongest Middle East ally, I would hope not. 

Pakistan and Nuclear Deterrence

In today's issue of the Wall Street Journal in the opinion section of the front page, an editorial discussed the implications of a nuclear Pakistan and the possibility of buying its nuclear weapons from it. The idea is comes from the fact that Pakistan needs financial capital desperately, and in return for buying their nuclear weapons, the U.S. would provide a nuclear shield in Pakistan and give them tanks and jet fighters. That idea raises several questions, if this purchase actually came to fruition, could it serve as an example to other nuclear armed nations around the world such as India and some European nations, and what are the possible ramifications of a nuclear non-proliferation that excludes the super-powers like the U.S., Russia, China, and Western Europe? In answer to the first, a nuclear arms treaty would only work in nations that are trustworthy that would respond to economic sanctions. This description would exclude nations such as Iran, Syria, and North Korea. These nations, with the backing of Russia and China, have been able to side-step the brunt of the U.S.-led sanctions. Some nations that would take notice of a nuclear purchase would include India and maybe Israel. A disarmament between Pakistan and India would invariably decrease the odds of a nuclear war happening anywhere on the globe. The answer to the second question is that the world would become a much safer environment in which to engage other nations diplomatically. A guarantee of an American nuclear shield would become an enormous deterrent to any hostile nation. A nuclear shield would not stop conventional warfare, but merely act as a safe-guard against nuclear attacks by the opposing state. However, for the nuclear shield to be completely effective, the U.S.'s nuclear arsenal must be modernized. The last nuclear weapon to be commissioned was back in the 80's at the height of the Cold War. Nuclear weapons can only be a proper deterrent if they are reliable and safe to handle. Efforts by the Bush administration to modernize our arsenal were stymied in the Democratic Congress of the past two years, and with the Obama administration coming into power in a little over a month, the hopes of a modern nuclear arsenal are slim.

The time to act is now, while tensions in the hot spots of the world, namely between Pakistan and India, are not escalated to the breaking point. The Obama administration should take note of these options of nuclear purchasing and nuclear modernization. I paraphrase the words of Vice-President elect Joe Biden, the U.S. will be tested within the first six months of an Obama administration. Other nations do not know what Obama's breaking point is and will test him to discover how far he will go to deter a conflict. In short, the nuclear future of this nation rests on the shoulders of the new government. How it chooses to handle this issue will be telling of how it will handle foreign policy over the next four years.

Social Justice

One of the more controversial topics of this past election season. Social justice remains a major talking point in any debate of political ideology. This subject, however, goes much deeper than politics. Not only is social justice a topic discussed in the Bible, it is something ingrained into every person's mind. Everyone, including evil people like Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Idi Amin, and Pol Pot have consciences, their's are just repressed and relegated to obscurity. The Bible speaks of social justice as an action that Christians are called to do. Back then, it entailed letting the poor and widows pick up the fallen grain during the harvest, and other such acts of care taking. The Bible, however, does not touch on the subject of free-government handouts, which have recently come to the center of political debate with the discussion of stimulus packages for auto companies, financial institutions, and the everyday citizen. Government handouts do not promote social justice; they never have, and they never will. Giving someone money for doing nothing only encourages that person to continue in his or her current path. People must work for their money, or they will never learn how to properly take care of themselves. Programs that promote this sort of "work for your money" mentality are very sucessful in promoting social change and social justice. Habitat for Humanity, one of Jimmy Carter's only good acts as president, is a program that I can believe in. The premise of the program is that they provide cheap housing for lower income people. The kicker is that the recipient must complete so many hours working on either their house or another Habitat house, and they must still pay some significant sum of money for the house. Not only does the family or individual receive a house that they have bought, but they also are learning the value of hard work.

All that is to say that I do not believe in just giving out money, but sometimes a pick-me-up is what someone needs to get back on his or her feet. This job, however, is not the government's but, rather, the church's. Prison ministries, inner city ministries, and ministries to the poor fulfill Christ's commandment to love your neighbor as yourself. The book of Amos in the Old Testament describes what happens to a people if they neglect or even take advantage of the poor and helpless. A lack of social justice was one of the reasons that the nation of Israel was destroyed. God used the Assyrian empire as his tool of judgement to punish Israel for her poor treatment of the poor.

Social justice is an important part of a Christian's life. To neglect it is folly that will lead to judgement and humility. At the same time, we must not let ourselves think that by throwing money at a problem will make it go away. I hate to use a cliche here, but it best exemplifies the situation. If you give a mouse a cookie, he will not simply take it and try to get his own food next time. He is going to ask for a glass of milk, and so begins the viscious cycle of dependence.

The Value of Science and Mathematics

In the United States today, science and math classes are looked upon in a less than favorable light. In the early grades, kids that are interested in math and science are looked upon as "geeky" or "nerdy." These negative connotations are further emphasized by television shows that depict aforementioned students as small, puny, and forever picked on by the bullies. While these shows may seem harmless, a subtle prejudice is formed against these fields of study. Hard statistics back up this assertion. I don't know the exact numbers, but the percentage of college graduates with degrees in math or the sciences has been falling since around the '80s. Math and Science are no longer considered "cool" as they were during the '50s and '60s at the height of the space race. These days, more and more degrees in math or science are going to foreigners. However, there has been no better time to get into the math or science fields. Technological advancements in chemistry, biology, physics, and math have made these fields explode with demand. Starting salaries in these fields are fairly high as well; however, many of these positions are filled with people of Indian or East Asian decent. Many see these fields as too difficult to comprehend. For example, organic chemistry is often considered a "filter" course in college; a course designed to filter out the weaker and lazier students. And while this is an exceedingly difficult course, some think of it as impossible, just as some people thought putting a man on the moon was impossible. Americans need to wake up and realize that the only difference between them and the Asians that consistently beat them in average test scores and college attendance percentages is diligence and work ethic. History has proven that Americans can overcome the largest obstacles when we strive together and put our noses to the proverbial grindstone. Some consequences from a shift from American to foreign scientists and mathematicians will be that more and more companies will move their businesses to these foreign countries to take advantage of the high labor supply. Another consequence will be a lagging behind in technological advancement in the U.S. compared to other countries. These problems can be averted with a few actions both from the top and the bottom. At the top, President-elect Barack Obama can introduce legislation to increase funding for math and science departments in the K-12 public school system. Another piece of legislation that could be introduced, could be to give incentives to college graduates with math or science degrees. Some actions at the bottom would be to instill, at an early age in a child's life, a love for learning and reading. Some kid's shows are already doing this, like Dora the Explorer. Much work remains to be done, however, if we are to reverse the current trends, if we are to remain the as the world leader in military power, political power, and technolical power. But it is work that is by no means impossible; it is work that can be accomplished with American will power and work ethic remeniscent of World War II, just one of the many lessons, this current generation can learn from the Greatest Generation.

The Holiday Season

So I was at Walmart today hoping to get some cheap Halloween candy, but, instead, I was greeted by the familiar red and green of the holiday season. What has this world come to where Christmas themes are put out hardly a week after Halloween. Seriously, Walmart and all of the other department stores need to keep the Christmas stuff down until later in November. Seeing those decorations makes me excited for Thanksgiving and Christmas, but then I realize that they're both pretty far off, and I get depressed. Although I don't get as depressed as the 2nd week after Christmas when all the bowl games are over and school starts up again. That really is depressing. And what's more, right after Christmas, Valentine's Day decorations go up, and after that St. Patrick's Day and Easter. Will I ever get a break from some sort of seasonal attraction. But alas, that is not the purpose of this post.

The holiday season is one of my favorite times of the year, as I'm sure is true of many people, second only to the summer time for several reasons. One, the food is absolutely amazing. Thanksgiving dinner might be the best meal of the year. Turkey and gravy, dressing, cranberry sauce, steamed oysters, shrimp cocktail, cheese and crackers, sweet potato suflett (spelling?), Sister Shebert yeast rolls, key lime pie, creamy and cold ice cream. You don't get much better than Thanksgiving dinner. Second, the entire family is always together for Thanksgiving and Christmas. The family is always good for lots of laughs and backyard games. Third, there is always tons of football going on during the holiday season except during the time in early December after the conference championships and the start of the bowl games. Fourth, presents, presents, presents. Need I say more? Fifth, the singing...Christmas songs are fantastic, and that's including carols, hymns, and more contemporary stuff too. I love the Christmas radio station that starts up in November and doesn't stop until after New Year's Day. Sixth but by no means the least important, Christmas is the time of celebrating the birth of Christ which, by itself, would make the holiday season incredible. It is a time when Christians remember when Christ humbled himself to come down to earth from his lofty seat in Heaven. I don't want to get too preachy, so I'll end my sermon right here.

In short, the holiday season is fantastic and is only beaten by summer time. If only the U.S. were in the Southern Hemisphere, then I could have both at the same time.