That former gubernatorial shoo-in Rob McKenna is a crappy lawyer is no secret. But writing on his blog (yes, McKenna is now a lowly blogger like me!), McKenna seems intent on proving that he’s also a really crappy economist:
As the House debated a $12 minimum wage, Rep. Matt Manweller (R-13), who is also a political science professor at Central Washington University, had apparently heard enough of tortured economic arguments from the other side.
His speech held the House in rapt attention – no mean feat. Of course, the bill passed anyway, on a party-line 51-47 vote, but Manweller’s speech is truly worth your time.
And McKenna is right: Manweller’s speech is truly worth your time… if you want some insight into the sort of bullshit Trickle Down orthodoxy that would have guided McKenna’s economic agenda had he won the governor’s mansion. But if you’re interested in learning how the economy really works, not so much.
Insisting that when wages go up, employment necessarily goes down, Manweller is “baffled” he tells us, that there are so many people who simply do not understand “the law of demand,” angrily denouncing the $12 minimum wage as “the most anti-science bill” ever! Which would be a powerful condemnation indeed, if “the law of demand” was, you know, an actual law. But of course, it’s not. Physics is a natural science, and the law of gravity is an undeniable natural law. But Adam Smith was a moral philosopher, and supply and demand, at best, is just a broad generalization. To insist, as Manweller does, that the labor market would behave in the exact same way as the market for carbon, or health care, or private jets, is just plain stupid. (As is that oft repeated straw man that asks if $12 is so good, why not $50?)
For all his apoplectic eye-rolling, Manweller isn’t actually a bad speaker, exuding an authoritative air grounded in a profound sense of passion, commitment, and total delusion. But the last gubernatorial candidate to follow Manweller’s advice on the minimum wage, didn’t do too well. So publicly fawning over “The Nutty Professor” speaks as poorly of McKenna’s political acumen as does of his economic.
McKenna may be a crappy lawyer, but Inslee isn’t the brightest bulb in the tanning bed.
If Americans were a little more willing to learn about economics of the type professed by Adam Smith and David Ricardo, namely Value Theory, they’d know that this question, of how one squares supply and demand with the empirical evidence surrounding the minimum wage(as documented so well by Goldy) was resolved 150 years ago. Unfortunately that would lead liberals to reading Karl Marx, and understanding that the commodity which turns into(creates) value, “Labor”, is not what the Job Creators buy, “Labor-Power”. You’d think this observation would be more universally acknowledged, but given the class justice issue this ferments in the Job Takers, “Labor-Power” is a term relegated to the dustbin of internet comments.
It’s just not possible to meet the French minimum wage here in Washington. Oh that would mean paying Washingtonians $12.71 an hour. Ohh their economy is a bright star in Europe and Germany’s minimum wage is only about a dollar less. Heaven for bid American businesses pay as much as their competitors. Unless your talking Guatemalans…that is what Washingtonians deserve to be paid.
You don’t understand risk.
Not-governor McMoron has a blog! And… You can comment!
Know where I’ll be atrollin’…
the law of supply and demand is a theory, it’s not a “broad generalization.” it posits certain conditions, eliminates many factors, like the MACRO economy, and says supply and demand depending on the elasticity etc. determine price.
it’s an excellen theory with a shitload of predictive power. and times when it does not apply — according to its own rules and definitions — do not undermine it. but they do prove it’s a limited special theory for special conditions. just turns out the democratic viewpoint is more correct that most times what we have is not a “market” so “market theory” itself says it won’t give the answer. in this it’s not that different than the theories in natural sciences.
here’s times and sectors where there is not a market:
-health care. when I had fucking cancer I didn’t even know or care if the god damned fucking chemo bag was $5K or $10K as some of them were. and I couldn’t go shopping. and like with auto repairs, I was clueless about what I was buying. hello, market theory says “THIS IS NOT A MARKET” and thus prices are NOT DETERMINED BY SUPPLY AND DEMAND. thus market theory here totally fucking supports those of us who say “hello, IT’S NOT A MARKET we need a socialized system.”
-the family and family obligations.
-auto repair cum insurance scamns, see above.
-real estate. see add more buildings each is more close to more people so demand goes up for the OTHER ones — unlike when you add widgets, demand does not go up for other widgets — so supply and demand does not work as been telling the other web site.
the minimum wage is not a real market according to market theory because it’s not willing buyer and seller each one not under special compulsion or in distress. hello! because about 20% of the labor market is fucking behind on the rent, they are in distress, they are under compulsion, and also they don’t have the means to shop or look around. how do they interview without tipping off the boss they’re not committed? another huge part is aliens, afraid to bargain. so right there I’TS NOT A MARKET UNDER MARKET THEORY’S DEFINITION. now add one huge factor, all “market” theory is only about one little sector if it’s a market, supply demand etc. it’s not about the national economy. so ahem…..boosting a wage…means more money is spent….so it increases demand for labor…this countervails the demand lowering impact of raising the price of labor.
now, what is a theory for? it is for testing. we tested this theory — the conservative jerkhole’s theory — on min wage by hiking them like 30 times from creation to 1968 when real hikes in min wage stopped. (today, even the washington min wage is WAY below the fed one in 1968 in real terms). Since 1968 we tested it the other way, we lowered real min wage. guess what?
1932 whatever to 1968 — HUGE ass gains in income for working class — vaulting the hungry into near middle class or at least winnebago owning folk.
and 1968 to present? falling real wages for lower class.
EXACTLY as economic microeconomic theory would predict; because it knows it’s not about the whole economy; and the externality of my wage being spent in your store means the wage “market” isn’t a market as the stimulus demand macro demand effect outweights.
so, please stop saying “it’s just a theory, it’s not real!” since by its own terms it matches reality and HELPS US EXPLAIN OUR SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT. once again, liberals cede power to the right, it’s nearly a habit. the point is go get that fucking $16 in ’16 up and running NOW and teach the entire fucking state RAISING THE MIN WAGE boosts the whole economy like it did back when it was mainly white males getting it. let’s do it again. it worked before, it will work again. just ride right over the conservatice bullshit arguments with an even more bold, bigger, positive liberal argument. damn, liberals and progressives half the time are so afraid of their own position. it’s sooooo defensive to go around whining “well it’s not really a theory, more of a broad generalization!” that just gives away tons you don’t have to give away. take it back. and hit them over the head with economic theory since it pretty much proves keynes, roosevelt and johnson and all them were RIGHT. how you think we got out of the depression anyway? higher tax, bigger government, hikes in min wage, dammit, why is this so hard to explain? becauase dems are cowed and ashamed and defensive. just. stop.
I went and posted the old arguments against raising the minimum wage, made in opposition to I-688, along with Washington state’s excellent economic performance since then. Any bets on whether any opponent of raising our minimum wage will engage actual facts?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA…