Increased minimum wage may be the wrong solution...

The Minority Youth Unemployment Act

A higher minimum wage will hurt Obama's most loyal supporters.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323478004578302510280314712.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

Topic: The articles dicusses how the Obama administration has done an outstanding job at maintaining the support of young voters and minorities. In his recent state of the union, Obama proposed in increase in the minimum wage from $7.25 to $9, the author contends that this is not the proper solution to eliminating poverty and may be an example of over-generalization.In the real world, setting a floor under the price of labor creates winners and losers. Some workers will get a $1.75 raise. Great. But others—typically the least educated and skilled—will be priced out of the job market and their pay won't rise to $9. It will be zero. The author is saying that when we increase the minimum wage, companies will be less inclined to hire people that they don't REALLY need. Many statistics reflect that minorities and the young fit into this category of being less educated and skilled.The minimum wage is also an ineffective way to reduce poverty. It is also important to note that large majority of those who live below the poverty line do no work, so when jobs become more difficult to attain for unskilled and uneducated laborers, their poverty will be exacerbated. William Dunkelberg, chief economist for the National Federation of Independent Business, says that after the July 2009 increase 600,000 teen jobs disappeared in the next six months even as GDP expanded. This begs the question; what is more important to the american economy and its people rights now, how many people are unemployed, or how much our low-income families are making?

Opinion: The article introduces an interesting topic that I believe is best reinforced through this White House memo "Studies show that modestly raising the minimum wage increases earnings and reduces poverty without measurably reducing employment." This shows that the White House is not ignorant to the reprecussions of their actions and is rather cleverly worded. "Modestly" implies that the increase is not a significant increase that many businesses can handle, which as I stated early, is a generalization. "Measurably" indicates that the studies they used failed to recognize variables that may cause a reduction in employment. I believe that the studies that was mentioned does not recognize one of the fundamentals of business and that is to keep expenses to a minimum, Companies will not pay $9 for an employee they may not need, that is a guarantee. It'd be nice to think that some Republicans, even one, would make the moral case that the minimum wage hurts the poorest workers. However, this may make republicans look indecisive, seeing as both the Bush's and the Gingrich congress advocated for an increase in the minimum wage, going against this may make the GOP seem indecisive. It is also interesting that a majority of the people living in poverty are unemployed, Obama makes it seem as though this will be the ultimate solution, but the increase would not only bypass the impoverished, but would actually hurt their chances of getting a job.

Conclusion: To answer my own question from the topic analysis, how much america's low-income families are making is currently more important than those who are unemployed. Those who are unemployed will continue to receive substantially more income in the form of welfare than those who are working to support themselves and their families at minimum wage. So on a moral standpoint, the people who are working will directly benefit from this increase, as well as give young people the opportunity to save money to further their education and things of that nature. Those who are supportive of this legislation must recognize that this is by no means the solution to poverty and will reinforce the the poverty cycle by preventing them from getting jobs that do not require any formal training. This legislation and its future truly rely on the response of american businesses, because this realm, independent of the american government, will make or break its support in correlation to the amount of employees they can afford.