ShareThis Page

More minimum-wage follies: Missouri's wake-up call

| Thursday, July 13, 2017, 11:00 p.m.
Supporters of a $15 minimum wage for fast-food workers rally in front of a McDonald's in Albany, N.Y. (AP Photo).

As Pennsylvania ponders whether to boost its hourly minimum wage from $7.25 to $15, it should first carefully consider a practical lesson from the Show-Me State.

Under new legislation, Missouri next month will roll back its minimum wage, reducing the hourly rate from $10 to $7.70 an hour. That nullifies a move by St. Louis city government to boost its baseline to $11 an hour.

Rather than sustain jobs at higher salaries, the St. Louis minimum-wage boost “fails on both counts,” said Republican Gov. Eric Greitens. “It will kill jobs, and despite what you hear from liberals, it will take money out of people's pockets.”

Indeed, what “might read pretty on paper doesn't work in practice,” added Mr. Greitens, who will allow Missouri's new minimum-wage measure to become law without his signature. Studies show arbitrary raises imposed by governments compel private businesses to cut hours or eliminate jobs.

Nevertheless, Pittsburgh City Council is urging support for state legislation to boost Pennsylvania's wage floor. This, after Pittsburgh raised its hourly minimum for city employees to $12.50.

Rather than provide economic incentives — reduced taxes, less regulation — to grow the private sector, politicians who promote compulsory minimum-wage increases expect business owners to magically come up with the cash. And that only reinforces the liberal proclivity to spend other people's money.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.