Why not?

Yesterday, I received an email newsletter from my state representative in the Wisconsin legislature. In it, she informed me that she is introducing a bill to put the minimum wage at $15 per hour. Because I have tried before, I already know that it is not possible to argue this point from a perspective involving the laws of economics (they’re agnostic.) So, I've decided that it’s time to give them what they want, and more.

Even though my rep holds a bachelor’s degree in psychology from UW, and I’d be shocked to learn that she has ever taken even a single course in economics, I’m sure she is eminently qualified to set wage rates for all businesses. After all, it’s just common sense that all employers need to pay their workers more, and I don’t see any reason why my rep can’t be the one to tell everybody else what they should pay. It can’t be that hard, just pick a number that’s “fair.” And $31,200 per year sounds like a really fair rate to pay the newest and least experienced worker on your team. And since they know best what employers should pay for their labor, I think they should also set prices for those businesses as well. I mean, who would know better? 

History has proven how well a centrally planned economy works, so this too should be no problem. We just have every business out there that is paying the new minimum wage, submit a list of the products and services they sell, and these hard working state legislators will fire back with the prices they will be allowed to charge for said products and services, and then cement them in place with a law. What could possibly go wrong?   

The Root Word of Liberal is Liberty

If you've ever spent any time at all reading the comment sections on a liberal web site, then you already know what are the two biggest threats to life as we know it in the world's greatest democracy, the United States. They are, of course Fox News and the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling that allowed corporations and unions to spend freely from their treasuries in order to influence elections and public policies.

Notice that in both cases, we are dealing with speech alone. Despite the fact that anybody who disagrees with Fox or any of the companies that choose to speak out for policies that they favor, are perfectly free to speak themselves, in full throated opposition, this does not appeal to them as a remedy. It used to be said that the answer to the problem of free speech, is more free speech. But now it seems the answer is just less speech all around.

And notice where their efforts are concentrated in the matter of the debate on climate change. There has been zero effort to win the debate. No, ending the debate is the only thing in which they are interested. Sceptics are "deniers, " as in "Holocaust deniers," and Al Gore is now openly calling for their punishment.

And they wonder why we call them "ill-liberals."