Most of the readers who responded to last week’s Cardinal Way essays about raising the minimum wage were not sympathetic to the idea.
This was not intended as a scientific survey, so we should read nothing into those results — however, the arguments both sides used might be useful to look at as Gov. Glenn Youngkin ponders how to respond to the bill before him that would raise the state’s minimum wage.
Many of those who responded said the central problem isn’t the minimum wage itself, but that we have too many people relying on the minimum wage to make a living.
“Minimum wage jobs should be for workers starting off their working careers, or possibly for retirees or someone who is wanting to earn a little on the side,” wrote Leroy Brown of Kenbridge. “Minimum wage jobs should not [be] intended to be the career that people depend on to support a family. People that work minimum wage jobs and want to earn more should take it upon themselves to obtain skills and education that would afford them higher paying jobs.”
Henry Bass of Christiansburg concurred: “Minimum wage jobs are starter-jobs. Intended for low-to-no skill and entry into a career. The key to wage growth is growing your skills and experience.”
Sandra Warwick of Manakin-Sabot weighed in to say much the same: “We need to find ways to help them learn more lucrative job skills.”
And then there was Beth Callis of South Hill: “I don’t believe every job should have to meet a standard of providing a living wage. If a person needs a ‘living wage’ & the job they have doesn’t support them, they should look for other ways to bridge that gap, like taking a second job or finding one that meets their needs.”
Of course, all that’s easy in theory. In the real world, people face lots of obstacles in trying to add those skills. Community colleges often say there are lots of potential students who would benefit from training for a higher-paying job but who can’t afford to leave even a minimum wage job because if they did they’d have no way to pay their rent or child care while they go back to school.
Otherwise, the arguments for and against raising the minimum wage were ones we’ve often heard.
From Jerry Coffey of Lynchburg: “If you raise the minimum wage, companies simply increase prices to offset the increases which leave the low income people in the same situation they were before.”
From John Alexander of Suffolk: “Isn’t this an argument used forever to keep wages low?”
There were mixed reviews on two possible compromises: a regional minimum wage and a separate minimum wage for teenagers.
No one who opposed a regional minimum wage elaborated, so we don’t know their reasoning, but for those who said they were intrigued, Brown’s response from Kenbridge was typical: “Pretty much all costs vary from one part of the state to the other. So, it makes sense for the minimum wage to vary as well.”
For those who opposed a lower minimum wage for teenagers, this response from Coffey in Lynchburg was commonplace: “I have always believed in same work-same pay.”
Alisande Tombarge of Fishersville gave voice to those who thought this was an idea worth considering: “I think it is sensible to have a ‘reasonable’ hourly wage for those under 18 and a livable minimum wage for those 18 or older. I support the minimum wage increase, but I also believe that teenagers don’t necessarily need to be paid $15 an hour or more.”
Then, finally, there was Thomas Field of Salem, who had a different view altogether: “There should be no minimum wage.”
Got any idea for a topic you’d like to see addressed in Cardinal Way? Let us know.
