Life Was Better When America Was Free Of The Minimum Wage
Once upon a time, the state did not intervene in economic matters, and the people were more prosperous because of it.
Future of Freedom Foundation) In today’s society, there are incessant debates over how much the minimum wage should be. I sometimes wonder how many Americans realize that there was once a time when Americans lived without minimum-wage laws. Indeed, how many people realize that the U.S. Supreme Court once held that minimum-wage laws violated the U.S. Constitution, the document that called the federal government into existence?
In 1918, Congress approved a bill that created a board to investigate wage conditions in the District of Columbia and to establish a minimum wage for women and minors working within the district. President Woodrow Wilson signed the bill into law.
The D.C. minimum-wage law was a good example of the interventionist/regulatory philosophy that was gaining ground in the United States. For more than 100 years, the United States had existed without minimum-wage laws or, for that matter, most other governmental regulations. That’s because the American people had adopted what was known as a “free enterprise” economic system, one in which economic enterprise was largely free of government control, management, and regulation.
In fact, it is impossible to overstate the highly unusual nature of the economic system of our American ancestors. Setting aside the obvious exception of slavery, the American people were, by and large, free to engage in any economic enterprise without governmental permission or interference. They were also free to accumulate unlimited amounts of money and decide for themselves what to do with it.
Consider, for example, the period 1880 to 1910, which is my favorite time in American history when it comes to freedom. Imagine: no income tax, IRS, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, farm subsidies, education grants, minimum-wage laws, licensing laws, drug laws, Federal Reserve, paper money, Pentagon, CIA, NSA, foreign aid, foreign military bases, foreign wars in Europe and Asia, and gun control. Additionally, there were very few economic regulations, minimal immigration controls, and almost no public (i.e., governmental) school systems.
Needless to say, that American society shocked the world. Nobody had ever seen or heard of that type of society. It was one-of-a-kind and the first time in history that such a society had existed.
The results of this unusual society also shocked the world. It caused the greatest outburst of economic prosperity that mankind had ever seen — despite the fact (or, actually, partly because of the fact) that thousands of penniless immigrants, many of whom could not speak English, were flooding American shores every day. In fact, many of the poor were becoming wealthy — after one, two, or three generations — something the world had never experienced. With their strange economic system, Americans had, in fact, discovered the way to end or drastically alleviate poverty, which had afflicted mankind since the dawn of civilization.
That’s not all. Americans also created the most charitable society in history. When people were free to accumulate unlimited amounts of wealth, many of them used it to help out others on a purely voluntary basis. This was how the hospitals, museums, opera houses, libraries, soup kitchens, and other charitable activities came into existence. One man — John D. Rockefeller, who statists have long reviled as a “robber baron” — actually gave away half-a-billion dollars — and not to get an income-tax deduction because there was no income tax.
The progressive movement
During that same period of time, however, a small number of Americans began agitating for a different type of economic system, one in which government, at both the federal and state levels, would wield the power to regulate, manage, and control economic activity, which had been the typical way societies had operated throughout history.
Moreover, these “progressive” Americans wanted an economic system in which people could be forced through the power of taxation to care for others, whether they wanted to or not. That’s what the “welfare-state” way life they favored was all about. Moreover, some of them were not satisfied with the limited-government republic that the Constitution had created, which included a relatively small military force. They wanted a vast empire of overseas possessions and an enormous, permanent military establishment to govern it.
Thus, in the late 1800s, the battle lines were being drawn between those who favored a genuine free-enterprise, limited-government system — one in which economic activity was free of governmental control, regulation, and management and people were free to accumulate the fruits of their earnings and decide for themselves what to do with them — and those, on the other hand, who favored a system in which economic activity was controlled, managed, and regulated by governmental officials and in which people would be forced to care for others through a tax-and-welfare system.
The statists — those who looked to the state to provide “safety” and “security” to people — had an uphill battle. After all, they were facing more than 100 years of a system that had succeeded in bringing unbelievable increases in people’s standard of living and in voluntary charitable activity, while protecting the freedom of people to live their lives the way they wanted. Why would anyone want to give up that way of life in return for one in which the state was in charge of controlling, managing, and regulating people’s lives and resources?
Yet, the statists began making inroads. For example, there was the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. There were state commissions setting rates for railroads. There was the start of Jim Crow laws. There was the Chinese Exclusion Act, a brutal and racist piece of legislation that was the nation’s first immigration-control law. There was the Spanish American War.
Go paid at the $5 a month level, and we will send you both the PDF and e-Pub versions of “Government” - The Biggest Scam in History… Exposed! and a coupon code for 10% off anything in the Government-Scam.com/Store.
Go paid at the $50 a year level, and we will send you a free paperback edition of Etienne’s book “Government” - The Biggest Scam in History… Exposed! OR a 64GB Liberator flash drive if you live in the US. If you are international, we will give you a $10 credit towards shipping if you agree to pay the remainder.
Support us at the $250 Founding Member Level and get a signed high-resolution hardcover of “Government” + Liberator flash drive + Larken Rose’s The Most Dangerous Superstition + Art of Liberty Foundation Stickers delivered anywhere in the world. Our only option for signed copies besides catching Etienne @ an event.
https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/11 --> This one goes to the District of Columbia...
In February 2013, the US Minimum Wage would have been $21/hour if had been allowed to increase with inflation alone - and the US Congress would have been responsible for increasing it... (Source: Moyers & Co., Interview with author Henry Giroux; Mr. Moyers cited the results of a UN CTAD (the UN's education arm) study that had been released that week). It took three years for the "$21/hour" number to start showing up in alt-media podcasts... and then it was suppressed again.
US businesses have had a 30 year wage holiday. The US Minimum Wage has not increased with inflation since 1968. And now 70% of us make less than $50K / year in a country where everyone needs to make at least that or more to be able to prosper. Unions are no longer the deterrent for exploitation. 40% of the workforce has to be unionized for the threat of unionization to keep wages and benefits competitive across the workforce.
Today, many small businesses do not offer any benefits at all, or if they do, the benefits are contributory and wages are so low that the employees cannot 'purchase' the benefits. I experienced this during my last 12 years of working for a small business.
Most small businesses have farmed out all things related to employee regulatory compliance and payroll, to "Professional Employment Organizations" or PEO's like the evil Paychex Corp. When they want to do something bad to their employees, they just tell them that the PEO is requiring it and that they are also subject to it... And Paychex can be counted on to lie on demand and fight any valid application for unemployment.
Thanks to congress's self inflicted frontal lobotomy, the individual taxpayer has lost a ton of exemptions and deductions from the Itemized Form 1040. The standard deduction and our gross wages are used as weapons with charitable giving, natural disaster losses, etc., pegged to them instead of just being 100% deductible.
Congress let the IRS do that to us. People who can't itemize because their wages are too low, never got to use those deductions at all... and the people at the bottom of the earnings pile need all the help they can get, but are the most penalized by government systems. And nobody says anything in congress about any of it.
I'm curious about the Rockefeller take here.
Humans are self-organizing. Check. But its also true that there is a Prieto principle, aka Matthew "the rich get richer" reality. The robber barons accrued wealth which they used to buy state power too (as in paying off govt to create the petro-pharma beast and the fed soft coup in the nineteen-teens).
So what is the voluntarist check on Rockefeller-Morgan-Rothschild type accrual of all the marbles?