Profile image
By Cafe Hayek (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

More on the General Effect of Welfare on Wages

Monday, March 20, 2017 13:17
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

(Don Boudreaux)

Tweet

Here’s a follow-up letter to a correspondent who continues to insist that welfare payments reduce the wages of low-income workers:

Mr. Chris Indovino

Mr. Indovino:

You’re unconvinced by the argument that government welfare payments generally reduce the supply of labor and, thus, cause the wages paid to low-income workers to rise.  You write that “if taxpayers are footing a portion of the bill for poor workers to feed and clothe their families employers can get by by paying less to workers on welfare.”

Before I try again to convince you that you’re mistaken, let me acknowledge that there is one form of government welfare in the U.S. that does reduce poor-workers’ wages.  That’s the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).  Because one must work to be eligible to receive the EITC, this program increases the supply of labor and, thus, causes wages to fall.  But the typical government welfare program, for which non-workers as well as workers are eligible, reduces the supply of labor and, thus, causes wages to rise.

Here’s why.  Suppose you win a billion dollars in a lottery.  What happens to your willingness to continue working at your current job?  According to the logic expressed in your e-mail, you should now be willing to work for nothing, given that your lottery winnings are now sufficient to pay all of your expenses.  But of course you will instead almost surely quit your current job.  And if your employer wants to persuade you not to quit, he’ll have to offer you a much higher wage in order to make it worth your while to continue working.  (Imagine how you’d react if your employer said to you “I want you to keep working and accept a pay cut to $0 per hour.  I don’t have to pay you anything now because your lottery winnings cover all of your expenses.”)  Winning the lottery, by reducing the supply of your labor, raises the wage that you must be paid in order to work.

Please don’t mistake me as equating government welfare payments for lottery winnings.  They’re obviously different.  But they both do reduce the supply of labor and, therefore, they both put upward pressure on the wages that employers must pay to recipient workers.  The lottery example is a way of showing that workers do not reduce their wage demands simply because some of their expenses are covered out of non-wage income.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA  22030



Source: http://cafehayek.com/2017/03/42467.html

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories
 

Featured

 

Top Global

 

Top Alternative

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.