The Minimum Wage Conversation Never Ends

CascadeNewLogoBy Steve Buckstein

Oregon and some other states mandate that their minimum wage increase every year with the Consumer Price Index. Based on that formula, it was announced earlier this month that Oregon’s minimum wage, the second highest in the country at $9.25 an hour, will stay unchanged in 2016.

That same evening during the Republican presidential debate, one candidate called for both a higher national minimum wage and for indexing it to inflation. He argued that this would mean “we never have to have this conversation again in the history of America.”

Well, if Oregon is any example, that’s not exactly true. Oregon began indexing its minimum wage in 2002. Yet, earlier this year, there were no fewer than twelve legislative bills introduced to raise the rate to as high as $15 per hour. Activists promised that if the legislature didn’t act, they would put a measure on the 2016 General Election ballot.

So clearly, putting minimum wage increases on autopilot won’t take this conversation off the table. Until legislators and voters understand that income cannot be generated by state mandate, minimum wage increases will continue to hurt the very workers they’re meant to help: the young, the less educated, and the less skilled. They are the ones who often can’t produce enough value for employers at higher wage rates to justify gaining or keeping a job.

Steve Buckstein is founder and Senior Policy Analyst at Cascade Policy Institute, Oregon’s free market public policy research organization.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 05:00 | Posted in Economy, Employment | Tagged , | 76 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • starstruck

    Listen up you bozo capitalist pigs. I have 73K in college debt. How am I going to pay that back making $12 an hour???!! Idiots. If you want me to default on my loan, fine. Otherwise, pay me a decent wage and I will repay, albeit slowly, the debt I incurred getting my degrees in ancient cultural foundations. I am hoping to land a teaching gig, but until then, I continue to serve coffee and pray for a wage increase.
    I have an opportunity to teach at a community college, but they want me to teach writing and that is simply not my passion.

    • MrBill

      Should’a majored in something useful. It must suck to be you.

      • Sounder Horn

        starstruck believes in ‘mandatory’ minimum wage increases, COLA’s and other governmentium gruel’s as inherent entitlements.
        On the other hand, ss seemingly overlooks them for what they virtually manifest: inflationary catalysts to a GDP that can ill afford to cater to every whim of an able bodied yet unproductive cry baby establishment.

    • Jack Lord God

      College debt is akin to the lottery – A heavy tax levied upon those with an inability to do math.

      • DavidAppell

        I’m guessing you didn’t go to college. Yes?

        • MrBill

          I’m guessing you did and that you majored in something pretty useless. Maybe something with the word “Studies” in it. Yes?

          • DavidAppell

            Guess again.

          • DavidAppell

            Actually I majored in the most useful subject of them all — physics. And then went on to get a couple of advanced degrees.

            You?

          • Woodfords Frog

            Yes, and look were that got you. A crappy blog living by yourself.
            Quote from you…. “blogs are often full of sh*t.”

          • MrBill

            Fair enough.

          • Woodfords Frog

            Yes, and look where that got you….. a blog.

  • Jack Lord God

    What frustrates me about minimum wages increases is those behind them never take responsibility. When indexing was enacted, I and many others stated here and elsewhere you would see higher unemployment and slower growth. Well, turns out we were right. Oregon’s unemployment tended to higher than the national average, growth lower.

    Ever wonder why the caring activists always maintain that we have a desperate need to help the working poor – yet tend to phase in these minimum wage increases over a few years?

    It’s so they don’t take the rap when the results of their caring became all too obvious were they enacted overnight.

    Republicans in the state legislature should propose the following:

    Raise the minimum wage overnight

    Raise it to whatever they want, fifteen dollars is fine.
    Then sit back and watch the results.
    I can assure you, it will be the last time we ever hear from minimum wage advocates. The effects of their policies will be quite undeniable.

    If they are right, and minimum wage increases result in a great economy and working poor being able to go skiing, fantastic.

    If they are wrong and people are thrown out of work, that will also be clear.

    Win win. But we know they would never agree to it.

    • DavidAppell

      States with significant influxes of new people, like Oregon, should expect to have unemployment higher than average. It’s not surprising.

      • Jack Lord God

        A classically idiotic assertion that defies common sense and most peoples experience.

        Most people don’t quite a job in one state to move and be unemployed in another state, so that’s point one.

        Point two, most who are unemployed in one state, don’t spend a bunch of money to move to another state, only to remain unemployed, they tend to look for jobs real quick.

        Thanks for the classic Appell poor logic. I mean this is what has established your reputation on the internet. Choice grade A nonsense.

        • DavidAppell

          “Most people don’t quite a job in one state to move and be unemployed in another state, so that’s point one.”

          Yes, many do. Some of them don’t just settle for working for daddy, so they uproot themselves and set out for what they think are better pastures and better prospects, without a job waiting for them when they get there.

          I’ve done that. I know many others who have done that. It happens all the time.

        • DavidAppell

          “Point two, most who are unemployed in one state, don’t spend a bunch of money to move to another state, only to remain unemployed, they tend to look for jobs real quick.”

          Of course they do. I grew up in Pennsylvania during the collapse of the steel industry. Many, many guys set out to look for work elsewhere, even though it meant they would be unemployed when they got there. They hustled for new work as they could find it.

          If you hadn’t taken the easy way out and hadn’t worked for daddy in his sex toy business, you’d know some of these things.

        • Ardbeg

          People move without a job ALL the time. Every time one spouse relocates the other spouse often quits with no job prearranged. Family situations often necessitate fast moves. It’s usually not a big deal for someone with a diverse skill set and a little $$ in the bank. Even low skilled workers can always find another low skilled job. They do it all the time, sometimes they move across town, sometimes from state to state, and low wage earners can often fit what they own in their car.

    • thevillageidiot

      you are wrong about “it will be the last time we ever hear from minimum wage advocates.” it is never enough. Then the advocates push for such things as rent controls. price controls etc. all have been tried and failed but does not prevent the outcry for such.

      • Jack Lord God

        Believe me, my parents lived with rent controlled tenants for decades. The bullshit level was just unreal. I forgot myself – People who love to spend other peoples money never tire of the process. You are correct sir, they wont go away.

        • Glad you saw the light, Jack. As the title of my post states, the minimum wage discussion will never go away because advocates will always blame the unintended consequences of higher minimum wage rates on someone else. “Greedy businessmen,” “predatory landlords,” “heartless bankers,” etc. will be blamed for simply acting as basic economics dictates that they do.

    • David from Mill City

      “Ever wonder why the caring activists always maintain that we have a desperate need to help the working poor – yet tend to phase in these minimum wage increases over a few years? “

      I don’t wonder, I know that the Federal Minimum Wage has needed a sizable increase for years, but I also understand that a 50% increase in the minimum wage is too large for
      the economy to absorb in a single step. Spreading the increase over several years gives employers time to make those wage and price increases caused directly and indirectly by the Minimum Wage change.

      While I support an Oregon only Minimum Wage increase I would much rather see it done at the national level and should change the present single rate for the whole nation to a national base rate and a state or regional COLA (cost of living allowance). Additionally that during the stepped increase process that any annual cost of living increase be added before adding the step increase. Further that for the duration of the increase process that the Cost of Living increases associated with Social Security and Federal pensions be calculated bi-annually or quarterly as the
      Annual Cost of Living increases applied to Pensions and Social Security currently can lag the actual cost of living increase that triggered them by up to a year. And lastly eliminate the current tip credit that permits an employer to pay tipped workers less then the current minimum wage.

      Of course there is the other way to solve the living wage problem, eliminate “Right to Work (for less) Laws; make it much easier for employees to form unions; harder for
      employers to ship jobs overseas, hire scabs or conduct lock outs and permit sympathy strikes by other unions in support of collective bargaining disputes.

  • Granola girl

    The minimum wage jobs were designed to be “starter jobs”, not living wage jobs. People need to make themselves more marketable by taking classes or going back to school full time.

    • DavidAppell

      Unrealistic. How can the working poor afford to take classes or go back to school full-time?

      • starstruck

        EXACTLY my point. I had to get that degree. And now I can’t pay it back. Ever. Unless the min wage goes up. And I mean up…by a significant amount…say to $35 an hour. Now that would be meaningful and helpful to me.

      • redbean

        Unrealistic for some, but not for all. It’s not necessary to go back to school full-time. Community college is still affordable and is tailored for working adults.

    • Ardbeg

      GG, before the recession 1 out of 5 jobs was a low wage entry level type job. Those jobs being created now are 3 out of 5 are low wage. MBA’s are serving you your morning coffee.

    • redbean

      People also become more marketable by learning on the job and moving up the ladder in the same workplace.

      • Milton Friedman and others have described the minimum wage law as cutting off the lower rungs of the career ladder, so that young, less educated and less skilled workers can’t even reach the first rung on the ladder.

        • David from Mill City

          Steve, Milton Friedman and others are just plain wrong on this. The disruption to the work force caused by down-sizing, out sourcing automation, the rise of artificial intelligence and moving good family wage jobs out of the country has moved qualified workers down the job ladder displacing the less qualified further down it thus making it difficult to impossible for the least qualified to get a job. Reducing or eliminating the minimum
          wage will not stop this from happening, all it will do is reduce the income of those lucky to have a job.

  • DavidAppell

    Steve: If businesses don’t pay a livable wage, guess who makes up the difference?

    • thevillageidiot

      What is a living wage and how is that determined? How is a “minimum” wage determined? Who is affected the most by a higher minimum wage? who loses because of a higher minimum wage?

      • DavidAppell

        What is the minimum you need to live on? Why?

        • thevillageidiot

          since you have no idea what a minimum wage really is… start wit the clearing price. from Gary North Economics in One Lesson, “he wage is a signal to other workers and other employers regarding the
          prevailing conditions of supply and demand. If this wage is a
          market-clearing wage, there will be no rival workers offering to work
          for a lower wage for the same job, and there will be no rival employers
          offering to pay more.” When the Irish started the mass immigration from Ireland during the potato famine, there was no minimum wage, no unemployment check, no government welfare. no income tax. what you earned you kept. the wage was determined by what one would work for. they thrived. they worked for the clearing wage. employers paid the clearing wage. employee competes against employee. employer competes against employer. If I the owner of services wish to charge (work for less) than someone else with the same services the I win. with a minimum wage there is no competition. I cannot by law choose to work for less. by becoming employed and showing my skill to the employer or gaining skills I can sell to some one else at a higher price (wage). If I cannot compete and get the job because I have no skills I get nothing. as far as Living wage. learn to live within your means. spend less than you make. In my personnel life I compete with every other contracting employee for a job and the primary driver is what I am willing to work for. there is no minimum wage. the employer makes an offer and I can counter it or accept it. if I counter with a wage the employer is unwilling to pay my competitor wins. I will have to lower my asking wage the next time until an employer and I come to an agreement. sometimes it is a take it or leave it. so when was the last time you worked for “minimum” wage? you compete for work. others compete against you. the person who gets the job wins. I you ask too much you will not get the job. goes back to the clearing wage. the government does not know what that is. for the whole book (it is free) go here. http://www.garynorth.com/public/department181.cfm

          • DavidAppell

            Civilization has advanced since the days of Irish potato farmers — have you noticed that?

            Again, what is the minimum you need to live on, and why?

          • redbean

            Civilization has advanced in some ways and declined in others, but the laws of economics haven’t changed.

            Minimum wage laws require an employer to pay you a certain wage, but they don’t require the employer to hire you. The minimum wage that you need is meaningless when your wage is zero because you’re unemployed.

          • And, of course, the employer’s minimum wage actually zero or even negative. When starting a business, entrepreneurs often earn negative wages, dipping into their own savings and borrowing to build a business. But, if they wish to hire one employee to help them, they must pay the government-mandated minimum wage, which is often more they they are currently earning themselves.

          • David from Mill City

            Steve, there is another way for a start up to get an additional source of labor, take in a partner who will fully share in the benefits and risks of the new enterprise.

          • David, why should an entrepreneur have to take in a partner? Why can’t adults exchange labor for payment on any terms both agree to?

            Why should owners be able to take huge risks while you won’t allow workers to take relatively smaller risks?

          • David from Mill City

            Steve, with the large risks the owner takes come the possibility of a large gain. The worker gains nothing. So just why should a worker subsidize the owner by providing his labor at less then cost?

          • David, I agree, workers have no obligation to subsidize owners by providing their labor at less than they believe it’s worth. But, that doesn’t justify government setting a minimum wage.

            Such policy simply replaces the preferences of the government for those of workers and employers. If the employer is not willing to pay what the worker asks for, the worker is free to not work there and look elsewhere.

          • DavidAppell

            Steve wrote: “If the employer is not willing to pay what the worker asks for, the worker is free to not work there and look elsewhere.”

            Again, if employers don’t pay a liveable wage, guess who makes up the difference?

          • DavidAppell

            Steve: So? Entrepreneurs are taking a risk they decide they can afford, usually own stock, and are often seeking a large payout down the line.

            Employees are not.

          • David from Mill City

            redbean– But if an employer wants to see more
            work done then he himself can do, he must hire someone to do it. We are mixing two separate questions here, the first is what is the minimum amount a worker must be paid for his labor. The second is how do we keep a consumer based economy such as ours thriving when the buying power of our consumers (also known as workers), is declining due to a reduction in the number and type of jobs available. As I have said elsewhere in this discussion this is the real topic that needs to be debated and soon.

          • DavidAppell

            Can you show evidence that raising the minimum wage leads to lower employment?

          • Eric Shierman

            Henry Hazlitt wrote Economics In One Lesson in 1946, not Gary North.

          • Correct of coure, Eric. Apparently Gary North “reworked” Hazlitt’s book and titled it “Christian Economics in One Lesson.” I haven’t read it, but thevillageidiot provided a link above.

          • redbean

            Gary North was a friend of Hazlitt’s and is re-writing Hazlitt’s classic following the same economic reasoning, but with the addition of ethical considerations from the Christian viewpoint. It is called “Christian Economics in One Lesson” and will be published in 2016 for the 70th anniversary of Hazlitt’s book. There are about 15 chapters available for free on his website: http://www.garynorth.com/public/department181.cfm

          • Thanks for the info.

          • thevillageidiot

            It is now complete. same site.

    • thevillageidiot

      have you considered the unseen consequences due to a higher minimum wage? what happens to those who are making over the current minimum wage when that is increased? have you considered the price increases that accompany the higher min wage? Why do you want to prevent people from competing for jobs? Do you have something against high school students working at the current wage? They do not need to make a living wage.

      • DavidAppell

        Lots more than high school students work for less than a liveable wage. It would be refreshing if conservatives acknowledged that for once.

        • thevillageidiot

          They have made poor decisions. Now there are some of limited capability who will not make very much. but the majority simply refuse to change. in today’s world there are avenues that were not open before. one must learn to use the available resources. Not everyone has a profitable blog.

          • DavidAppell

            Not everyone is as intelligent and gifted as you. Half of all people are of below average intelligence. Does that mean they deserve to make less than a livable wage, and have taxpayers make up the difference?

          • DavidAppell

            Poor decisions? Half the population has below average intelligence. They don’t have all the open doors and opportunites smart people like you have.

    • Eric Shierman

      If I understand you correctly, this rhetorical question is meant to imply that the minimum wage is a policy substitute for transfer payments. If that’s the case, might it be less efficient than transfer payments?

      • David from Mill City

        If by transfer payments, you mean establishing a minimum income source that everyone receives whether or not they are employed, that is something that may be needed. It is clear that thanks to automation, and artificial intelligence, it soon may be possible for the American Economy to meet the the basic needs of everyone in the United States without employing most Americans full time. And more importantly as we have a consumer based economy where currently the work force is the consumers, we need to find a way
        to maintain consumer spending as the size and buying power while the number of workers decline.

  • David from Mill City

    ‘That same evening during the Republican presidential debate, one
    candidate called for both a higher national minimum wage and for
    indexing it to inflation. He argued that this would mean “we never
    have to have this conversation again in the history of America.” ‘

    Assuming that the wage is set right, that the method of calculating inflation reflects all living costs, and that annual cost of living increases are made before each step increase during the implementation period he is correct.

    The reason that despite indexing there is a need to make a major increase in Oregon’s Minimum Wage is that the starting point was not set at the proper amount and that the Consumer Price Index used to index the wage does not accurately reflect the real inflation rate.

    There is a added benefit to what the Candidate proposed, by taking the minimum wage debate off the table it would make it easier to find a workable solution to the real jobs crisis, the reduction in the overall number of jobs caused by the increased use of automation and artificial intelligence in American Business as well as the movement of jobs overseas.

    • thevillageidiot

      Only a free market can set the correct wage and price. there is no government or person that can “set” the correct wage.

      • David from Mill City

        Sorry to pop your bubble, but there is no such thing as a “Free Market”, it does not exist, nor has it
        ever existed. Our current market place as is the case with all market places, is the product of government regulations. Our Contract and Civil Law systems are based on Government regulations, our currency
        is a product of Government as are banking and security regulations. Property, water and mineral rights are a product of government regulations. Even the existence of Corporations are a product of
        governmental rules, laws and regulations. Were these laws, rules and regulations eliminated there would be no market instead there would be total chaos.

        “Deregulation” is also a misnomer, what is really being proposed is to to change the governmental
        regulatory system to the benefit of some faction not eliminate it.

        • This analysis flies if the face of the founding principles of this country; namely that government doesn’t create our rights, but protects our rights.

          Any time two people engage in buying and selling products and services a marketplace exists. The government’s role should be limited to protecting us from fraud, extortion, and violence in the marketplace and elsewhere.

          • David from Mill City

            Steve, you are making my point, there
            is no “free market” but rather a government created market place. How the government creates the market place, what it regulated and
            how, or to put it much more bluntly who will benefit from the system and who will not, is and should be a matter of public debate.

            But it needs to be a honest and open debate. The first step of making the debate honest and open that way is to drop this erroneous assertion that there is a “Free Market” and “Free Market Forces”.

          • I’m not making your point at all. I’m making the case that the market exists outside government whenever individuals, or any economic actors enter into transactions.

            The debate revolves around how much regulation government should exert on the market, not who created the market.

          • David from Mill City

            Steve, It appears that we may be using
            the term “market” in different ways. So Let me put my point in another form, government provides the frame work that permits trade
            to happen. It makes the transactions you refer to possible. Without this frame work only limited simple barter is possible and only with
            great risk to the traders. This governmentally provided frame work is not always obvious but it always there. Further as trade depends on
            this governmental frame work to be able to happen, it is not possible, with the exception of limited barter, to have trade free of governmental influence. Hence my assertion that there is no such thing as a “free market” and to say that wages or prices should
            be set, without governmental influence, by this nonexistent “free market” is without value.

            You are correct that how government regulations form and effect the market place should be the subject of a real and spirited debate. Along with the equally important related debate on how, what and for whom our economy and social system should provide for.

          • While we agree that trade often does operate within a government framework, the market exists absent government. The market is simply what we call people and organizations trading with each other.

            In regard to the minimum wage discussion here, I argue that government should play NO role in setting wages or prices in the marketplace. Of course we are far from that ideal today, but it is the direction I believe we should move.

            Once, people voluntarily agree to trade with one another at given wages and prices, government’s role should be limited to enforcing those contracts to protect everyone involved from force and fraud.

          • Eric Blair

            Well.. unless we can go back to a hunter/gatherer society, markets have always existed in a governmental framework, and always will. If not directly, then certainly indirectly. Unless we’re only going to walk through the woods or across the fields and trade with our neighbors.

          • Gardenhomeboy

            Markets exist without government control or permission all the time, look at Kowloon or most black markets. In the west we have had government and we have had markets, i could say the same thing about government not existing without markets too, Eric. The soviets had markets too.

          • Eric Blair

            I any even semi-complex society, you cannot have markets without some form of governmental intervention. Simply impossible. And, no, markets don’t exist without governmental control or permission. Black markets exist because of governmental control.. without that control there would be no black market.

            Your last statements just makes my point… government and markets are intertwined.. there is no such thing as a “free market”. You only have more or less governmental intrusion.

          • “Black markets exist because of governmental control.. without that control there would be no black market.”

            If black markets exist because of governmental control, then without that control they would not be black, they would just be…MARKETS.

          • Eric Blair

            But there is no such thing as a free market, again, unless you are talking about casual economic relationships between neighbors. In the markets of today, a free market is an impossibility. It’s not whether or not government will be involved, but to what extent. The only way to have a truly free market is to have no government. And even then there will be individuals that will exert control.

            Just so that we’re clear, black markets don’t just deal in products regulated by government, they also deal in products outlawed such as slavery, murder for hire, and forced prostitution.

  • David from Mill City

    “They are the ones who often can’t produce enough value for employers at higher wage rates to justify gaining or keeping a job. “

    The problem with this statement is that does not reflect reality. What determines whether or not a job exists is the employer belief that the tasks associated with a given job are necessary for his business to function. In as much as wage costs are one of the factors along with many others included in his thought process associated with establishing this belief, an increase in the Minimum Wage may cause him to reconsider the need for the tasks associated with a particular job. But given the current economy most employers have already eliminated most unneeded tasks so a minimum wage increase is not likely to have a major impact on a jobs existence. All a Minimum wage does is establish a floor below which wages cannot go below.

    As to the problem the “ the young, the less educated, and the less skilled “ have getting a job is not the product of the Minimum Wage but rather the competitiveness of the job market caused by too many people seeking too few jobs. And that is due to the abysmal state of our current economy, which is caused in part by Conservative Politicians not understanding that in a consumer based economy it is consumer demand that creates jobs and that our workers are our consumers. Which means that during a recession rather then reducing Federal spending, it needs to be increased and if necessary the Federal Government needs to be the employer of last resort and these actions need to continue well past the official end of a recession.

    • thevillageidiot

      you talk symptom not cause when “the young, the less educated, and the less skilled “ have getting a job
      is not the product of the Minimum Wage but rather the competitiveness of
      the job market caused by too many people seeking too few jobs.” The cause is the elimination of low skill jobs. Ie caused by the implementation of the minimum wage. bidding for a job is not allowed.

      and here you talk in circles. But given the current economy most employers have already eliminated most unneeded tasks so a minimum wage increase is not likely to have a major impact on a jobs existence. so why is there a minimum wage? mechanization has reduced labor costs. machines don’t require a minimum wage. so if it can be done by a machine at a lower cost it will be. watch for the computer pad at you local big M supper club to take your order eliminating one more minimum wage job. there may be someone to hand it to you or not. This helps to keep the low cost meals.

      • David from Mill City

        To start with, in many states wait staff are already paid below the minimum wage, for example waiters in
        South Carolina are paid as low as $2.15 an hour so we may not see the automation of wait staff that everyone is predicting While this currently not the case in Oregon, the restaurant owners lobbying group
        is out there pushing for a tip credit.

        As to your question as to why there needs to be a minimum wage, it is need to insure that those workers
        who do have jobs, are paid at least enough to live. Currently we are indirectly subsidizing employers who pay their workers less then a minimum wage through food stamps and Oregon Health Plans.

        As to the impact of automation, artificial intelligence and out sourcing on the number of jobs, that
        needs to be addressed and soon, but separately and not through not raising the minimum wage.

  • Jim Greenfield

    Whence came the idea that government should set wages in the private sector? Does government know the value of a particular employee’s work to his employer, or the amount of revenue available to each employer to pay the worker, or how hard the particular employee works? Is it just coincidence that for so many years Oregon has had both the second highest minimum wage and the second highest unemployment rate in the country? If government forces a business to pay $15 an hour to an employee whose work is only worth $10 an hour guess what happens. The employee loses his job. The only effective way to raise wages is to increase the education, skill level, and training of employees. Government mandates throw people out of work and damage the economy. Like many other small business owners, if a new minimum wage passes, I’m taking my business and my money out of Oregon. Jim Greenfield, http://www.taxmancometh.net

  • Gardenhomeboy

    Even “smart liberals balk at a $15 an hour minimum wage”. Look, Oregon’s minimum is already at 50% of its median wage $17.50. raising it higher will almost undoubtedly have disemployment effects. if you want to increase the incomes of workers expand the EITC or do a wage subsidy program. I know these won’t be popular either. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/alex-armlovich-smart-liberals-balk-15-minimum-article-1.2366418

    • Starstruck

      You people are all nuts. You have spent more time discussing this insane issue than it is worth. Nothing will ever Change. The poor, like me, will always be with us. Always. And so will the rich. To change some hourly wage a few dollars either way will not make ANY difference to anyone.
      None.
      The only way to solve this problem is to do what that guy did in Seattle and make the minimum wage 72 K a year.
      Now that is worth taking about.

      • Gardenhomeboy

        That idea failed miserably. It didn’t reflect merit or productivity. It provided no incentive to improve performance. People hated it and it undermined the workplace environment.

        It is sad you think poverty won’t go away, you are wrong too. Western society has very few people in poverty in absolute terms thanks mainly due to markets and individual rights based governmental system.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)