The United States Department of Labor stipulates the federal minimum wage and regulates “compliance with labor standards.” Since 1990 economists have debated the benefits and disadvantages of federal minimum wage laws, some of the most heated debate rising from David Card and Alan Krueger’s landmark research on employment and minimum wage standards.
In an article I wrote for International Studies in Philosophy, I argue for the abuses inherent within a system of neoliberal economics and the practice of outsourcing labor. In the article I argue that outsourcing support a “race to the bottom,” wherein First World corporations maximize their profit margins by outsourcing their labor and seeking the lowest international labor costs. I then discuss the practice of slavery and draw the conclusion that outsourcing, in its worst forms, differs from slavery by the slightest degree. Are First World corporations justified in paying Third World laborers .17 cents/hr for a product that is then sold for one hundred U.S. dollars? If so, to what extent does this differ from slavery?
Since outsourcing is a viable economic model wherein First World corporations export their labor to defer cost and maximize profits, should there be an international standard for the minimum amount that laborers, of any country, may legally be employed for?
Though there would certainly need to be an entire field of researchers and statisticians assessing the pros and cons of such a proposition, one can surely agree that efforts to standardize international minimum wage laws would curb corporate greed and increase the pay rate for an international body of employees. How such regulation would influence the international employment rate remains to be seen.
We live in an era of globalization and our respective leaders must acknowledge this fact. Some measures must be employed to safeguard the rights and wages of international laborers. An international consortium of bankers, financiers, auditors and regulators should assume the responsibility for global compliance and where there are violations of the law, embargoes and sanctions should be enacted.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Baronius
Jason, this is your second article asserting a moral position without adequately supporting it (at least to my satisfaction). I would expect a philosopher to be more rigorous. On what basis can nations violate each others' sovereignty, and forbid individuals from entering into free contracts? You've got to answer that before we even discuss the enormous difficulties of implementing this plan, or its inevitably catastrophic consequences.
2 - Roger Nowosielski
Baronius,
For your information, Jason had made it explicit that he will not discuss the content of his articles on these threads. He will provide further references upon request, but that's all.
So perhaps if you want to engage him in a discussion, you might want to go to his own website.
Roger
3 - Jason J. Campbell
Baronius:
It's a provocative idea and I think the ability to generate conversation is the starting point for rigorous analysis. This'll be my style of writing for Blogcritic. I want to present a quick easily understood argument and then move on. If it's too heady too academic it'll be a bore. I think my argument for the global banishment of slavery (which is not to suggest that it does not exist) is a retort to your unease. Slavery is illegal because we developed the moral sensibility and market conditions conformed. To have ethic conform to the market is a huge problem. I would argue that it is one of the reasons we're in this global mess now. Safeguarding the lives of Third World laborers would be my main incentive. Someone's gotta argue their case.
4 - Jason J. Campbell
LOL!!! Yeah what Roger said!!! LOL....LOL
5 - Roger Nowosielski
Sorry, Jason, for having spoken out of hand.
Roger
6 - Roger Nowosielski
Well, you know, Jason. I think I shall adopt a similar stance in the future. My understanding, of course, is that you develop your positions in depth first, and then treat us to a synopsis of sorts - to stimulate the discussion.
My problem is, I haven't got many developed positions (as yet), not sufficiently so to my liking. So I sort of use BC, in a manner of speaking, as a forum for doing so. You're connected of course with a university where you can do that ex cathedra. I'm not any longer, so I'm kind of stuck with BC to work my "papers" out.
Roger
7 - Jason J. Campbell
No sweat at all...that was funny...I'm still laughing...I certainly welcome discussion...but from a distance...Actually, I'm interested to hear arguments against a global minimum wage, however simple or complex. Roger is right though. I'm more of an instigator like Socrates the gadfly...
8 - Roger Nowosielski
Well, I looked at your long paper - Socrates vs. the Delphi Oracle - very interesting because "Know thyself" is attributed by some as a cornerstone of his ethical teachings. I'll need some time, of course, to get through this. My problem is, I can't stop doing philosophy on the go - so I'm ALWAYS going through pain.
9 - Cindy D
I am going to argue for more than a minimum wage--a guaranteed minimum income.
10 - Jason J. Campbell
Hit me up anytime Roger you have my email...I'm no guru but I'll read whatever you send my way and give my 2 cents...constructive feedback is critical. BC's awesome for me because (when the discussion is on task) you see the positions formulate. Baronius may start to develop arguments against and someone else might dev. arguments for and I can watch the discussion unfold. Its easy to say this is a crazy idea, its much harder to argue against it. In one of my posts Cindy was making some really great points and I wanted to jump in but I decided to watch the discussion unfold without any involvement.
11 - Roger Nowosielski
Will do! I also find it nerve-racking and too consuming to get up close and personal every time; my teaching instinct, I guess.
But thanks for the offer. I will avail myself, definitely.
12 - Baronius
Jason & Roger, this is a very public forum. I prefer to phrase my comments in a personal way, but they're as much for the reader (the "critic") as the writer (the "blog"). We'll see where the discussion goes. For my part, I reject the idea that slavery and employment are nearly the same, and I'll address the article's other errors as they come up.
13 - Roger Nowosielski
Baronius,
I'm not with Jason on the content. Haven't read it yet. So let the discussion unfold.
Roger
14 - Bob Burns
Since we can't get agreement on a simple positive thing like the Doha round, how we going to get agreement on these other ideas like this? And do you think $15/hr for a Saharan goatherder is realistic?
15 - Bob Burns
More intelligently, all labor laws should be scrapped as market-distorting inefficiencies
16 - Dave Nalle
I am going to argue for more than a minimum wage--a guaranteed minimum income.
Where do we send the nice men with the white jackets to pick you up?
Ok, to the main thesis.
A worldwide minimum wage makes no sense at all. Living costs, working conditions and myriad other factors make every nation's economic environment different. A wage which would be more than sufficient in one nation would be totally inadequate in another and it would provide employers with the excuse of saying that they're paying that minimum wage even when a free market would have set a higher minimum wage.
Plus it's utterly unnecessary. As nations become more modern and more industrialized and better educated their wages go up. Just having a western company come in and set up a factory leads to overall increases in wages which accelerate as time goes on.
But the most serious concern is that a minimum wage would price a lot of countries out of the market. If the minimum wage made wages the same in every country then the best educated and best located countries would get all the business and the rest would get none. Right now the benefit of low wages is that it attracts businesses to places which otherwise would have no ability to attract employers.
Every reasonable argument runs against this idea.
Dave
17 - Cindy D
Dave,
Really, it's defensible. I'm working on it. It's better than a global minimum wage or any minimum wage.
18 - Cindy D
More intelligently, all labor laws should be scrapped as market-distorting inefficiencies.
It's Mr. Burns from the Simpson's right?
19 - STM
Great idea ... let's have a global minimum wage (what based on the value of the US dollar), and watch as it fluctuates up and down.
So we base it, let's say, on the cost of a basket of goods.
So in India, you can buy a nice basket of groceries for about $25.
Head down to Australia (which already has a minimum wage much higher even in US dollar terms than that of the US), where the same basket might cost you $300.
Even in Europe, the cost of living is different in each country. Spain and Portugal are neighbours, but wages and cost of living are totally different.
Good idea.
Let market forces decide on what the mimimum wage should be in each country.
In the meantime, perhaps you could look closer to home and push for something both viable and achievable - a liveable mimimum wage in the US ... I'll be kind and say much more than $10 an hour, because I know in some states it's still around $8-plus.
A federal wage setting system might be the answer in the US, along with a federal system of abitration through a specialised industrial relations court to decide on collective wage bargaining and its spin-offs to smaller companies and small businesses, having consideration also for what productivity gains there might be as a trade-off for better wages and working conditions.
Mind you, I'm not sure now is the right time to start agitating for anything no matter what country you live in.
20 - Franco
First world corporations do not set the labors rates in third world countries. And if those third world countries do not what those corporations to come in, they can say no.
Every countries labor rates are an exact refection of the factors that exist in any country and are dictated to based on its leaders to foster over all economic conditions for the people to engage in free market trade for goods and services.
This opinion piece assumes the premise that a global minimum wage can be set and fixed by an outside controlling force. It can’t be fixed as an outside force, it has to be fixed from the inside of each country based on its economic performance, and the better it performs, the better the wages are. History has proved this since the wheel.
The biggest factor in determining a better labor wage is the development of a larger middle class. The larger the middle class the better the wages are as people find there way into this growing middle class. The freer (secured in their rights) the market (the people) are to trade (better their life) the faster the people are to prosper.
An extreme example for clarity. Take Zimbabwe, do you not believe that the Zimbabwe people would not be fully happy right now to work for a first world corporation at the dorp of a hat at any consistent wage better then the current leaders of that country have been able to economically stabilize for them. They couldn’t get there fast enough.
Now you will say that it is just the kind of people who can be exploited as slaves. Yes that is true, but only if you let in one first world corporation. Letting in as many as the market will bear offers workers more options, the more options for workers means corporations have to compete for workers and wages go up. As wages go up people can come together and start up thier own corporations. This gives the people more power to apply their skills to a better fit and pay.
Once this cycle starts a middle class has a starting point. That middle class must be free from obstructions so it can grow into a majority.
Where would this lead over time? " A world full of middle class trading goods, services, and good will. I mean it could be so sickeningly peaceful and maybe nauseous for some. I mean what would all the bitching activists have left to do, as these people would have a problem of their own to solve. Wouldn’t that be nice, just don’t let um fuck with the free market.
21 - Bliffle
There's no way to enforce it.
22 - Mark (Ede)n
So, when your done with this one, tell me why there should be a wage.
23 - Hope and Change?
Didnt King Barry just proclain that the USA will no longer "dictate" international policy? So lets obey the Master in Chief...the king is too busy dictating what we Americans must be doing and has no time...at least not this week to screw up the world economy too!
An international minimum wage..lol..."The world is filled with foolish people with foolish ideas." H&C
24 - Baronius
Excellent work, y'all.
25 - Cindy D
And if those third world countries do not what those corporations to come in, they can say no.
I wonder if I had held Milton Friedman's head underwater long enough, if he'd pay me a million bucks, of his own free will of course, to get some air.