If an employer has an opening that pays $50,000 in salary, and the Christian applicant will bring in $51,000 in extra revenue to the firm while the Muslim applicant will bring in $55,000, then to discriminate against the creed of the latter will cost the employer $4,000 in potential profits. Discrimination is automatically “fined” in the free market. — Bob Murphy
It is not the poor who benefit the most from “the war on poverty” but the non-poor who benefit from employment in poverty programs. —Antony Davies
We have developed a poverty industry and a poverty bureaucracy. Both of them seek to perpetuate themselves, and yet the poverty rate remains the same year over year. The war on poverty is not dominated by the people who are poor but by the non-poor who benefit from employment in poverty programs. —Antony Davies
In 1948, white teenage unemployment in the U.S. was 10.2%, while black teenage unemployment was only 9.4%. This was when the effective minimum wage rate was much lower. Today, in a much less discriminatory epoch, but where teenagers are “protected” by a more stringent minimum wage law, white youth unemployment is 13.9%, while black youth unemployment is an astounding and shameful 33.5%. —Walter Block, The Case for Discrimination, 2010
In 1990, the U.S. government enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act. This law attempted to protect the disabled in the labor market by prohibiting discriminatory behavior on the basis of disability. A law specifically designed to ensure that the disabled got a fair shake in the labor market instead resulted in decreased employment rates for the disabled.
Why? There are a couple of reasons. First, the law made it expensive for businesses to hire the disabled. Regulators have deemed, among other things, that employers will need to modify an employee’s physical environment, offer the employee additional training, give him extra time to complete tasks, and even hire interpreters. All these things increase the cost of doing business.
Second, the law made it difficult to terminate disabled workers, even when warranted. But how is a business to prove that it terminated a disabled worker because of something other than the worker’s disability? The answer that many businesses seem to have arrived at, although few will admit it, is not to hire the disabled in the first place.
It turns out to be easier for an employer to prove that it did not hire a disabled worker for a reason unrelated to the worker’s disability than to prove that it fired the worker for such a reason. Consequently, the Americans with Disabilities Act actually led to a decrease in employment rates for the disabled.
—Antony Davies, James R. Harrigan
A young drug dealer once asked for a job on a public housing project in San Francisco. He approached Chris Albert, president of Willie Electric Company, hoping to get out of drugs and into legitimate work.
Unfortunately, because of the high wages dictated by the minimum wage law, the contractor couldn’t afford to take a chance on an unskilled man with no job record. The young man came back two days later and begged to be employed at a lower wage. “I won’t tell the law,” he promised.
“I want to make a better life for me and for my mom, and for my little sisters and brothers.” Unwilling to risk legal problems, the contractor reluctantly refused.
Two days later the young man was shot and killed. Maybe he’d be alive today if the minimum wage laws had not prevented him from working instead of being on the streets.
—Mary Ruwart, Healing Our World
If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor. No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty, or an involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as “the right to enslave” —Ayn Rand
A businessman’s success depends on his intelligence, his knowledge, his productive ability, his economic judgment—and on the voluntary agreement of all those he deals with: his customers, his suppliers, his employees, his creditors or investors. A bureaucrat’s success depends on his political pull. A businessman cannot force you to buy his product; if he makes a mistake, he suffers the consequences; if he fails, he takes the loss. A bureaucrat forces you to obey his decisions, whether you agree with him or not—and the more advanced the stage of a country’s statism, the wider and more discretionary the powers wielded by a bureaucrat. If he makes a mistake, you suffer the consequences; if he fails, he passes the loss on to you, in the form of heavier taxes.
A businessman cannot force you to work for him or to accept the wages he offers; you are free to seek employment elsewhere and to accept a better offer, if you can find it. (Remember, in this context, that jobs do not exist “in nature,” that they do not grow on trees, that someone has to create the job you need, and that that someone, the businessman, will go out of business if he pays you more than the market permits him to pay you.) A bureaucrat can force you to work for him, when he achieves the totalitarian power he seeks; he can force you to accept any payment he offers—or none, as witness the forced labor camps in the countries of full statism.
The businessman’s tool is values; the bureaucrat’s tool is fear.
—Ayn Rand
A businessman’s success depends on his intelligence, his knowledge, his productive ability, his economic judgment—and on the voluntary agreement of all those he deals with: his customers, his suppliers, his employees, his creditors or investors. A bureaucrat’s success depends on his political pull. A businessman cannot force you to buy his product; if he makes a mistake, he suffers the consequences; if he fails, he takes the loss. A bureaucrat forces you to obey his decisions, whether you agree with him or not—and the more advanced the stage of a country’s statism, the wider and more discretionary the powers wielded by a bureaucrat. If he makes a mistake, you suffer the consequences; if he fails, he passes the loss on to you, in the form of heavier taxes.
A businessman cannot force you to work for him or to accept the wages he offers; you are free to seek employment elsewhere and to accept a better offer, if you can find it. (Remember, in this context, that jobs do not exist “in nature,” that they do not grow on trees, that someone has to create the job you need, and that that someone, the businessman, will go out of business if he pays you more than the market permits him to pay you.) A bureaucrat can force you to work for him, when he achieves the totalitarian power he seeks; he can force you to accept any payment he offers—or none, as witness the forced labor camps in the countries of full statism.
The businessman’s tool is values; the bureaucrat’s tool is fear.
—Ayn Rand
Capitalism gave the world what it needed, a higher standard
of living for a steadily increasing number of people. —Ludwig von Mises
Government-provided free tuition tends more and more to produce a uniform conformist education, with college faculties ultimately dependent for their jobs on the government, and so developing an economic interest in the profession and teaching a statist, pro-government, and socialist ideology. —Henry Hazlitt
