tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21495206.post116324543326298587..comments2008-05-21T11:56:00.067-04:00Comments on Source-Filter: The Beauty of the Reductio ad Absurdumnoahpoahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00859749380417518443noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21495206.post-1163271847234606452006-11-11T14:04:00.000-05:002006-11-11T14:04:00.000-05:00I agree that reductio arguments are really satisfy...I agree that reductio arguments are really satisfying, but I'm not sure I completely agree that this one works against the "living wage" crowd. More precisely, it works against the average "living wage" supporter, but not against the intellectuals behind the proposal. <BR/><BR/>Most of the intellectual forces behind "living wage" laws are also committed to inflationary economic policies. That is, inflation is not just a pesky side-effect of wealth redistribution for them, it's actually desireable as (a) economic stimulus (they believe) and (b) a mechanism for economic planning. Inflation puts/keeps economic policy - at least in part - in the hands of the government.<BR/><BR/>To people who have actually thought about minimum wage policy beyond "corporations are evil" or "feed children, not billionaires," I imagine that minimum wage policy is no different from normal wage raise negotiations that go on in corporations. These people think of the nation as a giant corporation which the government should be "running." Regular raises are part of the deal - especially given that their economic policies ensure that prices go up over time. Probably they would respond that the same market forces (in their understanding of "market" - which is to say, something that's nothing like a real market) that keep companies from raising wages ad libido also keep them from doing so. The only difference - they say - is that they're centralizing planning, which they believe is more efficient and/or humanitarian than leaving it up to the "whims of the market" or what have you.<BR/><BR/>Of course, you and I know that this is folly. Government mucking with wages has the same effect as government mucking with anything: it might keep income disparities narrower, but it ultimately also (a) keeps everyone (crucially especially those it's trying to help) poorer and (b) destroys the very information that makes cogent economic planning possible in the first place (by setting wages rather than finding out what they actually are).<BR/><BR/>As for the reductio, though, that really only works against the people in the marches carrying the signs. The people who write books about this would have a response for you.<BR/><BR/>(As a sidenote - I'm planning to use the "living wage" in my lesson on propaganda for Language and Politics discussion section next week since I very much think that it is a modern example of Soviet-style sloganeering. I'll let you know how it goes.)Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16538691187806203109noreply@blogger.com