The issue of labor freedom keeps popping up for me. In the last few weeks I heard Christopher Coyne give a lecture on Mises' observations about socialist central planning, read Thomas Sowell's Applied Economics, re-listened to Milton Friedman on Econtalk, and just today heard comedian Jo Koy make a very relevant comment (as a guest on the Adam Carolla Podcast). Labor unions came up, and Koy noted that old labor union pictures are exclusively white.
Perhaps I'm reaching a bit, but it seems to me that the case for labor freedom can be summarized by the things mentioned above. Mises said that central planning eliminates ownership, therefore eliminating the ability to exchange and establish a price for resources, therefore eliminating the possibility of proper allocation. Sowell and Friedman, it seems to me, build on this by commenting on the consequences of limiting labor freedom through minimum wage, licensing, and other barriers. These barriers limit the real ownership of one's own labor, distort the price of labor and, perhaps most importantly, violate personal liberty. Sowell's discussion of slavery covers all of these evils and I doubt anyone would dispute his argument, yet many people seem to deny this same reality when it comes to labor unions and minimum wage laws. This is where Koy's aside comes in. Noting the racial homogeneity of labor unions was not intended as an insightful point about protectionist practices in the labor market, but it was nonetheless. Koy, a comedian not an economist, is obviously aware of the history of unions. In order to keep out competition in the labor market they advocated wage floors and barriers to entry, thereby greatly intruding on the labor freedom of non-union workers. While this process tends to be remembered as a valiant fight for the exploited working masses, Koy exposes it for the racist infringement of freedom that it actually was.
The case made by Mises, Sowell, Friedman, and Koy seems pretty strong, though if you'd like to hear it from a better and wiser blogger I'd recommend checking out Don Boudreaux over at Cafe Hayek. Limiting labor freedom eliminates proper market allocation (Mises), it tends to be used to keep out competition and enable discrimination (Sowell and Friedman), yet the prevailing historical view is an incorrect belief in egalitarian struggle for the proletariat.
Perhaps I'm reaching a bit, but it seems to me that the case for labor freedom can be summarized by the things mentioned above. Mises said that central planning eliminates ownership, therefore eliminating the ability to exchange and establish a price for resources, therefore eliminating the possibility of proper allocation. Sowell and Friedman, it seems to me, build on this by commenting on the consequences of limiting labor freedom through minimum wage, licensing, and other barriers. These barriers limit the real ownership of one's own labor, distort the price of labor and, perhaps most importantly, violate personal liberty. Sowell's discussion of slavery covers all of these evils and I doubt anyone would dispute his argument, yet many people seem to deny this same reality when it comes to labor unions and minimum wage laws. This is where Koy's aside comes in. Noting the racial homogeneity of labor unions was not intended as an insightful point about protectionist practices in the labor market, but it was nonetheless. Koy, a comedian not an economist, is obviously aware of the history of unions. In order to keep out competition in the labor market they advocated wage floors and barriers to entry, thereby greatly intruding on the labor freedom of non-union workers. While this process tends to be remembered as a valiant fight for the exploited working masses, Koy exposes it for the racist infringement of freedom that it actually was.
The case made by Mises, Sowell, Friedman, and Koy seems pretty strong, though if you'd like to hear it from a better and wiser blogger I'd recommend checking out Don Boudreaux over at Cafe Hayek. Limiting labor freedom eliminates proper market allocation (Mises), it tends to be used to keep out competition and enable discrimination (Sowell and Friedman), yet the prevailing historical view is an incorrect belief in egalitarian struggle for the proletariat.
No comments:
Post a Comment