The Prohibition on Working for Less Than a Specific Amount

In what is blatantly stealing from Prof. Don Boudreaux, I shall call the federal wage floors what they truly are: a prohibition on people charging less than a given amount for their labor. The Economist, much to my disappointment, wrote several articles this week defending such legislation.

In the article "Raising the Floor" from the week of December 13, The Economist claims that prohibitions on selling labor for less than a given amount "...reduce the amount companies must spend recruiting new people." Yes! Great! This implies that, before such a prohibition, workers choose to leave. A worker takes a job, gains skills and experience, gains access to new and better opportunities, and leaves their current job for the better opportunity. This should be celebrated. The Economist should be elated about this. I am as excited as I can be, considering it is happening to anonymous people that I do not personally know. The Economist advocates wage floors because it reduces employer recruitment costs.? How about concern for the prospects of unskilled laborers? I would much rather that employers bear the costs of employee turnover than unskilled laborers remain unemployed with no prospects.