Government Intervention and (Convincing People about) the Unintended Consequences of Good Intentions

I have opined many times about the folly of minimum wage laws. Today, starting with this great video from Reason, let’s look at the narrower topic of wages for restaurant workers.

The obvious takeaway is that government intervention has backfired.

A second takeaway is that Saru Jayaraman (the woman in charge of pushing for the bad policy) is either very dumb or very dishonest. Or blinded by ideology.

For purposes of today’s column, however, I want to contemplate the motives of D.C. voters. Why did they vote for more government intervention, first in 2018 and then again in 2022?

When writing these columns, I often refer to our “left-leaning friends.”

That’s not sarcasm. Many people who want bigger government have good intentions. Like the guy in this cartoon, they do damage but genuinely think they are being good people pushing for a better society.

I hope, of course, to change their minds by showing (sometimes with humor) that there is often a big gap between their good intentions and real-world results.

In large part, I tell them this is because of economics. Simply stated, systems that tax success are reward sloth don’t have a good track record. Just as efforts to boost wages with government intervention tend to backfire.

But I must confess that it is a uphill challenge.

To the extent I have any impact, I suspect it is by strengthening and refining arguments for right-leaning readers.

My left-leaning readers, by contrast, seem remarkably immune to my analysis.

Even when I roll out my version of heavy artillery (the “never-answered question” and the “anti-convergence club“) and stymie them by asking for exceptions, that doesn’t seem to change their minds.

So I’m guessing the above Reason video won’t change the minds of the people who voted to destroy jobs and bankrupt small businesses in D.C.

———
Image credit: Andy Withers | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.