The only way to make Living Wage plausible


Yes, for all the economic freedom and free trade and free market policies I support, and for all the deregulation I support, I also support a Living Wage – but how would that be possible in an economy like the American economy in which I operate with 80,000 different legal restrictions on how business can and cannot operate and also with each regulation costing $100+ for annual compliance cost per employee? I am going to explain that factually, using mainly basic math, right now!

Step 1. Replace the entire Federal Register with a single legal restriction: The Non-Aggression Principle

The federal register is essentially the book of economic legal restrictions, both ones classed as “laws” and ones classed as “regulations”. I am therefore suggesting we disband the federal register, burn all copies of it, and make it law that the Non-Aggression Principle is the one and only economic regulation, what I mean is a law that says this:

“All employers and workers are equally obligated by law to never conduct any behaviors that are violent crime or are property crime, and also to never conduct acts of fraud or of coercion.”

And the one page can be filled to define what violent crimes are and what property crimes are. This policy would save employers very close to $8,000,000 in annual compliance cost per employee. The compliance cost would only be an annual $100 instead. And perhaps we should reduce this compliance cost to about $25 per employee per year. Granted, we would have to drastically increase harshness for law enforcement regarding this ‘one-and-only’, but that’s another topic.

Step 2. Replace all of Taxation in the United States, especially the IRS, with the FairTax

I have done some big talks about the FairTax before, but now I think I should explain how it is best for the economy:

  • This law would eliminate the income tax
  • This would jack up transparency by abolishing the IRS
  • Abolishing the IRS would also eliminate the ability of government to steal money from earning workers as it presently does
  • The FairTax would give We The People consumption allowances to give us reason to budget our money and not spend impulsively
  • This consumption allowance rounds to slightly under $12,000 per adult and slightly over $4,000 per minor, regardless of how many of each are in the household.
  • The consumption tax would be either 30% tacked on to price or 23% deducted from price depending on how things go the first full year of taxation, and the first year would be the 23% deduction.

This policy would allow workers of all sorts, from richest to very poorest, to keep absolutely all they earn monetarily. That way, We The People can afford not just to buy more but also to donate much more to Non-profit charities.

Step 3. Replace Minimum Wage with a Living Wage based on Nominal GDP Per Capita.

Now, with all the money-saving done through Deregulation explained above, can an employer afford to pay workers a living wage in an economy with only one restriction, a yearly restriction-compliance cost of $25 per employee, and the FairTax in place? Certainly! But of course, one must define what a Living Wage ought to be. My definition:

An entry level worker being able to afford a simple one-bedroom apartment ontop of being able to afford to set one’s own individual lifestyle, within consumption allowance as determined by FairTax, including their own food choices, their own personal-time clothing preferences, their interiordecoration choices [i.e. what the worker wants his/her apartment to be like internally], their school choices and other individual lifestyle choices.

So, using basic math, what would this mean? Would it mean setting Living Wage to be annually based on Nominal GDP per capita? Not exactly. Instead I propose that, after steps one and two are done, we set the Living Wage like this:

  • Take the $56,000 total Nominal GDP per capita
  • Subtract 23% [13,000] from that GDP number to account the FairTax
  • Divide the resulting $43,000 by fifty
  • You have the $860 I propose be the weekly wage for lowest-paying work.

Why? Because apartments go for about $800 to $900 per month for one-bed-one-bath apartments. At least in my state they do. Also because after the first $860 for a four-week period is spent on rent, the other $2,580 can be put to four months of consumption [2,580 times four would be $10,320 but times five or more would be over the annual consumption allowance for one adult. And this is all before knowing of the monthly rebate the FairTax comes with for spending allowance on needs for the apartment. The other eight moths of retaining $2,580 per month can go to charities, to college tuition, to savings, there are an enchanting number of things you’d be able to do with your own money in an entry level job under this system that requires ALL THREE steps to be met IN ORDER as written here. So I can remind what that is:

  1. Replace all of the federal register with the Non-Aggression Principle
  2. Replace all of taxation in this economy with the FairTax legislation
  3. THEN you can and should raise the minimum wage to a living wage


I think I have done a good amount of early morning policy ed. I have put much win-win thought into this proposal, and thanks for the read,



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s