Trump calls for a minimum wage increase

Scroll down to read this post.
For many reasons, mostly political but partly ethical, I do not use Google, Facebook, Twitter. They practice corrupt business policies, while targeting conservative websites for censoring, facts repeatedly confirmed by news stories and by my sense that Facebook has taken action to prevent my readers from recommending Behind the Black to their friends.
Thus, I must have your direct support to keep this webpage alive. Not only does the money pay the bills, it gives me the freedom to speak honestly about science and culture, instead of being forced to write it as others demand.


Please consider donating by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below.


Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:

If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652


You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.

Researching the November Democratic primary: Republican Party presidential candidate Donald Trump on Sunday called for an increase in the minimum wage.

He did add that this is something the states should decide. However, with him pushing it he is helping to make it a political issue that will force an increase, something that has routinely damaged economies and hurt the poorest and lowest income members of society. He also added that he will negotiate with Democrats on his tax plan (which he now called “only a concept”) which will likely cause increased taxes on the wealthy.

As I’ve said, we now have a choice between a liberal Democrat and an avowed socialist/communist. Ain’t that just wonderful?



  • mpthompson

    Yeah, advocating a minimum wage increase is lame on Trumps part, but it will not kill this nation. If he can build the wall (real or virtual, it just needs to be effective in whatever form it takes) and turn the tide on all this open-borders crap by actually enforcing existing law, then we may have a nation left to argue about what, if any, the minimum wage should be. Hopefully, we’ll be so lucky.

    I know, I know, Trump could be lying about border control, but he’s the best chance we have given the other candidates would just give us more of what we’ve seen over the last 30 years in that regards.

  • Wayne

    If Trump supports a minimum-wage increase, it negates all his talk of border-control.
    Roughly 2 million people work at minimum-wage, why price those people out of the market? Why make cheap imported labor, more competitive?

    “Munger on Shortages, Prices, and Competition.”

    “Mike Munger of Duke University talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the limits of prices and markets, especially in the area of health. They talk about vaccines, organ transplants, the ethics of triage and what role price should play in allocating. The discussion concludes with a discussion of how markets respond to price controls, particularly minimum wages.”

  • steve mackelprang

    The art of the deal….. one has to be elected before anything can be done, by merely saying this I would guess his appeal among a large segment just went up a few notches. Will he build a wall?, will he push for a wage hike? Presuming to know what he will do, is like believing Bush when he said, no new taxes!

  • Cotour

    “Trump: ‘I don’t know how people make it on $7.25 an hour’

    People do not “make it” on $7.25 an hour, that’s not the point. What exactly are people talking about when they use the term “minimum wage” and what in actuality is the definition of a minimum wage ? If you mean a “living wage” then say living wage and a living wage IMO is about social engineering and has little to do with the economics of a functioning business to pay entry or low level / unskilled workers. (there actually are such things as low level and unskilled workers no matter what the left tells you)

    I believe that Trumps natural general mode of operation (business or political) is to test the waters and accumulate as much capital (emotional / political / financial) in order to appear to be the most reasonable in order to become empowered and then he will reasonably sort it all out later after the empowerment and “take care of business”.

    Its an intuitive / seat of the pants type style (which I understand well) and like it or not he has made it work very well for him throughout his life and career.

  • Wayne

    [Trump]–“…will reasonably sort it all out later after the empowerment…”

    That, is extremely hopeful thinking. Why not just believe the guy, right now, when he reveals his crony-progressive ways?

    (Your point on “minimum vs. living,” I do agree with.)

  • Cotour

    I do not at this time know how his style comports with what I am primarily concerned with, reconnecting with the Constitutional concepts our country has been so stealthily steered away from in order to accomplish this Liberal / leftist / U.N. agenda which is now plain to see and no longer just a conspiracy theory or a suspicion:

    Our country has been hijacked by the Leftists that live among us:

    Trumps challenge related to your reasonable concerns is how he accomplishes his transition to government and keeping the concerns for the country and the Constitution in balance. Trump is on the road to being the only American choice presented that has a chance to win the presidency. So like it or not our choices have been narrowed to the point that he is going to be your best reasonable choice. I suspect that you and many others will get more comfortable with that fact in the coming weeks and months. There are certainly unknowable elements to this, if Trump is “the man” how will the political zeitgeist of our day attempt to or in fact influence and control him? The people in power will do what ever necessary to retain control, I have no doubt. Trump says he is not a globalist (?).T

    This is all disturbing given the above listed article about how our world is now a “border less world”.

    Time will tell the tale.

  • Al

    Like him or not, Trumps been consistent throughout the years:

  • Wayne

    Mark Levin wraps up Trump & the minimum-wage, in under 50 seconds–

    (To borrow from Nancy Reagan, “Just say NO.”)

  • Wayne

    (Hey– very interesting website!)

    Did watch that video clip on Trump, and it was informative. Selective, but informative.
    I am however, convinced he’s a Crony at best & a Progressive at worst & I’m just not down with that. Don’t hate the guy, but can not support him.
    Not exactly sure in my own mind, what he could possibly say or do, going forward, to change my mind & it will be interesting to see how he intends to earn my vote. (I suspect he’s written off a large segment of the Conservative’s & Libertarian’s, as he appears to be pivoting to the left of Hillary on some issues.)

  • Cotour

    The left finances the theft of your freedom with your own funds:

    The Leftist / socialist can only be about the redistribution of other peoples money and is about retribution and penalizing. Instead of empowering someone low on the totem pole they must drag others down to their level.

    Very negative, reverse racist and anti American, this defines specifically Obama and the leftists that follow him. Sick, sick, sick.

    What do I fear most? The last three or so months of Obama’s administration and those of my fellow Americans who if it comes down to it will refuse to vote for the Republican candidate and essentially vote for Hillary. Four more years of the Leftist / Democrat anti American machine freely running rough shod over our country and the world? God help us.

  • Al

    An article worth reading if you’re on the fence about voting for Trump in the general election…

  • Cotour

    To my point about the left funding Americas demise with the peoples own funds:

    Our own government has incentivized and encourages the illegal entry into our country. This undermining to me is a form of treason.

  • Edward

    The $15 minimum wage is not faring well in Seattle. With the first increase raising it to $11 per hour, there have already been negative effects. Those with more experience, from surrounding areas, are commuting to Seattle for the higher-paying jobs, muscling out those with little or no work experience. Add to that the reduced number of restaurant jobs in Seattle, despite the rest of the state gaining restaurant jobs:

    Just having a minimum wage tends to most harm those with the least experience and education. Those who do not graduate from high school tend to be passed up for jobs that go to those with diplomas. This harms those whose families are not enthusiastic about their children getting diplomas and entering the regular workforce and reinforces the stories about “the man” keeping them down that kept them from being enthusiastic in the first place.

    Basic economics and personal experience show that the more you pay, the more you expect to get. So when the minimum wage goes up, the employer expects (and needs) to get more from his employees, and the inexperienced are not going to cut the mustard.

    As for Trump’s (mis)statement: “I don’t know how people make it on $7.25 an hour,” the answer is obvious. It is those for whom the minimum wage was originally aimed at: the high school student or recent graduate on his first job. The completely unskilled worker who is not worth the minimum wage to any employer. Those who are still in school or just starting out are not expected to be the ones with families, mortgages to pay, or other large expenses, and they may be expected to live with family until they are experienced enough to leave the nest. (Strangely, this reminds me of the tales of college graduates moving back with their parents.)

    The idea of the starter job — the minimum wage job — is to gain experience in the workforce and gain experience with a little walking around money. That is why we allow 16-year olds to start working, otherwise we would hold them to child-labor laws in ways that would make them almost unemployable.

    Instead, we raise the minimum wages and make them completely unemployable.

    That Trump believes that government should interfere with business in this way is yet another reason why he (as well as all other major candidates) is a poor choice for president. He will cause the rest of the country to suffer as Seattle has suffered. And that is on this *one* topic. There are other terrible ideas that he thinks are good. This is not how we made this country great in the first place, and it will not make America great again. He does not know how to do it, and if he did, he wouldn’t want to implement those policies, as they go against his philosophy.

  • LocalFluff

    I doubt Trump cares about any ideology, so it is not correct to call him a liberal. He’s an autcrat, he will do what he needs and wants to do. His independance will make him a powerful president who might get majorities across the two shattered parties in Congress. What is completely certain is everything he says about construction! He can’t keep off the topic. That talk is not political tactics, it’s his character. When he talked about 911 he mentioned the challenge of ground zero as a construction site. He comments rally buildings and airports because building is his life. The wall will be built. Maybe he’ll launch a new deal to crush the democrats and to create huge infrastructure projects as monuments over him. Trump international airport, the world’s greatest.

    “- I solemny swear to the office building of the president of United Real Estate of America, to the best of my ability…” and that’s one heck of an ability, I’m telling ya! Now all, fill up the caterpillars and bring them to the southern border, we’re starting to build a wall today.

  • Edward

    LocalFluff wrote: “I doubt Trump cares about any ideology, so it is not correct to call him a liberal. ”

    Trump’s ideology includes higher taxes, using force to make companies do as he wants, and using government to wrest control of property from its owners. How is this not liberal? As you say, Local, that is his character.

    Construction is not the end-all be-all that you may think. China has constructed a few cities that are completely unpopulated, because they tried to build their way into prosperity, but it is productivity leads to prosperity. Indeed, Trump sounds like he may retry FDR’s WPA program to build rose gardens and other non-productive projects. Producing unused buildings is not a useful endeavor. If productivity is not expanding, then the buildings are a waste of resources.

  • Wayne

    Good point on Construction-in-general, and FDR & WPA.
    Productivity is a huge factor that is often under-looked. (We produce, so that we can consume.)
    Trump has an MBA, correct? I’d expect him to be a little more well-versed in “business-topics,” like the minimum-wage. His reflex responses, I believe, give us a more accurate view into how he would govern, than do his public statements.

    btw– Most excellent & well thought-out comments, on a wide range of posts & topics. (I’m ready to Vote for you! Pick your Office.)

  • LocalFluff

    Edward, I’m not saying that it will be good. I do have some hope that it will be, for America. But that is up to the future Trump himself, no one knows, not even himsel today. But he seems to have the ability to do good if he wants. And since he is the only candidate who does, that puts all ideologies and special intrests and political tactics aside since none of that matters without the ability to do something. Trump is a doer. And the most obvious way to demonstrate doership is to dig and build. Build build build. I think that will be the general solution to all problems during the next eigt years. If it doesn’t work, then build it ten feet taller!

  • Edward

    LocalFluff wrote: “Build build build. I think that will be the general solution to all problems during the next eigt years. If it doesn’t work, then build it ten feet taller!”

    Ah, yes. The fallacy of “I know the answer, and if it doesn’t work, then we need to apply even more of it.”

    Keynesian Economics at its worst. “Everyone knows” that Keynesian Economics (AKA demand-side economics) works, but the reason that it never has, yet, is because governments have never spent enough money — applied enough of it. However, no matter how much has been spent, it does not work, even when the economy is centrally controlled, as in the Soviet Union.

    Not only for this reason (recorded before Obamanomics and its failed stimulus): (7 minutes)
    (Please note the $2 bills at the 3:20 mark — think of another of Robert’s recent postings.)

    But because under Keynesian Economics there is no added productivity.

    Reagan’s supply-side economics gave us two decades of prosperity, because the lower taxes left us with more money to spend, plus the reduced onerous regulations made it less expensive to produce goods and services, increasing the efficient use of resources.

    Obama’s demand-side economics gave us $10,000 billion in additional debt, more people in poverty, more people on EBT cards, the highest percentage of workers out of the workforce in almost four decades, and a GDP that can almost keep up with population growth (thus a negative per capita GDP growth, especially after factoring in inflation).

    Third, from third grade economics, when demand increases, so do prices until the demand decreases to meet the limited supply. As prices increase, so does the waste of resources. We cannot “demand” our way into prosperity. Waste of resources was one of the reasons that the Soviet Union fell.

    When supply increases, prices fall until demand meets the increased supply. As prices fall, producers are forced to find more efficient uses of scarce resources. Increased efficiency in the use of resources is one of the reasons it took Bill Clinton nearly a decade to kill the Reagan economic boom.

  • LocalFluff

    Edwars, Trump won’t cure keynesianism. I even saw him say in an interview that he likes low interest rates. If the American people had wanted to cure the sharia interest rate and the depression, they would have voted for Ron Paul four years ago. They did not. Now Trump might very well make America temporarily rich again by taking money from stupid politicians in other countries, which of course is mostly western Europe. Politics is a zero sum game and Trump is the obvious winning player. It is up to the rest of the world to cure keynesianism if they want to. The US should and won’t take the cost of that transition.

    Trump will simply rule the US like China, India and Russia are ruled. It is a kingdom of self interest. Forget about ideologies.

  • Cotour

    Right now as I write the Democrats in Congress are holding a news conference.

    They propose: 1. Repeal the tax decrease passed by Trump and 2. Increase the minimum wage to a “Living” wage, which they propose will solve the homeless problem.

    What I want the Democrat Congress persons do is propose that the minimum wage be exactly half of what the base salary is of a Congress person, which I believe is $174,000.00 per year / $87,000.00 per year. Now THAT is a living wage.

    $15 dollars an hour? Why $15 dollars an hour? As long as what they propose has nothing to do business and economics of a particular business model and the market it exists in, why not make their goal also not connected to economics and business models and markets?

    At what point do these people get introduced to reality? Every time the people vote.

    “We are building a future” say the Democrats.

    The only problem? No one wants to live in the future they are attempting to create.

  • Cotour

    People don’t “Make it” on $7.25 an hour, “Making it” is not the purpose of the minimum wage.

    Hear Rashida Tliab proposes that $15 and hour is also not enough to “Make it”, she proposes a $20 an hour minimum wage.

    I have proposed previously here that these Congressional economics and social engineering geniuses create a bill that the president would sign into law where the minimum wage would be tied to one half of the salary of a Congress person.

    I believe that a Congress person right now makes $174,000.00 dollars per year. That would translate to an hourly rate of $87.00 per hour given a 2000 hour work year (8 hrs per day X’s 5 X’s 50 weeks. I know they don’t work that much). A very livable wage in deed.

    So my proposal would be that the “livable” minimum wage be tagged at $43.50 per hour ($87 / 2 = $47.50).

    If these proposals made by these pandering politicos are not related to the economics of the market and an actual business model and the ability of a business to be incentivized to offer a job to those entering the job market why not make the minimum wage a truly livable wage? And tie it to at least half of what a Congress person makes.

    What is the actual definition and intention of the thing called the “Minimum wage”?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *