There was quite a bit to comment on concerning the State of the Union speech last night. His speech seemed to have far less to do with the current state of the union than with what the president believed about what needs to be done in the future. He was in such a state of alarm, it would seem, that he felt he must take more unilateral action to accomplish his goals. Nowhere was this more apparent than when he spoke about the state of the economy.

 He spoke of all the things one would normally expect to hear, jobs, poverty, trade, manufacturing, technology and energy policy. He also spoke of two things we have come to associate with his regime in recent months, the so-called “problem” of income inequality, and the idea of raising the minimum wage.

I am no economist. My training and expertise is in science and religion. However, I am somewhat educated in economics under the tutelage of people like Smith, Hayak, Friedman and especially Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell. They have helped me considerably in the area of capitalism and free-market economics. You know, the kind we in the United States used to practice before the likes of FDR and most of the administrations that have followed.

 I came to this conclusion a few years ago; our president operates outside the realm of logic especially concerning the economy. The statements he made during the State of the Union speech have solidified this conclusion. Obama’s economic theory is unworkable because it violates the laws of logic.

One prime example is the fact that he believes income equality can be achieved while also enhancing “upward mobility.” The president stated the following, that income “inequality has deepened, upward mobility has stopped”. The problem is the belief that incomes can be “equal” and people can also be upwardly mobile. The logical result of income equality is that “upward mobility” stops. If “upward mobility” is occurring, income equality is not. If income equality is achieved, “upward mobility” ceases. The existence of income equality means the non-existence of upward mobility, and vice versa.

Which brings us to the second, more serious, part of Obama’s illogical economics; his proposed method of beginning to solve the “problem” of “income inequality” by raising the minimum wage. This also defys logic and reason. In order for income equality to be achieved in just one business, it would be necessary that all involved in that business, from the owner to the entry-level worker, receive the same wage! Thus the minimum wage would automatically become the maximum wage! That might be feasible for one business, though the odds are astronomical it would work even for just one. But try to imagine that for all businesses of all types no matter if they produced jet engines or toothpicks! That is precisely what would have to happen if income equality were to happen. However, that only counts the businesses. The same would have to apply to government work. A congressional page would have to have the same salary as the president! A county sheriff would have to make the same salary as the president! A public street cleaner would have to make the same salary as the president! A private in the Army would have to make the same salary as a general and of course that salary would have to be the same as, you guessed it, the president! A more absurd notion would be hard to fathom.

Of course, this doesn’t address another serious problem with an elevated minimum wage, the fact that it will increase rather than decrease unemployment. But that is for another article. Better yet, just find what Dr. Williams and Dr. Sowell have to say about it. Their explanation in this area would be far more informative and enlightening than mine.

Support Conservative Daily News with a small donation via Paypal or credit card that will go towards supporting the news and commentary you've come to appreciate.

D.T. Osborn

I am 57 years old and live in the great state of Nebraska. I am a direct health care services worker and recently retired pastor of a Baptist church. I have been married for 32 years and have a 30 year old son and a 26 year old daughter.

Related Articles

Check Also
Back to top button