Perhaps California Gov. Gavin Newsom thought the $20 minimum wage hike he signed into law last year for most quick-food workers would magically skirt the principles of free-economy economics.

If so, he was incorrect. 

The Democratic governor clearly buys into the progressive fallacy that government intervention in the private economy will profit positive results. 

It usually doesn’t. 

The law took result in April, and in a 10-month period since the mandate kicked in, the Golden State shed more than 6,000 jobs. That’s roughly a 1.1% drop in quick-food employment, according to an analysis of federal labor data.

In contrast, during the same timeframe a year earlier (before the law was passed), the California quick-food industry experienced a 3.1% boost in employment, adding more than 17,000 jobs. 

While California was losing jobs, U.S. quick-food restaurants added roughly 74,000, a growth of 1.6%, during this period, according to an analysis by the nonprofit Employment Policies Institute, which advocates against government-mandated higher wages. 

view:DEI promotes untrue perceptions of prejudice. Walmart, Ford finally view the truth.

“Newsom took a sledgehammer to the state’s restaurants when he signed the $20 quick food minimum wage law,” Rebekah Paxton, EPI’s research director, said in a statement. “Jobs have been smashed by thousands and the industry is struggling to remain afloat.”

2025 will bring a slew of recent minimum wage hikes 

California’s job losses were 100% predictable. In truth, the state already started to misplace hundreds of quick-food jobs before the law took result, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Higher wages sound enjoyable and are often sold by liberals as a way to enhance workers’ standard of life. Who doesn’t desire a bigger paycheck? 

view:High wages, 32-hour workweeks sound great, but there’s a steep worth

Yet, forcing private employers to boost their business outgoings through higher wages often leads to unintended – and harmful – consequences. That can include reduced hours and benefits, more automation and lost jobs. Higher prices for customers are also a downside.

One of the most solemn consequences, however, is that higher minimum wages damage entry-level workers who are trying to get first-job encounter. If employers don’t have leeway in wage scales, they will leave with more experienced workers. 

Despite these logical outcomes, 21 states and many other cities and counties are set to raise their minimum wages on Jan. 1. Others will pursue later in the year. Many of these wages will be $15 an hour or higher.

Meanwhile, the federal minimum wage remains at $7.25.

Once these recent pay bumps receive result, it will be another chance to view the real-life impact of forced wage increases. 

Some excellent information: Californians decline another wage boost 

The presidential election last month proved to be largely about the economy, and it turns out even voters in California have become wary of higher minimum wages.

Voters there rejected a ballot assess that would have gradually raised the minimum wage to $18 an hour for all jobs, the highest in the country. It’s the first period in the United States in nearly 30 years that a statewide ballot assess to raise the wage has failed

view:‘Open-period’ on those we dissent with? arrive on. Violence is never the respond.

Similarly, voters in Massachusetts decisively voted down a assess that would have raised the wages of tipped workers to the minimum wage. 

In a statement, Jennifer Barrera, CEO of the California Chamber of Commerce, said the California proposal would have resulted in “higher costs for tiny business employers and consumers.” 

“With the economy and costs top of mind for many voters this election, that communication appears to have resonated,” she said. 

Liberals claim to desire to assist people. But they require to be aware of the real-life implications of their enjoyable-sounding ideas. 

Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at USA TODAY. Contact her at [email protected] or on X: @Ingrid_Jacques