I'm Against Minimum Wage Of $15 An Hour Nationally

Here's why.

No One Size Fits All
According to Wikipedia the average per capita income in Connecticut is $39,373 while in Mississippi workers earn just 53% of those living in Connecticut ($21,036). This works out to almost $19 an hour in Connecticut and just over $10 an hour in Mississippi.

The way we go about setting this at a federal level is done all wrong. Rather then taking a hard number and applying it to all fifty states it should be percentage based instead.

Let's take for example using 90% of a state's per capita income as a goal for our minimum wage. In Mississippi that figure would come in at $9.10 an hour. In Connecticut it would be $17.04 an hour. Here in Pennsylvania it would be $12.64 and hour. All the figures I used were based on a 40 hour work week for 52 weeks out of the year.

As you can see the $15 an hour would place unreasonable burdens on business owners in Mississippi while short changing minimum wage earners in Connecticut. Going with the 90% figure it would help bridge the gap between the lowest paid and those with average incomes. At the same time creating parity between all fifty states.

Keep in mind Per Capita income is the average of all workers from the highest to the lowest paid. This doesn't mean someone earning the minimum wage still isn't at the bottom nor that they may be able to live on this hourly wage. What it does mean employers in each area wouldn't go bankrupt trying to pay the same wages as other states whose standard of living costs are twice theirs.

Using a percentage based system state by state is a lot fairer to both employers and employees. That said, I'd tend to think more federal legislators from various states are far more likely to get onboard with this plan. Meaning there's a greater chance of it's success in congress then a straight across the board 'one size fits all' type of increase.