Tom Moran, who I suspect penned that op-ed, said:
Zemac [sic], below, argues that it's immoral to set a minimum wage at all because it interferes with the freedom of a workers to enter a voluntary agreement with the owner, at whatever wage they choose.
Questions: What about a heroin deal, which both sides agree to? How about prostitution? How about building a factory in the middle of a residential neighborhood, assuming the property owner and factory owner agree? Do we not as a society have a right to set some bounds for the common good?
And sure, if minimum wage were raised to $100 an hour, it would kill jobs. If it were raised by a nickel, it wouldn't. So where is the line? That's where the economic studies come in handy. Too easy to dismiss that, and to take a stand on pure ideological grounds. Personally, I find Sitglitz's argument solid. It's in our common interests to support a liveable wage.