1) Please explain
"One effect of a minimum wage law is that of discrimination against the employment of less-preferred workers."
It seems to be the crux of the whole article but I don't get it. How would the abolition of the minimum wage encourage employers to hire "less preferred workers." Surely market forces would prevail over an employer’s petty bigotry wouldn’t it?

2) Are you persuaded that a minimum wage increase legislated nationally is bad policy solely on the basis of its purported ill effects on American Samoa, which has a population of approximately 66,000? Seriously?! What about the policy effects on the continental United States (population approx. 307 million). The fact that the author has to resort...

...Continued from the last comment

Then when the article finally sets foot in the continental United States it references an arbitration without offering any context as to time or location. Does the word "Locomotive" offer any clue as to how distant in time and culture, that particular arbitration was. (It took place in 1915 and involved the Southern Pacific Railway. Irrelevant for the same reasons as apartheid South Africa.) Once again, the author offers no evidence that white unionists in that case proved prescient when they speculated that the arbitration decision would discourage the employment of black firefighters. So the author, again, fails to support his ridiculous thesis with any evidence.

This is really...