It is also based on the vie that money can be saved by the city if the city does not have to provide certain health and other services to the working poor because they can pay for it themselves or because their employers provide it as part of the package. By most measures, it saves money when the employer makes such arrangements because the employer is more cost-conscious than a government entity may be. In truth, it would be preferable if a larger political entity made such an ordinance binding, as is noted by Coverford (2006), who says the Chicago law would be ineffective in the suburbs because retailers could easily move across boundaries to a smaller suburb without such a law it if so chose. If the living wage were a state or national law, it could cover everyone and would reduce the sort of shifting that might take place in a smaller jurisdiction. Hansen (2007) points out that such laws have been passed in 140 cities and counties across the country, and when they have been challenged, they have usually been upheld by the courts. He cites some who see the Chicago ordinance as having gone too far because it included health benefits and so ran afoul of state and federal jurisdiction in those matters (Hansen, 2007, p. 14). This would be another good reason for a state and federal law on the subject, though there seems to be little political will to pass such an ordinance at this time, at least in most states. The argument that targeting large retailers is unfair was rejected in a federal decision in California, so that argument may not be as persuasive in the future (Hansen, 2007, p. 15).

The movement for a living wage is gaining traction, though proponents still have a long way to go to make this a reality across most of the country. Opponents still claim that such laws will destroy the economy, and they do so in spite of studies showing that the laws do no such thing and may even bring major benefits. The issue is unsettled but also coming to the fore more and more. The...

(2006, June 29). Living Wage Challenged Why Chicago's Pay Plan Won't Work in the Suburbs. Daily Herald, 1.
Critics assail living wage study (2002). United Press International, retrieved August 19, 2007 at http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-84649824.html.,

Daniel, C. (2004, March 22). The myths of the living wage. Business Perspectives. Retrieved August 19, 2007 at http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-118376814.html.

Fine, H. (2006, November 20). Businesses planning referendum to block living wage. Los Angeles Business Journal, retrieved August 19, 2007 at http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-155737409.html.

Fine, H. (2007, February n19). LAX hotels, city making their cases: court likely next stop for fight over living wage law. Los Angeles Business Journal, retrieved August 19, 2007 at http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-161275288.html.

First hurdle cleared, big-box still faces ordinance obstacles (2006, October 9). Retailing Today 45(18).

Furdell, P. (2001, July 2). Living wage ordinances: A growing movement? Nation's Cities Weekly. Retreived August 19, 2007 at http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-76551057.html.

Goodman, a. (2006).

Perpsectives on a living wage. POV. Retrieved August 18, 2007 at http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2006/wagingaliving/special_goodman_chi.html.

Hansen, M. (2007, January). Big-box match in the early rounds. ABA Journal 93, 14-15.Heller, L. (2006, September 25). Daley machine stamps out living wage. Retailing Today 1,28.

Living wage laws benefit the entire community (2004). The Washington Post, retrieved August 19, 2007 at http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-150615.html.

Schoeff, M. (2006, September 25). Chicago big-box law rejected. Workforce Management, 3-4.