Three months ago Seattle entrepreneur Dan Price made headlines when he decided to make the "minimum wage" at his company, Gravity Payments, a salary of $70,000. He announced a plan to phase in raises over a three-year period. Media interviews characterized the move as one of altruism for his employees after Price decided that his minimum salary was an amount where most people were happy and burdens of financial stress were eased.

The decision was made to align more with Mr. Price's religious upbringing than with a political agenda, according to an article in the New York Times. Price cites a favorite "Acres of Diamonds" speech from Baptist minister and Temple University founder Russell Conwell. It hasn't stopped Price's action from being viewed under a political lens.

Thus while I applaud Mr. Price's stated intentions, the initial effects of his move have been somewhat predictable. Those from outside the company who believe income inequality can be fixed by simply raising the compensation of lower wage earners have been cheering. Those inside the company that were among the higher wage earners -- even some who got a raise -- have been quitting.

According to the Times article, the financial manager, who was "putting in long hours that left little time for husband and extended family," made her exit because "he gave raises to people who have the least skills and are the least equipped to do the job, and the ones who were taking on the most didn't get much of a bump."

Gravity's web developer also decided to leave, despite previously earning a $41,000 salary and receiving a $9,000 increase on his way to $70,000. He noted that "the people who were just clocking in and out were making the same as me."

Nationwide, Seattle is being used as the model for those who wish to raise the actual minimum wage to $15 per hour. Proponents only see benefits, and dismiss actual consequences as either academic or unfounded. The example of Dan Price and Gravity Payments helps illustrate what would happen at the margins of even a $15 wage, without even having to more than double that to get a $70,000 salary.

Assuming a 40-hour workweek, a $15 minimum wage would equate to an annual salary of $31,200. This is before any overtime pay, which the Obama administration has a separate proposal to increase the salary needed to avoid paying overtime to employees to be above $50,000.

Let's use Gravity's intra-company frustrations as an example of what would be happening in Georgia's job market if a $15 per hour wage were passed. Let's start with teachers.

According to the National Education Association, the average starting salary for a teaching position in Georgia is $33,673. That's roughly 8% above what a fast food worker would make, before any overtime.

Then there's the Georgia State Patrol. According to the Georgia Department of Public Safety website, the starting salary for a Georgia State Patrol officer is $32,418. That's a whopping $23 per week more than anyone making minimum wage. Before taxes.

Over time, the wage market always resets itself to pay skilled workers more. People expect to receive higher wages for skills, expertise, and/or higher-stress environments than those who, as Gravity's web developer put it, "just clock in and out every day."

Why would a prospective teacher complete the mandatory education only to put up with the stress of students, parents, and the increasing demands of an education bureaucracy when he or she could work a 40-hour restaurant shift, then clock out and leave the stress behind? Why would anyone put on a uniform to then put their life on the line for virtually the same wage as the kid who collects tickets at a movie theater?

The answer is, they won't. And those supporting large minimum wage hikes know it. The goal is to push up all wages. But they would prefer you not think about the natural consequences.

There is one tried and true way to increase wages. That is to increase the skill level of employees, preferably with skills matched to the needs of today and tomorrow's employers. Employees must add value in the private sector in order for an employer to pay them their wages and still get a return on their capital and get paid for their risk. The public sector can't raise wages above the taxpayers' ability to pay them.

Skills are what enable an employee to enhance his or her salary, commensurate with the value they provide. Gimmicks may present nominal short-term progress, but long-term wage increases are a product of markets, not government decrees. 

Charlie Harper, author and editor of the Peach Pundit blog, writes on Georgia politics and government; www.peachpundit.com.