Obama to sign executive order raising minimum wage for federal contractors

[Jeff]

I think this is crazy , Obama wants to use a executive order to raise minimum wage for federal contractors to $10.10 a hour , this is wrong for so many reason I don't know where to start, but the easiest way I guess is here in the south there are people working for 11 or 12 bucks a hour ( and yes they worked there way up to it ) and now someone walking in off the street makes almost the same ? So some say this will help everyone to get a raise HELLO we have companies laying people off everyday because of Obama's great idea for healthcare, so to fix that he will try and push a pay raise and force companies to yet again have to pay out more money, get ready for the half of Americas work force that wasn't directly effected by the healthcare mess to now feel the stupidity from DC.



President Obama, in the first of potentially many executive actions tied to his State of the Union address, will unilaterally increase the minimum wage for workers under new federal contracts to $10.10 an hour, from $7.25, in an effort to build momentum for a minimum wage hike for all Americans.


http://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum/topic/show?id=4301673%3ATopic%3A2369404&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_topic

[jafar00]

Everyone has the right to earn a living wage. I am a big supporter of that concept. A well paid employee works harder, is loyal and is less prone to fraudulent behaviour.

[tailfins]

Everyone has the right to earn a living wage. I am a big supporter of that concept. A well paid employee works harder, is loyal and is less prone to fraudulent behaviour.

Are you telling me a buggy whip maker who loyally works hard should get $10 per hour irrespective of the ability to sell buggy whips? When there is a 18 year old who can work for $7 per hour, but can't drive the delivery truck or raises the company's insurance rates for example it makes sense to hire the cheaper applicant still. If at $10 per hour minimum wage, you get the 18 year old and a 25 year old applicant who can drive the delivery truck, the 25 year old gets hired and the 18 year old stays unemployed.

[gabosaurus]

Are you telling me a buggy whip maker who loyally works hard should get $10 per hour irrespective of the ability to sell buggy whips? When there is a 18 year old who can work for $7 per hour, but can't drive the delivery truck or raises the company's insurance rates for example it makes sense to hire the cheaper applicant still. If at $10 per hour minimum wage, you get the 18 year old and a 25 year old applicant who can drive the delivery truck, the 25 year old gets hired and the 18 year old stays unemployed.

So you are for a return to the early 1900s when employers set all the wages and employees had no rights?
Wages need to keep up with the level of inflation and rising prices.

[tailfins]

So you are for a return to the early 1900s when employers set all the wages and employees had no rights?
Wages need to keep up with the level of inflation and rising prices.

Low wages serve as pressure to abandon economically unviable work. Between importing millions of unskilled workers and raising the minimum wage, young people are locked out from stepping on the first rung of the job ladder. Add licensening restrictions that keep young people from lawn mowing, selling lemonade, babysitting, etc, you are dooming young people to a life of poverty.

[aboutime]

For those Americans who fully endorse what Obama says he will do with the minimum wage for federal contractors....You should also know...or perhaps, take time to check; how the UNIONS love to hear about the Minimum wage being increased.

Of course. Most people have little, if any concept of how all of that works at the BARGAINING TABLE when Union bosses are demanding Increases for their members...because someone like Obama...who owes the Unions so much...doesn't really care about wages. As long as the UNIONS who are driving cities like DETROIT into bankruptcy...get what Obama promised them.

[jafar00]

Are you telling me a buggy whip maker who loyally works hard should get $10 per hour irrespective of the ability to sell buggy whips? When there is a 18 year old who can work for $7 per hour, but can't drive the delivery truck or raises the company's insurance rates for example it makes sense to hire the cheaper applicant still. If at $10 per hour minimum wage, you get the 18 year old and a 25 year old applicant who can drive the delivery truck, the 25 year old gets hired and the 18 year old stays unemployed.

It's simple. Employ someone who can do the job in the first place and make the payment high enough to attract a higher scale of worker.

As for the Buggy Whip maker, if he is also selling them as you suggest, I assume he would be in business for himself anyway so his sales are his payment. However if he is just the poor guy employed to make enough of them to keep the go getter buggy whip salesman supplied, he should get whatever industry award is due to him and if that's $10/hr and he is happy working for so little, good luck to him.


Low wages serve as pressure to abandon economically unviable work. Between importing millions of unskilled workers and raising the minimum wage, young people are locked out from stepping on the first rung of the job ladder. Add licensening restrictions that keep young people from lawn mowing, selling lemonade, babysitting, etc, you are dooming young people to a life of poverty.

Indeed. If I employ someone and spend the time and money to properly train them up to do the job, I don't want them looking around and maybe joining a competitor who will have the advantage of someone else investing in a well trained staff member so they don't need to.

[DragonStryk72]

Everyone has the right to earn a living wage. I am a big supporter of that concept. A well paid employee works harder, is loyal and is less prone to fraudulent behavior.

As am I, but blindly raising the minimum wage while continuing to ignore the real problem isn't the answer. The real problem is Cost of Living vs. the average wage here in America. I get it, you don't exactly live here, so it can seem like a straightforward thing "Oh, well people aren't making enough, so just raise the wage", but that doesn't work here, because six months after the line's been moved, we're right back where we started, or worse, since many people see the new money, and plan around being that much ahead of their bills permanently. And the government keeps on doing it every few years now.

The reason is because of the instant gratification society that has developed here. People see a chance for an immediate gain, and that's what they vote for. They do this because they have no faith in the government for real long-term solutions and growth, and the government is only too happy these days to use that to garner more votes however they can get them.

The wage in say Britain or Australia is far more stable than it is here, which is a huge boon to their economies, since this allows them to plan their growth for the coming years. Unfortunately, here, we keep trying to make these huge sweeping changes, and then immediately follow up with more sweeping changes. The last thing to hit the market was the ACA just this past October, which would've have hurt businesses quite a bit even without the crap rollout. That hurt wouldn't be so bad, but now, immediately following that, and even before all of the ACA is finished coming online, there's this run of a 33% increase in the minimum wage. Businesses are being given no time to adapt and plan between sweeping changes to their bottom line, and then get slapped as greedy bastards because they're basically forced to lay people off/not hire on new people.

[logroller]

So you are for a return to the early 1900s when employers set all the wages and employees had no rights?
as opposed to a return to the soviet-era, where the government sets all the wages and the populous has no rights...two can play the hyperbole game.


Wages need to keep up with the level of inflation and rising prices.
Lol. You went to Cal--was macroeconomics not part of your program? In actuality, artificially raising wages leads to increased inflation (cost-push). You're entertaining a vicious cycle. It's like advocating more coal-fired power plants to run the air conditioners because of global warming, only less tenuous.

[DragonStryk72]

So you are for a return to the early 1900s when employers set all the wages and employees had no rights?
Wages need to keep up with the level of inflation and rising prices.

No, inflation and rising prices need to be curtailed, so that the Cost of Living lowers, thus making day to day living more affordable.

[jafar00]

As am I, but blindly raising the minimum wage while continuing to ignore the real problem isn't the answer. The real problem is Cost of Living vs. the average wage here in America. I get it, you don't exactly live here, so it can seem like a straightforward thing "Oh, well people aren't making enough, so just raise the wage", but that doesn't work here, because six months after the line's been moved, we're right back where we started, or worse, since many people see the new money, and plan around being that much ahead of their bills permanently. And the government keeps on doing it every few years now.

The reason is because of the instant gratification society that has developed here. People see a chance for an immediate gain, and that's what they vote for. They do this because they have no faith in the government for real long-term solutions and growth, and the government is only too happy these days to use that to garner more votes however they can get them.

The wage in say Britain or Australia is far more stable than it is here, which is a huge boon to their economies, since this allows them to plan their growth for the coming years. Unfortunately, here, we keep trying to make these huge sweeping changes, and then immediately follow up with more sweeping changes. The last thing to hit the market was the ACA just this past October, which would've have hurt businesses quite a bit even without the crap rollout. That hurt wouldn't be so bad, but now, immediately following that, and even before all of the ACA is finished coming online, there's this run of a 33% increase in the minimum wage. Businesses are being given no time to adapt and plan between sweeping changes to their bottom line, and then get slapped as greedy bastards because they're basically forced to lay people off/not hire on new people.

I know all about high cost of living here in Sydney lol. Because of me, employees here now get yearly pay rises capped to inflation but it's something.

[logroller]

I know all about high cost of living here in Sydney lol. Because of me, employees here now get yearly pay rises capped to inflation but it's something.
Does Australia peg its tax thresholds to inflation? Answer: NO. I'm not bagging just Australia mind you, the AMT here stateside is a abomination on the middle- class.

Its fun when people are all about what's a fair standard for taking from the capital investors that provide the goods and services, but those who take from them are exempt from the standard.