Minimum Wage $9.50?

[red states rule]

Give libs an inch and they want a mile. After passing a minimum wage increase recently (and giving themselves a pay raise) Dems want to raise the mimimum wage again


Minimum wage $9.50? Democrats say maybe
Senator Kennedy pledges to revisit the issue, may index minimum wage; political battle looms.
By Chris Zappone, CNNMoney.com staff writer
July 27 2007: 3:19 PM EDT


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Just days after the first increase in the minimum wage in 10 years, Democrats on Capitol Hill led by Sen. Edward Kennedy are discussing a further increase to $9.50 an hour.

Kennedy (D-Mass.), one of the original sponsors of the recently enacted minimum wage hike, announced this week his intention to propose legislation for a new increase, Laura Capps, a spokeswoman for the senator, said. The proposal, if passed into law, will aim to take effect in 2009 after the current minimum wage law expires.

No time frame was given for the legislation although an aide in another Senate Democrat's office confirmed there would be a push for another wage increase.

The recently-enacted law, The Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, raised the federal minimum amount to $5.85 from $5.15 on Tuesday. That will increase to $6.55 next year and $7.25 in 2009 under the current law.

The $9.50 figure would be half of the expected average worker's wage as of 2011, according to a statement released by Sen. Kennedy's office.

There is also a possibility the wage would be indexed to inflation or some other measure of the cost of living. Ten states already have index adjusted-minimum wages. They provide for automatic increases to the wage in the same way Social Security or Congressional salaries factor in inflation and costs of living.

Kennedy spokeswoman Capps said the awareness of the minimum wage issue rose dramatically with the legislative effort for the first bill.

Capps said it was an issue with broad popular support, including from Republican voters. "Republicans surely heard strongly from their constituents on the issue," Capps said.

Liana Fox of the labor-backed Economic Policy Institute said part of the reason for Kennedy's initiative is that by July of 2009, when the federal minimum is $7.25, 12 states with their own minimum wage law will be over $7.25.

"We've never had a situation like that before," said Fox. "It will increase pressure at the federal level."

Some critics said a new law to boost the minimum wage beyond $7.25 would not go far. Economist Chris Edwards of the libertarian Cato Institute dismissed the notion of an additional wage hike as a "political tool" used by Democrats.

Raising the wage to $9 an hour "would cause a lot of trouble," said Edwards. "There are huge differences in local economies. $9.50 an hour in New York and $9.50 an hour in Kansas are two different things."

Edwards said this "shows why free-market Republicans should never agree to this sort of the thing [a minimum wage increase]. The Bush administration thought, 'Oh we'll get this off the table,' but the Ted Kennedys always come back for more."

Kennedy told National Public Radio this week that he expects the minimum wage to be a major issue in next year's election. Indeed, it already is. On July 2, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards endorsed a further increase to $9.50 by 2012.

Edwards also advocates indexing it so that it automatically rises each year to keep up with average wages.

"No one who is serious about the federal wage floor is ready to pack up and go home at $7.25 by 2009," said Jen Kern of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Kern added that $7.25 is not enough to restore the minimum wage to its historical buying power today.

ACORN is one of the groups involved in advocating for higher wages for poor and working-class families.

"It's not an issue that divides the country," she said.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/07/27/news/economy/minimum_wage/index.htm

[Trinity]

The minimum wage here just went up to $6.85 an hour I believe not to long ago and I remember some one telling me that even though it was passed there was some loop hole in it so that business or certain business would not have to jump up to that amount. I don't know for sure, I never checked into it.

[red states rule]

The minimum wage here just went up to $6.85 an hour I believe not to long ago and I remember some one telling me that even though it was passed there was some loop hole in it so that business or certain business would not have to jump up to that amount. I don't know for sure, I never checked into it.

Minimum wage is for entry level and untrained workers. Anytime you increase the cost of doing business - something has to give

Either fewer jobs created, people laid off, or increased prices

[darin]

They count on dumb people voting for them. Dumb people think "Yeah! It's GOOD to have a VERY HIGH minimum wage! I DESERVE more money for being largely unskilled! I shouldn't HAVE to work two jobs!"

[nevadamedic]

Minimum wage is for entry level and untrained workers. Anytime you increase the cost of doing business - something has to give

Either fewer jobs created, people laid off, or increased prices

That's not always true............

[Black Lance]

A very stupid policy for Americans, but probably a good one for the DNC. Raising the minimum wage that high would allow Democrats to claim they are "looking out for the poor", and when the inevitable dramatic increase in unemployment occurrs, Democrats can respond by simply advocating for more unemployment benefits. They can also simply deny that a higher minimum wage has caused the increase in unemployment, and with more people relying on government social programs, these voters will be more likely to cast their ballots for the DNC in order to preserve the transfer payments that they have become dependent on.

[glockmail]

A very stupid policy for Americans, but probably a good one for the DNC. Raising the minimum wage that high would allow Democrats to claim they are "looking out for the poor", and when the inevitable dramatic increase in unemployment occurrs, Democrats can respond by simply advocating for more unemployment benefits. They can also simply deny that a higher minimum wage has caused the increase in unemployment, and with more people relying on government social programs, these voters will be more likely to cast their ballots for the DNC in order to preserve the transfer payments that they have become dependent on.
True and why the DNC should be be considered anti-american and treasoneous.

[Pale Rider]

Democrats depend heavily on uneducated dependents of the government to get elected. If the dems ever feel there aren't enough dependents to keep electing them, they'll just create some more, and one of the ways they do that is to raise the minimum wage, which reverberates just as Black Lance has said.

[glockmail]

Democrats depend heavily on uneducated dependents of the government to get elected. If the dems ever feel there aren't enough dependents to keep electing them, they'll just create some more, and one of the ways they do that is to raise the minimum wage, which reverberates just as Black Lance has said.
Every single Democrat candidate proposes to raise taxes. The resulting slow down will increase unemployment. This has been proven every time taxes were raised. Therefore your theory is sound.
:salute:

[red states rule]

That's not always true............

It is basic economics

[red states rule]

Democrats depend heavily on uneducated dependents of the government to get elected. If the dems ever feel there aren't enough dependents to keep electing them, they'll just create some more, and one of the ways they do that is to raise the minimum wage, which reverberates just as Black Lance has said.

Liberal compassion has cost the producers $9 trillion over the last 40 years

Yet, libs whine how the "problem" is worse and we need to spend MORE

[red states rule]

Every single Democrat candidate proposes to raise taxes. The resulting slow down will increase unemployment. This has been proven every time taxes were raised. Therefore your theory is sound.
:salute:

What is funny - libs whine how the "working poor" need this raise. Yet they just voted to repeal ALL the Bush tax cuts

The tax rate on these people will go up 33%. From 10% to 15%

They will be taking home LESS money due to the Dems raising their taxes

[Yurt]

The prices of goods have already gone up in my 'hood due to the most recent minimum wage increase. It is wholly ironic that dems use this as a goad to get the these people to vote for them on the increase because these people most likely do not realize that the increase will almost immediately be offset by a rise in cost to the businesses as a result of this "tax."

Right or wrong, it is a way of life. Example, my 'hood just raised water/sewer/property taxes quite substantially. I believe it was around 15% the first time and the remaining four increments over the course of five years are going to total I believe a 50% increase in water. Not sure the ratio on sewer/prop, but I don't believe it is that high. Well, as people predicted, this tax increase simply had the LL increase our tenant rents.

When will the government learn that raising taxes for the "rich" does NOT help the "poor."

[red states rule]

The prices of goods have already gone up in my 'hood due to the most recent minimum wage increase. It is wholly ironic that dems use this as a goad to get the these people to vote for them on the increase because these people most likely do not realize that the increase will almost immediately be offset by a rise in cost to the businesses as a result of this "tax."

Right or wrong, it is a way of life. Example, my 'hood just raised water/sewer/property taxes quite substantially. I believe it was around 15% the first time and the remaining four increments over the course of five years are going to total I believe a 50% increase in water. Not sure the ratio on sewer/prop, but I don't believe it is that high. Well, as people predicted, this tax increase simply had the LL increase our tenant rents.

When will the government learn that raising taxes for the "rich" does NOT help the "poor."

not as long as they fool, lie, and cheat people into believing the wealth envy bullshit

[Yurt]

not as long as they fool, lie, and cheat people into believing the wealth envy bullshit

I don't follow the "wealth envy bullshit". I think those who do not support tax raises have this as well. Not sure you are saying this, but I don't think dems created this particular "envy." This envy is probably as old if not older than the world's oldest "profession."

[red states rule]

I don't follow the "wealth envy bullshit". I think those who do not support tax raises have this as well. Not sure you are saying this, but I don't think dems created this particular "envy." This envy is probably as old if not older than the world's oldest "profession."

The "wealthy" are already paying a huge majority of the taxes - and all libs want is for them to pay more

When is enough, enough?

[LiberalNation]

Well I've never had a job making 9 an hour. Sounds good to me.

[red states rule]

Well I've never had a job making 9 an hour. Sounds good to me.

Try developing some skills.

[gabosaurus]

They count on dumb people voting for them. Dumb people think "Yeah! It's GOOD to have a VERY HIGH minimum wage! I DESERVE more money for being largely unskilled! I shouldn't HAVE to work two jobs!"

Politicians have always counted on stupid people voting for them. That is how Bush got appointed and re-elected.
The military is largely unskilled labor. Should we pay them less than minimum wage?

[LiberalNation]

Try developing some skills.

That takes time. I wouldn't mind the bigger paycheck now.

[Black Lance]

That takes time. I wouldn't mind the bigger paycheck now.

Nobody would. But are you willing to risk not having any paycheck at all? A $9.50 or higher minimum wage isn't going to cause unemployment among doctors and lawyers LN, their wages are well above that naturally, the damage is going to be most felt by people like you, who are temporarily working "unskilled labor" as they make it through the education process.

[red states rule]

That takes time. I wouldn't mind the bigger paycheck now.

Who would not want a bigger paycheck? Of course the Dems have raised taxes so it remains to be seen how much of that increase you would actually take home

[red states rule]

Politicians have always counted on stupid people voting for them. That is how Bush got appointed and re-elected.
The military is largely unskilled labor. Should we pay them less than minimum wage?

Typical. When lose an election they blame the stupidity of the voters or scream how the election was stolen

On those few occassion they win, they gleefully say how the voters spoke and showed their support for the Dem party

Libs always want it both ways

[actsnoblemartin]

youve got to be kidding me, bad donkey :slap:

[glockmail]

What is funny - libs whine how the "working poor" need this raise. Yet they just voted to repeal ALL the Bush tax cuts

The tax rate on these people will go up 33%. From 10% to 15%

They will be taking home LESS money due to the Dems raising their taxes


The Democrats will claim the republicans threatened a veto and made them do it, so they lobbied for an increase in the minimum wage to offset the increase. I guess they figger that the poor are too dumb to do the math.

[darin]

Nobody would. But are you willing to risk not having any paycheck at all? A $9.50 or higher minimum wage isn't going to cause unemployment among doctors and lawyers LN, their wages are well above that naturally, the damage is going to be most felt by people like you, who are temporarily working "unskilled labor" as they make it through the education process.

I try to get MY raises the ol' fashioned way...I try to 'work harder'.

What LN doesn't seem to get is this: It doesn't MATTER if her paycheck amount increases if everything else increases too!

Here's a simply exercise for her, and others (thanks to Jim for giving us an economics lesson!):

jimnyc makes $10/hr. Food and gas and porn, broken down daily, cost him $4 per hr. That means Jim "keeps" $6 for every hour he works. Now, the Democrats Swoop in and Raise everybody's taxes! Now, Food and Gas and Porn cost him $5/hr. Jimmy is heartbroken. Now he keeps only HALF his pay. To be "Kind" to the "Working Poor" the Democrats pass law raising Minimum wage to $11/hr. How THOUGHTFUL! Jim's pay goes up $1. Look at this! He's making $11/hr, and has returned to his $6/hr surplus. However, the Gas Place must pay their attendant $1/hr more. The Food place must pay their cook $1/hr more. The Porn Place must pay their dancer $1/hr more. Because of this, Jimmy now spends $8/hr on the necessities of life, leaving him with $3 of every $11 he makes. So, the result is, Jim spends LESS money on other things, Tax revenues tank, so the Democrats ask to raise the tax rate further.

Neat, huh?

[red states rule]

Media Mania over Wage Increase Ignores Economists' Dissent
By Julia A. Seymour | August 1, 2007 - 16:11 ET
You'd think it was the news media that "got a raise" last week for all the cheering. The federal minimum wage was increased on July 24 by 70 cents to $5.85 an hour and will go up by the same amount in 2008 and 2009.

CNN's Ali Velshi gleefully greeted the change on "American Morning" July 24. He called it "unmitigated good news."

ABC's Claire Shipman also called it "good news for thousands of low-paid workers," on "Good Morning America" the same day.

Media merriment over the 13.5 percent increase was to be expected since CNN, PBS, ABC, USA Today and The Washington Post all showed support for an increase when it was on the Democrats “100 hour” agenda.

While some politicians and members of the media have said this is good news for America, most economists say just the opposite. Their arguments that the increase will hurt businesses and the economy and slow job creation were left out of many reports.

CNN's Lou Dobbs even got confused about how much he makes on July 24.


The increase turns out to be “just about a 10 percent raise for those folks on minimum wage, about two million of us,” said Dobbs in his commentary during “The Early Show” on CBS.

Since when is Dobbs a minimum wage earner? According to Salary.com, he makes millions each year from his anchor job at CNN. And that's not even including his book, "The War on the Middle Class" and his financial newsletter.Dobbs was also wrong about the number of people making the minimum wage. 2005 data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics put the number of minimum wage earners at 479,000 hourly workers "earning exactly $5.15.""Lou Dobbs Tonight" reporter and "Your $$$$$" co-host Christine Romans was "sorry" for minimum wage workers on July 28.


“[W]e found out if you’re earning the federal minimum wage and you’re working full-time in this country, we’re still sorry,” said Romans on CNN’s “Your $$$$$ [Money].”

Many reports completely left out the dissenting opinion from many economists -- that increasing the minimum wage will actually harm the economy and low-skilled workers particularly.In fact, a survey of the American Economic Association found that “over 73 percent of AEA labor economists believe that a significant increase [in the minimum wage] will lead to employment losses and 68 percent think these employment losses fall disproportionately on the least skilled.”

Dr. Gary Wolfram, a Hillsdale College professor and adviser to the Business & Media Institute, explained that minimum wage hikes “[raise] the cost of doing stuff where low-skilled labor is involved and increased the price of things that would require low-skilled labor – hotels, fast food.”

Walter Williams, an economist and BMI adviser, has written: “if higher minimum wages could cure poverty, we could easily end worldwide poverty simply by telling poor nations to legislate higher minimum wages.”


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2007/08/01/media-mania-over-wage-increase-ignores-economists-dissent

[Yurt]

That takes time. I wouldn't mind the bigger paycheck now.

Well your boss does, and it is hers or his:

my body
my sexuality
my uterus
my vagina
my morals
my life

my choice


And yet you want his or her paycheck regulated BY your beliefs.

[MtnBiker]

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Just days after the first increase in the minimum wage in 10 years, Democrats on Capitol Hill led by Sen. Edward Kennedy are discussing a further increase to $9.50 an hour.


What a cheap bastard, why doesn't he discuss a real living wage and suggest $25 dollars an hour. $9.50 an hour will only produce 19,760 in a year.

[red states rule]

What a cheap bastard, why doesn't he discuss a real living wage and suggest $25 dollars an hour. $9.50 an hour will only produce 19,760 in a year.

Even then, how does he expect someone to afford a home on jsut $25/her? Any minimum wage should include a home and reliable transportation - provided by the employer

[red states rule]

What a cheap bastard, why doesn't he discuss a real living wage and suggest $25 dollars an hour. $9.50 an hour will only produce 19,760 in a year.

What Happened to the Left? I don't think the following statement by Sen. Kennedy--in the debate on Sen. Dorgan's amendment to curtail the proposed "guest worker" program--has drawn enough attention:

"I would like the chicken pluckers to pay $10 or $15 an hour. They do not do it. They are not going to do it. Who are you trying to kid? Who is the Senator from North Dakota trying to fool?

These are the realities, the economic realities. No one has fought for increasing the minimum wage more than I have. But you have got realities that employers are not going to pay it." [E.A.]

Weren't Democrats (especially liberal Democrats) the people who wanted chicken pluckers--and others doing lousy jobs at the bottom of the pyramid--to be paid $10 an hour? Yet here we have the putative lion of liberalism declaring this modest goal (less than $3/hour above the new scheduled minimum wage) to be impossible. Employers just won't do it! They'll hire illegals instead. But what if the flow of illegals is curtailed--something Kennedy's immigration bill promises to do. Why not see if a tight labor market can boost wages above the new $7.25 minimum--instead of caving and providing employers with cheap temporary "guest workers" from abroad? If chicken pluckers organized and their union went on strike demanding $10 an hour, would Kennedy ask them who they were "trying to kid" (and support breaking the strike with "temporary" employees)? They told us in the '60s that Kennedy was the tool of the bourgeoisie!

http://www.slate.com/id/2168226/