House Raises Minimum Wage

[Miss Modular]

$7.25 an hour is still not enough to pay the rent and the bills, but at least it's progress. :/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060729/..._wage_taxes_dc

House vote raises minimum wage By Richard Cowan and Donna Smith

1 hour, 7 minutes ago

The House of Representatives voted on Saturday to give some of the lowest-paid American workers their first raise in nearly a decade, while also handing a big tax cut to some of the wealthiest.

The House in the early hours voted 230-180 to raise the $5.15-per-hour minimum wage in three 70-cent steps until it reaches $7.25 in mid-2009.

During a bitter floor debate, Rep. Phil English, a Pennsylvania Republican, said most Democrats' opposition to the bill showed "they've always liked the politics of the minimum wage and cared little for the policy of the minimum wage."

But Democrats shot back that Republicans had staged an election-year stunt to get a minimum wage vote knowing the Senate won't go along because of opposition there to the estate tax cut. And some senators are opposed to any minimum wage hike.

Before this election year, Rep. George Miller (news, bio, voting record), a California Democrat said, "You never raised a finger to help these individuals" getting paid the minimum wage.

Coming shortly before the House was to start a five-week summer break that will give members time to campaign for re-election, the legislation also would cut estate taxes, derided by Republicans as a "death tax," and extend several other popular tax cuts. Its estimated cost was about $310 billion over 10 years.

The package is likely to be debated next week in the Senate, where its fate was unclear. Efforts to roll back estate taxes failed in the Senate in June. Such a cut is a high priority for Republican leaders ahead of the November congressional elections when Democrats hope to make big gains.

REPEATED REJECTION

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada noted the Senate has "rejected fiscally irresponsible estate tax giveaways before and will reject them again."

The estate tax cut is estimated to help less than 1 percent of American families at a time of skyrocketing federal debt.

"Workers at the lowest end of the scale are being held hostage to 7,500 families," said Rep. Steny Hoyer (news, bio, voting record) of Maryland, the second-ranking Democrat in the House, who wanted a minimum wage increase bill without the estate tax cut.

Those 7,500 families are the number of wealthy families that would benefit from the estate tax cut. By contrast, some seven million workers would benefit from the increase in the minimum wage.

Republicans argue cutting estate taxes helps small businesses and farmers.

The bill also would renew for two years expired tax breaks for education, research, college tuition and other popular items.

For several years, Republicans controlling Congress have blocked an increase in the minimum wage, claiming it would backfire by causing employers to hire fewer entry-level workers.

But Democrats stepped up pressure this year for the increase, arguing high gasoline and heating prices were making it harder for the working poor to survive while working at wages frozen since 1997.

They were joined by dozens of moderate Republicans in the House who, facing tough re-elections in November, challenged their leaders and demanded a minimum wage vote before breaking for the summer.

Recent polls have shown broad discontent with the Republican-led House and Senate. Democrats, hoping to win control of Congress, have tried to portray an out-of-touch Republican Party that has agreed to nearly $35,000 in pay raises for members of Congress over the past decade while refusing to increase the pay for low-wage jobs.

White House spokesman Tony Snow, asked about President George W. Bush's position on the minimum wage, told reporters on Friday, "We are for minimum wage increases if they do not jeopardize the ability of small businesses to create jobs."

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

I own a place, live alone, and pay bills at much less than $7.25 an hour. However it would be nice to be able to aford more. I'm spending all my savings to get my fiance into the country right now and i can't afford a decent car.

Anyway it's got to the point in america where we need to live like mexicans, many people in one house pooling resources. My worry is in places like where i live (nowhere, missouri) wmployers can't afford to pay that so if the minimum wage is raised, they fire some people in order to afford to give the hardest workers that raise. And a low paying job beats the hell out of no job at all.

But i sure could use that raise if I ever want to have kids.

[Miss Modular]

This page explains the problem I have with the current minimum wage. It explains the history of minimum wage, and how it has declined and increased over the years. Notice how much minimum wage was in 1968:

http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/anth484/minwage.html

[CaptainBubba]

But about your concerns Courage, uhhh, well, if you get fired because of this and become unemployed at least you wont be making 6 dollars an hour! Yea!

And "poverty" is an arbitrary term so the pretty graphs are pretty pointless. People can and do manage to live on wages lower than this proposed minimum wage. I work and have worked with them before and although its hard for them I'm sure theyd prefer it over no job at all, and rest assured, raising minimum wage raises unemployment. I could even find a graph of it if I cared to! Maybe I will when someone says I'm making it up.

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

i would appreciate a graph cause my mom has yet to believe that since i tried to explain to her after middle school economics.

[ArrowX]

weve had 7.00 an hour as minumum for quite a while, thanx for keeping up guys

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

Originally Posted by StupidKraut

weve had 7.00 an hour as minumum for quite a while, thanx for keeping up guys

only in your state, we are reffering to the national one.

In Missouri the minumum wage is 5.15 an hour.

[AChimp]

Minimum wage is for losers and lazy people!

[Preechr]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to be trying to figure out how to live on minimum wage. If you're willing to work even just a little bit and you have enough sense to make it there in the morning, pretty much anybody should be able to rustle up eight to ten bucks an hour. I've worked full time for about 17 years now, and I believe I've totaled about two months of that working minimum wage... Well, that was before I started my first full time job... as a dishwasher, where I earned about $1.50 over minimum wage.

We're at 5% unemployment despite all those jobs we've "shipped overseas" and the millions of illegal immigrants we bring in "to do the jobs Americans don't want to do." There are plenty of jobs out there that pay more then monopoly money.

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

Originally Posted by Preechr

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to be trying to figure out how to live on minimum wage. If you're willing to work even just a little bit and you have enough sense to make it there in the morning, pretty much anybody should be able to rustle up eight to ten bucks an hour. I've worked full time for about 17 years now, and I believe I've totaled about two months of that working minimum wage... Well, that was before I started my first full time job... as a dishwasher, where I earned about $1.50 over minimum wage.

We're at 5% unemployment despite all those jobs we've "shipped overseas" and the millions of illegal immigrants we bring in "to do the jobs Americans don't want to do." There are plenty of jobs out there that pay more then monopoly money.

perhaps in your area. In mine being department manager of a walmart pays minimum wage. You have a way to work up if there any "up" in your area. In my area your lucky to get minimum wage and you gotta fight for every quarter an hour increment raise every year. i work everyday and am never late and know enough to manage my department, they just fire everyone around me and keep me at the low pay. But it could be worse i could live in texas where the minimum wage is much lower.

[Preechr]

If it's truly that bad, and you need the money, MOVE.

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

Originally Posted by Preechr

If it's truly that bad, and you need the money, MOVE.

doesn't it take the money of one of those bigger jobs to be ABLE TO AFFORD TO MOVE!

[Preechr]

Once you do whatever it takes to get what you want and succeed once, it gets easier to do it the next time... and it gets progressively easier every time you do it. You're young. I'm not all that young anymore, and I've been around the block a few times. I understand what the big picture looks like from your perspective, and I know for a fact that it's impossible for me or anyone else to explain life to you in a way that will wind up being helpful for you.

You just have to do it.

Federally mandated wages just aren't an answer. Life's hard. It was meant to be. Doing it, either well or badly, is it's own reward.

Think of it this way: You're not mentally prepared for money yet. Money is a terribly complex thing, though it's also sublime in it's simplicity. The main thing you need to be doing at this moment is assessing your desires and comparing those to your ability to attain them and the resources available to you to do so. These are all variables. Set up an equation using these variables and then make it work to the best of your ability.

For instance, we're talking here about your payscale. The one you have now is one of those resource thingys. The better one you do not have yet falls into that ability catagory. You say you can't attain your desires in this regard because your location obstructs your ability to increase your resource base. While I could argue with your assessment of the situation, I won't. Let's say you're right. As I said: MOVE.

You counter that your desire to move, which would facilitate the increase in resources needed to achieve your desires, is similarly obstructed by your present resources. How about this: Reallocate either those resources or your desires and you're all set. At your age, I think I'd recommend the former over the later. Save decommissioning your dreams for later in lafe.

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

i believe i am managing my money well. most of my coworkers are in debt. I recently bought a trailer in my trailer park fixed it up and sold it at profit and am subletting the land beneath it. I have plans for a small minimal risk business and have already taken on an unpaid intern who needs experience and training i offer and also i'm giving him a share of the profit. Most of my money as of now is going towards my impending marraige, besides which a second income even if its minimum wage part time would help make ends meet.

You'll note i never said i wanted the state to mandate the raise. This only costs more people like me their jobs because as wages raise so also does unemployment (that money does come from somewhere) and a low paying job beats the hell out of non at all.

I am quite capable of handling money I'm not as stupid as you believe i just live in a poor region. I live rather comfortably for someone in my financial situation so i'm happy right now. But you know what they say about the rich man and his money, he'd trade it all for a little more.

Not everyone has the oppertunities you have. In the Phillipines you work 10 hour days for 35 cents an hour, do you think they are poor cause they don't work hard enough? My life is going just fine but your sense of entitlement is rather odd to me. A lot of people work a hell of a lot harder then you and make much much less.

I once read that people who make more than 50,000 a year tend to believe in karma and that hard work always pays off, and the those who make less are 30% more likely to believe that's not always true.

Just cause all lazy slackers (at least ones not born into wealth) are poor, doesn't make all poor people lazy slackers.

[Preechr]

Sounds like you're doing fine. I wasn't making any judgements on who you are or what you're doing, and if I thought you were stupid, I wouldn't be talking to you. I still say you should move if your assessment of available wages is correct. I've lived in some pretty fucked up places in my life, and I've never seen the minimum wage being the maximum available.

Sounds like you are already working the equation. Keep doing that. The only dog I have in this fight comes from my disagreement with mandated minimum wages, or it's cousin: the "living" wage, so if you're not advocating that, it seems we're done here.

HAVE A NICE DAY.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Preeche tells story like a grandpa.

This will probably die in the Senate anyway.

EDIT:

Sorry, but to add to that, I'm sort of frustrated will all of this b/c we're seeing a lot of mid-cycle politics right now. And it's funny, because Liberals and Democrats have been howling for weeks about how arbitrary flag burning amendments and other token Right-wing issues are, and that we have "important things to be discussing," etc. etc.

Meanwhile, House Dems push through a minimum wage increase that they know probably won't pass the Senate, all so they can go back to their districts in August and put "and I voted X amount of times to increase the minimum wage!" on their brochures.

Ugh, I'm disgusted.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by CaptainBubba

and rest assured, raising minimum wage raises unemployment. I could even find a graph of it if I cared to! Maybe I will when someone says I'm making it up.

I think you should go ahead and find that graph, because nearly half the states in this country have higher minimum wage laws in place than the federal rate.

Does every state with a higher rate than the federal have higher rates of unemplyment?

[CaptainBubba]

Your argument is suprisingly illogical in its most basic foundations.
I said that raising minimum wage will cause unemployment and even if states with higher minimum wages have more people employed this would fit just dandy with my statement. Obviously the opposite is most likley true, because areas where the employers can only afford to pay minimum wage would then also most likley have a hard time affording new employees.

Essentially what you are doing is twisting my argument to say that there is a direct correlation between minimum wage and employment with no other factors involved, which again is suprising as you are far smarter than to go ahead and say something like that when you probably know I, and noone with an iota of intelligence, would suggest that. There is no single direct correlation with employment and I said raising minimum wage raised unemplyment, which means each individual states original unemployment could be highly different from the others and so would the end unemployment.

In my state you would be hard pressed to find an employer not voluntarily paying at least 7.50 an hour and it is easy as hell to get a job. Raising the minimum wage would actually put Eastern European seasonal workers out of jobs most likley, because they tend to get paid they very least (around 6 an hour) out of everyone and often slack at their jobs for whatever reason. I doubt any organization keeping track of minimum wage here would count those seasonal employees or care about them since they are not permanent citizens.

And now for the graphs!:

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by CaptainBubba

Essentially what you are doing is twisting my argument to say that there is a direct correlation between minimum wage and employment with no other factors involved, which again is suprising as you are far smarter than to go ahead and say something like that when you probably know I, and noone with an iota of intelligence, would suggest that.

It's funny you said this, because this was actually what I was thinking about when I read your post. I was saying to myself, "why would my darling Bubba assume that raising the minimum wage leads directly to high unemployment?" This question popped into my head after reading:

Originally Posted by CaptainBubba

and rest assured, raising minimum wage raises unemployment

I mean, only a total asshole would assume that there's a "single direct correlation with employment." Right?


I'm actually not in favor of a "living wage," because I think it's rather vague. I think the federal riase is fine, b/c as I said, half the country is doing it already with little economic catastrophe to speak of.

Santa Fe expects to raise their city minimum up to $10.50 by 2008. It's already the highest in the country at like $8.50. I think that's probably too high (the former), but I also think the city economy will adjust ot the high rate and not plunge into depression.

Nice graphs.

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

i like the one with the kitty

[CaptainBubba]

you: "raising the minimum wage leads directly to high unemployment"

not what I said. Yet again. I did not say "leads to high unemployment" I said higher. It has an effect on unemployment. Thus, it is not the sole determinant of unemployment. Either you really really want this to be what I said and are embarassed that its not or you are not actually critically reading what you quoted me saying.

The third one is my favorite too! Its in lots of books but the kitty was a nice touch!

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Maybe you should go back and edit your post to say "effect," since what you said is "raising minimum wage raises unemployment."

How long does it "raise unemployment"? Does it raise unemployment as in closes industry, or does it "raise unemployment" for a year, and then merely adjust (ya know, when companies realize it's cheaper to just shut up and pay people rather than up and moving their whole operation)?

I mean, I can't promise pie charts, but I can find a study or two:

http://www.uvm.edu/~vlrs/doc/min_wage.htm

or,

http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/issue...e_minwagefacts

There is no evidence of job loss from the last minimum wage increase.

A 1998 EPI study failed to find any systematic, significant job loss associated with the 1996-97 minimum wage increase. In fact, following the most recent increase in the minimum wage in 1996-97, the low-wage labor market performed better than it had in decades (e.g., lower unemployment rates, increased average hourly wages, increased family income, decreased poverty rates).
Studies of the 1990-91 federal minimum wage increase, as well as studies by David Card and Alan Krueger of several state minimum wage increases, also found no measurable negative impact on employment.
New economic models that look specifically at low-wage labor markets help explain why there is little evidence of job loss associated with minimum wage increases. These models recognize that employers may be able to absorb some of the costs of a wage increase through higher productivity, lower recruiting and training costs, decreased absenteeism, and increased worker morale.
A recent Fiscal Policy Institute (FPI) study of state minimum wages found no evidence of negative employment effects on small businesses.

[AChimp]

I would like to reiterate my opinion that minimum wage is for losers and lazy people. This seems like the right time to do so.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Noted.

[Courage the Cowardly Dog]

Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore

Maybe you should go back and edit your post to say "effect," since what you said is "raising minimum wage raises unemployment."

How long does it "raise unemployment"? Does it raise unemployment as in closes industry, or does it "raise unemployment" for a year, and then merely adjust (ya know, when companies realize it's cheaper to just shut up and pay people rather than up and moving their whole operation)?

I mean, I can't promise pie charts, but I can find a study or two:

http://www.uvm.edu/~vlrs/doc/min_wage.htm

or,

http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/issue...e_minwagefacts

interesting. I guess some people won't work unless they are paid what they believe they are worth. Very intrigueing.