|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posts: 65472
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:41 pm
Because Gunnair was thinking I'm a little behind on sh*t disturbing... http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -increase/$1: The House on Friday rejected a Democratic push to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10, shooting down one of President Obama’s priorities from his State of the Union speech. The 233-184 defeat also exposed divisions within the Democratic Party. Where Mr. Obama called for a hike from the current $7.25 to $9 an hour, congressional Democrats pushed for a $10.10 rate. But they couldn’t muster unity even within their own ranks. Six Democrats from conservative-leaning districts voted against the wage increase, as did every single Republican who was present. “We need jobs out there. The best approach right now is to get federal spending under control and government out of the way of the nation’s job creators,” said Rep. John Kline, Minnesota Republican, who led the opposition. Mr. Obama’s call for a hike to $9 an hour reportedly caught labor advocates off guard. They had been working towards the $10.10 figure. The White House has not weighed in on the $10.10 raise. Democrats said a wage increase would have applied to 30 million workers and said raising the rate would have paid for itself because while businesses would have had to pay more, they would have seen customers with more money to spend. Their measure would have raised the wage incrementally over three years, and then set it on a path to automatically increase thereafter. The Democrats’ legislation would also have raised the rate for tip-workers, whose minimum wage has been $2.13 an hour for the last two decades. “While corporate profits soar, while the Dow breaks new records and while the CEOs take home 380 times the wages of average workers, the lowest-paid workers are falling behind,” said Rep. George Miller, California Democrat. The vote came as part of the debate on a House bill to streamline job-training programs. That bill passed on a 215-202 vote, with just two Democrats joining the GOP effort, and 14 Republicans defecting to vote against it. Democrats said Republicans missed a chance to write a bipartisan bill.
|
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:55 pm
Time for Obama to grow some balls if he truly believes what he says.
Oh wait this is Obama we are talking about.....yeah no balls.
|
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:00 pm
Sometimes, most of the time actually, the Battle Of The Sound-Bites is incredibly goddamn boring.
|
Posts: 65472
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:05 pm
Thanos Thanos: Sometimes, most of the time actually, the Battle Of The Sound-Bites is incredibly goddamn boring. Yet anymore it's the sound bites that win or lose elections.
|
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:06 pm
Which doesn't say too much for the comprehension skills of the majority of the electorate.
|
Posts: 4661
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:09 pm
If we're talking about the minimum wage, why not create minimum wage brackets by age? Leave it the same or maybe even lower it for everyone under a certain age (I'd use 18), and raise it for everyone above that age.
The benefits I see are increased teenage employment so businesses can still have unskilled workers at market rates and kids can finally get part-time work again. Also, it helps out the few who've made a career out of unskilled labor (I understand this usually isn't by choice).
I'd also like to see the minimum wage tied to inflation, but then the law needs to decide who calculates inflation, and it becomes a huge mess.
|
Posts: 65472
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:22 pm
DanSC DanSC: If we're talking about the minimum wage, why not create minimum wage brackets by age? Leave it the same or maybe even lower it for everyone under a certain age (I'd use 18), and raise it for everyone above that age.
The benefits I see are increased teenage employment so businesses can still have unskilled workers at market rates and kids can finally get part-time work again. Also, it helps out the few who've made a career out of unskilled labor (I understand this usually isn't by choice).
I'd also like to see the minimum wage tied to inflation, but then the law needs to decide who calculates inflation, and it becomes a huge mess. I'd just as soon dispense with the minimum wage as it discriminates against people who simply are not worth whatever the current minimum happens to be. The policy essentially prohibits these people from obtaining a regular job and has created a permanent dependent underclass that votes left for a living.
|
Posts: 21665
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:25 pm
The problem with not having a minimum wage is that you end up with unscrupulous companies that require their employees to pay them for the privilege of working. 
|
Posts: 65472
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:27 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish: The problem with not having a minimum wage is that you end up with unscrupulous companies that require their employees to pay them for the privilege of working.  You mean like taxes? 
|
Posts: 15244
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:28 pm
|
Posts: 21665
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:31 pm
Very similar actually--but levelled by the company instead of the gummint, and tending to add up to more than your wage.
You load 16 tons And what do you get Another day older and deeper in debt St Peter don't you call me 'Cause I can't go I owe my soul to the company store.
|
Posts: 65472
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:49 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish: Very similar actually--but levelled by the company instead of the gummint, and tending to add up to more than your wage.
You load 16 tons And what do you get Another day older and deeper in debt St Peter don't you call me 'Cause I can't go I owe my soul to the company store. Getting rid of the minimum wage will not bring about the return of the company store, sharecropping, slavery, British cuisine, or any other scourge of the past. Company stores were obviated when companies were required to pay their employees in cash and not company scrip. It's also illegal for a firm to charge for uniforms or housing if such is a condition of work.  All I'm proposing is eliminating a law that often makes it impossible for people like ex-convicts, stoners, drunks, and etc. to establish themselves in the work force. For many other people, especially those who live in urban areas, the minimum wage is often irrelevant as market pressures force the prevailing effective minimum wage higher than what the law mandates anyhow. In this case Congress turned down a raise to $10.10 per hour and in much of urban California it's irrelevant since most low-end jobs start their employees not much lower than $15 an hour these days.
|
Posts: 21665
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 3:08 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson: Getting rid of the minimum wage will not bring about the return of the company store, sharecropping, slavery, British cuisine, or any other scourge of the past.
Company stores were obviated when companies were required to pay their employees in cash and not company scrip. It's also illegal for a firm to charge for uniforms or housing if such is a condition of work. But if you get rid of minimum wage, then the clear next step for the companies will be to knock down the next barrier to their profits. So I don't accept that things will not regress. It's already common, at least in Canada, for companies not to pay interns. And, if you don't pay them, they are not subject to any protection under labour law. This appraoch is encouraged by the Government of Canada, which says that "Internships are a great way to gain professional working experience in a field you’re interested in."
|
Posts: 15244
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 3:17 pm
You're dreaming Bart - the minimum wage workforce is already the bottom of the barrel for the most basic human skill of any kind with any degree of liability. There are already lots of stoners, criminals, etc in their ranks.
And the less you pay someone, the less you can expect them to show up regularly and do their job properly. Basically if someone can't get hired at minimum wage, its because the employers don't think the person is able to do the job reliably, not because the manager is saying "gosh, I'd love to put him in this role for five dollars an hour, but dammed if I'll do it for seven!" McDonalds is not going to hire a diseased heroine addict that will probably disappear after his first paycheque just because he'll work for a couple bucks less.
And no person is not going to bust their ass day-in, day-out and take abuse from a boss for less money than they can find in the gutter or get from panhandling.
|
Posts: 11818
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:23 pm
$1: I'd also like to see the minimum wage tied to inflation
That would be nice. You could buy 8 gallons of gas with an hour's minimum wage back in the 1970s. I could almost afford a house in Vancouver at $40 an hour.
|
|
Page 1 of 5
|
[ 70 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests |
|
|