Posted on 01/27/2014 1:26:34 AM PST by Olog-hai
Minimum-wage increase proposals are getting the maximum push from Democrats in statehouses in more than half of U.S. states, highlighting the politically potent income inequality issue this year.
Lawmakers in at least 30 states are sponsoring or are expected to introduce wage hike measures, according to a national review by The Associated Press. They hope to notch state-level victories as President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats remain stymied in attempts to raise the federal minimum wage above $7.25 an hour. The president is expected to mention the minimum wage in his State of the Union address Tuesday.
Even in Republican-dominated capitals where the bills are long shots, the measures still give Democrats a chance to hammer home the popular theme of fair wages in what is an election year in most places. …
(Excerpt) Read more at bigstory.ap.org ...
Robots can work 24/7, are very precise, and you do not have to provide it with healthcare, etc etc etc. That means more Americans will be unemployed while the labor savings will be pocketed by the corporation and bonuses will increase for CEO and exec staff.........................
The problem with this scenario is that if no one is employed then no one is going to be buying what the robots produce and the CEO will get nothing...
Small businesses will be hardest hit. Eventually prices of goods & services will have to be raised.
Dang too bad Boehner & co don’t have the Conservative foundation to counter this dumb proposal.
When economists discuss monetary value, which is the purchasing power of that unit, they allways refer to the top value of the coin of the realm in our (US) case it’s the dollar which is composed of 100 cents not the most basic unit which is the penny. .
A case in point is in the 1940’s a candy bar cost 5 cents when the hourly minimum wage was $.50 per hour. What does it cost today ? Likewise what were the costs of basic goods and services during that period of time as compared with todays basic wage feel good tinkering ?
Who gets hurt the worst when these adjustments are decreed by government? It’s those living on fixed incomes who’s income value is based on previous minimum wage levels such as social security but not adjusted to the previous current rates of inflation. That also includes living on government subsidies we call “welfare” but those subsidies eventually get increased. But never those receiving “Social Security” .
When these feel good socialists frauds who have taken over the democratic in name only party banner propose these increases. That is never considered as they pound their breasts claiming they’re for the little guy. All they’re doing is un-necessarily raising the price on goods and services broadening the demand that those affected seek help from them..
My reply to Fee is that a rise in the minimum wage might give short-tern benefit to the Dems as a wedge issue, but that it does NOTHING to solve the “income inequality” “problem,” nor the decline in middle class jobs.
Is the Administration trying to shift subsidies onto the private sector?
The constant push for higher minimum wages, as high as $15, would shift the burden of subsidizing low income and low information people to the private sector.
Government will be praised as heroes while (un) intended consequences would make life worse for those poor subjects who will follow like lemmings down the proverbial cliff.
What they will encounter is to lose eligibility for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid and other State and federal programs, leaving them worse off than before. Because of their newly found “wealth”, they would be classified as the “new middle class” courtesies of their compassionate Administration. All the while the federal coffers would increase because of cost savings.
The evil Corporations would be blamed for causing this problem for not paying for extra subsistence.
I don’t believe that that calculation has not already been made by the Agencies?
This is only my personal opinion and I could be wrong.
My take on this whole issue is that the powers that be are going to continue to export American/European jobs to the Third World, and that in 30-40 years we will have a world proletariat, and we will still have the 1% running things, and we will all be brainwashed into thanking the 1% for our apartments and our $15/hr jobs and our free health care and free birth control and our increasingly bizarre entertainment.
I think we both sense that the government under Obama has become basically fascist, i.e., “you, big business, will become an agent of government, or we will destroy you.” To me, that is one of the most frightening aspects of the Obama admin - they are bullying everyone into being a player with them, or being destroyed.
Is income inequality a “problem” to be “solved?"In reality it is merely a political opportunity for propagandists.In America, “poor” people live in more spacious housing than the average European - say nothing of the average Japanese - and, the typical “poor” American is overweight. An American secretary is better of materially - because of health care that actually works, dramatically better transportation, just as good food - than Queen Victoria was in her day.
There is no obvious reason why people who prepare diligently, then work effectively, should make the same income as someone who follows Obama’s prescription and avoids well-paying employment.Keep in mind that the “lowest quintile of the income distribution” is loaded with young people just starting out. All the so-called “minimum” wage does is force employers to eliminate entry-level jobs - that is, make the actual wage for those jobs zero. If the pay for entry-level jobs were enough to support a family of four - as some such employees have insisted - those employees would presumably be content to stay in such jobs, making it that much harder for the next cohort of younger people to find entry-level work.
I agree with your other points and especially the last. It has been a growing cancer on our society with the unholy alliance with big business and big government being one in the same. Like you say, the sorry thing is the lemmings will continue to believe everything that is spoon fed to them as thought.
So we don’t need a national one...
Let the states deal with it. The federal government should step aside. The states are the ones with the pulse of their own economy. State’s Rights is out the door with the Obama Administration.
Free Health Care ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.