school? class? are you still in school? do you have a job? why are you still dwelling in the past? what's your major? do you have a phd in economics? you think you're smarter than these 650 economists (with 5 Nobel Prize winners for economics)? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15227667/ and unless you can prove that you're financially far better off than all of us, I don't believe that you're economically smarter than all of us
Asking T_J to prove something is like asking President Dubya to justify something. All you will get in response is silence.
RMTex -- I only respond to posts when I feel a legitimate argument has been put forth. That is why you don't see me attempting to respond to anything further in this thread. I certainly won't respond to Senor Aurelio, particularly after seeing Ottomaton's signature. I really don't want to associate with that guy. My points continue to stand, and I look forward to a legit challenger stepping forward to debate the issue.
OMG, Buffalo Phil's may have to increase prices?! You've convinced me. Once Buffalo Phil's has to increase prices to cover a $16.80 per employee wage hike, insanity has taken over thus setting into motion the collapse of the American economy. This must be stopped. And your quip about small businesses staying small? A figment of your imagination. Ten years ago, I worked a second job at a local (Bethesda, MD) eatery. They paid well-above minimum wage ($7.50 at the time) to jockey a register. From a single location opened in 1995, they've expanded to 21 locations in three states and the District. Location number 22 will put them in their 4th state and they're a franchising success story. According to you and Skippy, this is, apparently, some sort of financial miracle as you, obviously, believe that paying employees a living wage makes financial success a virtual impossibility.
what does ottomaton's signature have to do with 650 economists pwning you? and who said debating=associating? seeing your pathetic signature does not stop me from debating with you but it does not mean I associate with you..
Good article...I am leary of the increase for the same reasons the article points out...for companies to make the same margin, prices will have to increases, peoples hours will be cut or jobs... Overall, I think it'll hurt more than it helps...
Great news! They passed it. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/10/minimum.wage.ap/index.html Anyone who's ever known anyone who had to support a family on miminum wage or less can appreciate the Dems' work on this bill.
Why do people assume that only labor costs rise when the minimum wage is increased? When the minimum wage is increased, poor people get more money. What do poor people do with their money? They spend it. So you put more money in the hands of the poor, and that convenience store that had to raise its wages is going to sell more products too. Also ignored is that many states already have minimum wages at or near the new levels, so many places won't even get affected at all - and their economies didn't get hurt at all when they raised the minimums in the past.
add to that the fact that there is super small fraction of the nation even affected by the minimum wage increase. 45% of folks working in America are paid by Salary and not hourly. Of those paid hourly only 3% are paid minimum wage or less. I don't think raising the wage for those folks to $7.15 is enough to really cause great damage to our economy or businesses. The reason is that almost nobody makes or pays that. For those that do make minimum, I think the increase would help. Most of those are teenagers.
Thank you for your sensible post. Rich people tend to hoard their wealth and not spend it as much. Poor people need every single dollar they can get. WHy? So they can spend it on stuff that they need for their kids like you know, food, milk, clothing.
I'm against minimum wage laws. It's a market place. Supply and demand. If some kid is willing to do the job for $3 an hour - then so be it. He who is most desperate can work. That being said. I think any business that would force someone who has hepititis C, raising a kid, or paying of medical bills to earn $3 an hour is pretty heartless. What I suggest is a "recommended" wage law. Companies would be able to post their minimum wage but if it is below the minimum wage would be required to register and would not be granted certain benefits from the gov't. Also, all companies should be required to post the minimum wage they pay their workers where their customers can see it. We're not a sweat shop country either, and people have a right to know that they are patronizing places that take care of their employees.
This could work for retail businesses and would be an interesting experiment, I think. But how would the latter part translate to factory jobs and other things that are business-to-business? Businesses don't really care where they get their parts or whatever from and how much those workers are getting paid.
My take on minimum wage is that it is not neccessary. America is a free country. No one can force you to work for a particular wage. If the offer is not high enough for you, pass on the job. If you would be willing to work for what they are offering, then take the job. If no one will work for what a company if offering, they will be forced to raise the wage, but if there are people willing to work for less, the company should be free to hire them.
if you're working for less than minimum wage, chances are you're not supposed to be here, working, in the first place. this is why the all the illegals that are soon to be given amnesty will vote dem in the future. btw, i'm against a minimum wage. if you're going to try and regulate how much or little companies can pay, the least they could do is to make it a livable wage... no lower than something like $10-$11/hr
