jump to navigation

Minimum Wage Increase July 28, 2006

Posted by j-dub in National, Politics.
trackback

Here’s one story.

And a quote:

Democrats have been pushing to increase the minimum wage, now at $5.15-per-hour, in three 70-cent increments to total $7.25 by January 1, 2009.

Personally, I’m all for it. Think about those getting paid $5.15 per hour, with gas $3 a gallon. I don’t make the minimun and gas is a HUGE strain on my budget.  Not to mention all the other everday items that are inflated in price.

I’m sure this will also be a huge expense for businesses to take on, but businesses should be able to recoup the difference in various methods (increase prices, decrease expenses, etc).

Also, if you know anything about running a business, you’re people ARE your business; so why not pay’em?

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Anonymous - July 28, 2006

This is something that has been long overdue, but the .70 may be a bit of a hit for smaller businesses to swallow every year. I would suggest an increase every other year or a lower increase every year until 2010. A large increase, while needed, has the opposite effect of lower hiring rates and decreased hours. Imagine a small company with 200 workers must shell out a few extra grand per employee every year times 200. That will cut into profit, expansion, natural raises, etc. Believe me, this is a needed change, but I hope legislators are not blinded that this will only affect large retailers. While they will be able to absorb the higher rates the smaller ones will find it difficult.

2. j-dub - July 28, 2006

Here’s an updated link to the wage increase story.

Appears to be some interesting political manuevering associated with the wage hike. I can’t figure out whether the Reps are worried about small-business or big-business with their dealings.

3. j-dub - August 2, 2006

Well, yet another update on the minimum wage vote that is expected on friday.

Republicans want to attach a decrease in the Estate Tax which would let ridiculously rich people to exempt $5 – 10 MILLION (5 for individual, 10 for couples) of their estates from taxation by 2015.

I’m really peaved that they have to attach some benefit for the rich to the minimum wage increase bill. That’s pretty twisted if you ask me. They’re raising the minimum by $2.10 over 3 years time, but yet Republicans feel the filthy rich need a break also?

What a joke.

4. Anonymous - August 2, 2006

j,
This is the game of politics and grandstanding. I understand where you are coming from, but let me explain a few things about the Estate Tax that I have come to realize and even a significant number of Democrats have begun to understand.

The death tax affects not only wealthy big business owners, but modest small businesses including ranches, farmers, small tech firms and homeowners. For minority business this could be a crushing tax burden forcing them into near bankruptcy which has happened to farms who saw their property values quadruple in some cases because of urban sprawl.

The tax also discourages savings and investment among smaller businesses and in fact undermines job growth, wages, etc.

The only people who make out like bandits in this besides the government are lawyers and CPAs.

It also has an affect on charitable contributions. I saw an estimate last year (btw, over 50 Ds voted for the repeal) when the vote came up for conitnuation of the repeal and they noted that charitable contributions were up a record 25% over past years due largely because of the repeal. The converse of that is the money that went to charities would otherwise had gone to the government.

Last, but not least, it always struck me as rather sick to be taxed when you die whether you are very rich or had accumulated some modest wealth.

Personally, what I would like to see is a form of flat tax come into play.

5. j-dub - August 2, 2006

I would love a flat tax. That makes the most sense, not to mention the most fair of any option.

I guess I don’t have much sympathy for the filthy rich who have the capability to worry about 5 to 10 million dollars or even “modest wealth”. I don’t think they should be taken to the woodshed, but they sure don’t need to be looked upon as needy either.

Personally, I would rather see the tax stay high so they continue to donate money. I’d rather charitable organizations recieve free money than the government. They shouldn’t be donating money to avoid the tax, but because they want to.

I was amazed at Bill Gate’s contributions to the AIDS cause. He’s personally donated hundreds of millions of dollars of his own money and helped to raise BILLIONS more; even started his own foundation for the cause.

These politican types need to take notice and take the focus off of themselves and their “friends”, democrat or republican, and get with the program.

6. j-dub - August 4, 2006

Looks like the vote failed 56-42 (it needed 60 senate votes).  It sounds as if it will be brought back to the table right before the November elections.

Heres a story….


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: