Late this past week Republican leaders in the House of Representatives caved to pressure from the moderate wing of their party and proposed raising the minimum wage, hammerlocked at a paltry $5.15 an hour since 1997 by the Republican-controlled Congress. But in yet another example of greed disguised as ideology, their proposal was coupled to a cut in inheritance taxes on multimillion-dollar estates, a cut that would each year benefit only the tiniest sliver - about 13,000 - of America's wealthiest.
Tying the elimination of the estate tax to what would at best be called only a modest step towards establishing a living wage for millions of working poor demonstrates once again the Republican leadership's callous disregard for low-income Americans. Knowing full well that the Senate would vote down any bill eliminating the estate tax, House leaders hope only with this ploy to give cover to their moderate colleagues for the fall elections, while ensuring the wage hike does not become law.
That is not to say that even if the minimum wage hike, proposed at $2.10 over three years, were uncoupled from the estate tax measure the Senate would vote its approval. It was just in June that the Republican-controlled Senate rejected a Democratic proposal to raise the minimum wage to just $7.25 over two years.
The fifteen million American workers laboring at forty hours a week at the current minimum wage make just $10,700 a year, barely above the federal poverty level for a single person but well below that for a family of two, let alone three, or four. For 2006, the federal poverty level stands at a laughably low $20,000 for workers with a spouse and two children. Even at $7.25 an hour, the worker's annual income would rise to just $15,080 - far from a living wage for a head of household.
Inflation has eroded the minimum wage's buying power to the lowest level in fifty-one years. Tired of waiting for Washington, twenty states have already passed minimum wages higher than the federal level. Six more may have minimum wage hikes on the November ballot. And, in Chicago, the city council just this past week passed an ordinance requiring workers make a living wage of at least $10 an hour by 2010.
Over seventy percent of Americans support raising the federal minimum wage. Seventy percent either see or are one of the millions of Americans who are working as hard as they can but still need some help to stay afloat. Seventy percent of us are fair-minded enough to recognize that the economy exists to support society and people, not the other way around. This seventy percent must include a fair number of self-labeled Republicans, though obviously not those at the helm of their party.
More than five years under a Republican leadership whose fiscal and social policy takes good care of the rich but shuns the poor, everyday Americans are realizing that the benefits are clearly not trickling down. More than thirty-six million Americans now live in poverty, and over forty million more live in near-poverty. Millions of workers have been displaced from high-end to low-end jobs, and America has gone from being a manufacturing dynamo to having a WalMart, McJobs economy.
Yet the Republican Party leadership is still offering the same sermon, preaching that the solution to poverty is to grow the economy out of the problem, to cut taxes on the wealthy so severely that the revenue generated by their reinvestment will more than offset losses to the Treasury.
But rather than foster growth, the massive Republican tax cuts for rich (read: Republican) people - not to mention their catastrophic blunder in Iraq - have instead over five short years fostered enormous deficits and a growing American underclass. Their free-spending, revenue-slashing, help-the-wealthy and damn-the-deficits style of governing has led to growing economic unfreedom for working families, and greater income inequality between the richest Americans and the rest of us.
Poor and middle-class Americans today are working harder and longer than ever, saving less, borrowing more, commuting longer distances, and increasingly doing without. Larger numbers of working Americans are just trying to survive, trying to stand on their own two feet and take care of their families. Individuals and families are struggling ever more to meet basic needs, and to make ends meet.
The poor and middle-class are losing ground in America, even as they do all the things that society says that they should. But the Republicans keep telling us that the economy is growing - so don't worry, be happy!
But as the economy expands year after year, low-paying jobs increase and good jobs leave the country. Poverty rises, and the real incomes of working families stagnate. Pensions decline, and health care becomes a luxury. On their watch, the economy may indeed by doing fine, but the people in it quite simply are not.
This November, it is time for Americans to say "no more!" to the fiscal and social policies of the Republican leadership that have resulted in billions of dollars fleeing our Treasury and our pocketbooks. "No more!" cutting taxes on the wealthy and spending on the poor. "No more!" shifting debt to the next generations. "No more!" indecent wages for decent, hard-working Americans.
Families that work hard and full-time shouldn't be poor in America. This November, Americans need to elect politicians of every stripe who will support a living family income, who will put poverty relief ahead of tax relief for the rich, and who will put the interests and needs of America's workers ahead of corporations and wealthy estate-owners. In the fight against poverty, there's no Republican or Democrat way - there's only the right way. We have the wallet - can we find the will?
www.strangeanimals.us
Todd Huffman is a pediatrician and writer living in Eugene, Oregon. He is a regular contributor to many newspapers and publications throughout the Pacific Northwest.
What a shame that we keep uping the minimum wage. That just demeans the rest of us that had to work hard to get to the level that newbies are now going to get paid just to start with. So I worked all those years to get raises and now Joe Shmoe will get that automaticly. What a crock. It is not fair that there even is a minimum wage. What ever happened to having to earn your money?
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Saturday, July 29, 2006 at 1:17:44 PM
With regard to the comment from snginga: Since it is obvious you have spent most if not all of your life underneath a rock and have barely two brain cells to rub together to create a spark of intellect, I would suggest you model your life after the following bit of wisdom from Mark Twain - "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt".
by
Daniel Felt (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Saturday, July 29, 2006 at 3:55:20 PM
In the midst of this silly battle between the two above we should not lose sight of the point of this article. We have a legislature that gives itself ample pay raises with frequency yet refuses to consider the plight of the working poor in this country.
While Snginga bewails the pittance given to entry level and unskilled labor I note that my first job paid me $0.95/hour. Granted this was more than a few years ago but I certainly fail to understand why this poster thinks a boost in the minimum wage is somehow an insult to him? It has absolutely nothing to do with him unless he is making the current minimum, then he gets a raise, who loses here?
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Sunday, July 30, 2006 at 12:55:32 AM
One- The government Has no business dictating what I shall pay my employees. Any of them. That is an agreement entered into between the employer and the employee at the time of higher. It should not be generalized or standardized, as it is an individual agreement based not only on the position needing to be filled , but equally on the skill and experience of the individual.
If there is to be a federal wage then it should apply to federal employees.
Two- Have you not considered the countless workers that could have moved up the ladder, but have made the decision NOT to, and now get a undeserving raise?
Third- For all those people out there that you may believe are going to be helped by a higher minimum wage, there are going to be many, many that will now lose their jobs. Many will not be hired that would have and others will be forced to be let go. I fail to see how that is acceptable.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Sunday, July 30, 2006 at 7:39:49 AM
Regarding snginga's comments:
One - According to the Constitution of the United States, one of the functions of our government is "to promote the general welfare". That gives our government the right to impose some restrictions on our (U. S. citizens) lives. The laws whereby our government interferes with business have come about because business has shown a propensity to disregard the common good for the sake of profit. Anti-pollution laws, child labor laws, workplace safety laws, all were written in response to the fact that business would not act responsibly without being coerced by force of law.
Two - That does not follow. I think that you are equating not taking on a position with more responsiblilty and therefore a earning a higher wage (moving up the ladder) with not getting a cost of living raise which again does not follow. As to countless workers who have turned down a cost of living raise -- I suppose zero is a countless number.
Three - Opponents of minimum wage increases alway bring this up but I have yet to see this actually happen. There will always be entry level jobs.
by
Mike (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Sunday, July 30, 2006 at 10:03:10 AM
Your employees have a right to band together to negotiate their wages as a group. The American people have a right to set minimum standards for treatment of employees via their elected government. This means you can't sexually harass your female employees, have 12 year olds toiling away in boiler rooms for 70 hours a week, beat your employees with a bullwhip for not working hard enough, or pay them less than half of what it takes to get above the poverty level. The real shame is that so many American businesspeople treat workers as a unit of production rather than as a valued resource. That's one of the reasons why foreign companies are running them out of the marketplace. Treat your employees well and they will produce more.
by
Jack Bolton (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Sunday, July 30, 2006 at 11:02:38 AM
One- That is quite a stretch to example a government set wage as constitutionaly grounded in its mandate for the general welfare of the people. On that broad pretense you could justify almost anything. Not a very good argument.
The federal government has no right to dictate what a private business can and can not pay his employees. Safety concerns are in quite a different matter. I think that is obvious to everyone and does not need further explanation
When the federal government begins to force private business to pay wages and then benefits they are dictating, not governing.
Two- I am not equating moving up the ladder with a cost of living increase. First, a cost of living increase is a term used by politicians to justify unwarranted pay raises. In the real world there is no such thing. I have been gainfully employed for 25 years and I have never, ever, heard of anybody ever receiving a raise based on a "cost of living increase". Unless of course you are talking about unions, and a debate on how unions have hurt this country is another topic for another day. But in the real world of the working class there are no "cost of living pay raises".
What I was referring too are people that are content on making a minimum wage when they have the choice to make more but choose not to. They do not want to work. So now they will get a raise in pay, though it is undeserved. I know people personally that could make 3 dollars an hour more if she would just take the job as cashier at the local supermarket, it has been offered to her. but she will not and continues to stuff inserts into the local newspaper for minimum wage. Now she gets a raise.
Three- It is simple math. I will now higher one competent employee at lets say 11 dollars an hour, then hire two minimum wage earners and now have to pay them each 8 dollars an hour. There are many positions that private, small business owners will just do with out now. Many companies are small, only two employees, maybe three, and they will not add a fourth but rather divide the workload amongst what they have or do it themselves. I work for a company with two employees. Small businesses are the backbone of this country
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Sunday, July 30, 2006 at 12:12:21 PM
You live, Im sorry to say, in a world of selfish delusion. Santa Fe, New Mexico raised the minimum wage despite the folks like you crying that it would end badly. Today, Santa Fe is booming as that wage hike made workers more dedicated, attracted a better class of worker to that city and then attracted many businesses eager to ustilize that better work force. This is fact and you could, if you choose, look it up.
You remind of Scrooge, living in a sad little space with no regard for the world or apparently your own workers. You should be ashamed of your ignorance.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Tuesday, August 1, 2006 at 9:12:01 PM
Oh, and here is one more point. Let me put it as a question.
Do you think companies will be more or less likely to look outside of this country for labor? Do you think there will be more sneakers being made in this country, more shirts,more of almost everything you can buy, made in this country now or less?
Obviously large companies will look for cheaper labor outside of this country. Thats the result of having a higher minimum wage. Just look at the tag on the next garmet you buy and see where it was made.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Sunday, July 30, 2006 at 12:35:43 PM
Once this nation was agrarian, most people worked in farm related employment. Then we moved to a manufacturing base, now we see the rise of the former third world into the twenty first century and the restructuring, yet again, of the American economy.
We are now a nation of technology, we invent and explore new developments and charge for their creation, this is not, as you would have us believe, a bad thing created because workers had the gall to protect themselves from arrogant employers such as you who would have us all back in the dawn of the industrial revolution so you can make another buck.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Wednesday, August 2, 2006 at 7:20:45 AM
Minimum-wage boost defeated. Thank God for that. Raising the minimum wage is the absolute worst thing we could do in this country. The jobs that would be lost and the surge in Mexicans coming across the border for whats left would be disasterous.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Friday, August 4, 2006 at 8:43:37 AM
Do you watch yourself in the mirror while you post?
You are onviously a dedicated neocon but your tactic of ignoring the facts cited makes you small.
The minimum wage bill was saddled with an unacceptable rider that could not be passed, a neat trick upon the bill and upon the working class in this nation. Only a hard hearted and small minded soul as yours would applaud such.
I again note the [b]city of Santa Fe, New Mexico[/b] and challenge you to explain its booming economy resulting for its raise of the minimum wage...or do facts that challenge or fail to support simply fail to exist in your silly little world?
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Saturday, August 5, 2006 at 2:28:53 PM
Challenge me to explain the booming economy in Santa Fe, New Mexico? You have GOT to be joking! Im sorry!--but that is hilarious! I am finding it hard to believe that you are serious!
OK, on the outside chance that you are truly serious, then I will answer your silly challenge.
Sante Fe, New Mexico PROVES my point! Uh- duh! It is full of ILLEGAL ALIENS! WHO DO YOU THINK IS WORKING THERE FOR THE MINUMUM WAGE????
Wow, I still can't beleive you are so ignorant as to honestly bring that challenge. Please tell me you were joking.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Saturday, August 5, 2006 at 11:33:59 PM
You have finally exposed your ignorance for all to see
I thank you most heartedly for your abysmally stupid comment re: the economy of Santa Fe. You could have, if you had any modicum of intellect, googled and found Santa Fe to be, yes, BOOMING. I might add, to offset your racism, that skilled workers ( not your nightmare of border crossing illegals but actual American workers) flock to that city to take advantage of the higher minimum wage, enacted a few years earlier.
You know nothing, are unwilling to learn anything and add absolutely nothing to the discussion here...congratulations.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Monday, August 7, 2006 at 8:36:57 PM
I could have written your response. It is very typical of you.
Once again when faced with truth and reality, you slip into your own twisted world that ignores the facts and refuses to acknowledge reality.
That you deny the overwhelming evidence of the illegal worker problem in New Mexico, And the dominate percentage of them working for minimum wage, well, It's not even debateable. The rest of the world sees one thing, and you won't open your eyes. There are none so blind then those that refuse to see. Just another example of you calling white black and black white.
It is kind of scarey to think that there are those like you that have no concept of what the real world is, and yet think that they should be heard.
At least the powers that be have more sense then you. And fortunately for us I doubt that you will ever have any more impact on anything, other then your own small little world, then a meaningless blog.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Monday, August 7, 2006 at 9:51:40 PM
Let me see,... I will leave my minimum wage job here at McDonald's, and I will just pack it all up and move to Santa Fe for the minimum wage job at McDonald's over there.........
Yes, I have plenty of money to be able to move anywhere I want.....
My family and friends work for minimum wage pal, and let me tell you, there is no way on earth they have the where-with-all to be able to MOVE anywhere!
Do you not see how absurd your statement was? - Let me spell it out, since you are slow, People that make minimum wage do not relocate. Especially to make minimum wage somewhere else. How completely unattached from reality you are. How many adults do you know personally that make minimum wage? Any?
Why don't you go live with minimum wage workers for a while before you start to make assumptions about there lifestyle.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Monday, August 7, 2006 at 10:18:54 PM
First you are an employer, now you are a minimum wage worker, what next neurosurgeon?
My suggestion remians, do a bit of research on the raise in minimum wage and its consequences for the city of Santa Fe before you further emabrrass yourself by citing such sophomoric crap.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 at 7:11:23 AM
It is you that needs to do some research. You live in a world that is out of touch with working class minimum wage earners. You have no idea what it is like to literally live paycheck to paycheck just to survive, I doubt you know what it is like to be homeless, or to go to bed night after night hungry. Untill you have walked in our shoes, do us a favor, and shut it. Please keep your uniformed, secondhand misinformation to yourself.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 at 6:29:39 PM
Acording to your profile you are, and I quote," a certified master technician" WTF does that have to do with associations with or being a member of the lowest class of worker? You have displayed an abysmal knowledge of economics, foreign and domestic policies, the constitution of the USA and only have a handful of posts...goodness. Whatever happened, I wonder, to being an employer who paid minimum wage, as you once claimed? What a buffoon!
You are, sorry to say, a sham, a fraud and probably a high school student playing games with your betters......Ill be so glad when school resumes!
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 at 7:09:25 PM
Wonders never cease, It took this poster two weeks after thinking I was female to finally read my profile. And that from somebody who seems to like to think of himself as somebody that relies and researches facts! HaHa.
Anyway I do not feel very compelled to respond to his accusations about my life and background, however since this was not in my profile, I will oblige to a point.
My "association" with homelessness and minimum wage workers comes from close to 15 years of my life where I was in and out of homelessness and I worked minimum wage jobs to survive. I had nights upon nights going to bed hungry and I know what it is like sleeping on the city sidewalk.
Now those days are behind me. I am now a master certified technician and I make a comfortable living for my family. I own two homes and rent one.
I am a Minister. My calling is to prisoners. I have been part of Kairos prison minister for the last 4 years and I am the music minister at my church. I am a self taught guitarist. I enjoy leading worship and teaching.
I have said this because I am not ashamed and I give all the credit and the glory to God who saved my life.
To the poster I say once again, try to see through your hate and see the truth that is plain to everyone that opens his eyes. The truth will set you free. Your hate breeds more hate and leads to destruction.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Wednesday, August 9, 2006 at 7:20:03 PM
As is always the case when a lie is confronted with the truth, the liar is cornered with no place to go.
Ardee is a good case and point. What I have spoken during my pasts post for all to read is the truth. Now in the face of who I am, and the honest truth of what I have said, Ardee is forced to post incoherent gibberish.
We minister to people who are lost. It is part of human compassion to share the good news. But when somebody rejects the truth, then they have chosen their path, and are without excuse.
by
scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Friday, August 11, 2006 at 6:43:24 PM
Not one single post of yours is above the level of freshman in High School. You have responded to fact with insult and stupidly paraphrased nonesense gathered from right wing commentators who earn millions lying to fools like you.
It is a wonder you allow yourself to look so abysmally foolish, have you no pride at all?
I still note the issue of the minimum wage and your racist and ignorant responses in which you claimed (lied) to be an employer paying such a wage and refused to search the facts regarding one city that did indeed raise that wage and boosted its economy hugely. Instead you babbled in an almost psychotic fashion about illegal aliens flooded Santa Fe, which any rational and sane person using any reputable search engine can refute in moments....what a clown!
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Sunday, August 13, 2006 at 4:02:54 PM
