General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums📺 @BernieSanders tonight at 6pm ET will join @NewsHour .
PBS NewsHour live episode, Mar. 4, 2021
betsuni
(25,472 posts)Wait, incrementalism is okay now?
Celerity
(43,328 posts)Here is one from 2 years ago.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/150
betsuni
(25,472 posts)Incrementalism has been a very very bad thing for him and his supporters.
Celerity
(43,328 posts)of the comparative components.
Cheers
betsuni
(25,472 posts)Celerity
(43,328 posts)betsuni
(25,472 posts)Type in "incrementalism" into the DU site search.
Celerity
(43,328 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 5, 2021, 08:51 AM - Edit history (1)
Your statement used the word now, which is not applicable to this particular subject, as Sanders always has used multi-year phase-ins for his wage increase bills. There is no new action in this bill compared to his past ones, thus your analogy is faulty.
Sanders is many things, but he is not a fool about macro and micro economics. He is well aware that more than doubling the baseline minimum wage in a single fiscal year would have serious systemic knock-on effects, and could possibly generate exogenous shocks that could have destabilising outcomes both large and small. A multi-year glidepath allows for much of that to be avoided.
Some of the potential drivers of that systemic turbulence would be due to the fact that it would not just be the sub 15 usd per hour workers who would get wage increases. Many more wage cohorts would also see increases as well, as there are a multiplicity of interlocks with negotiated labour contracts that are pegged to the minimum wage via an assortment of adjustment formulae.
Celerity
(43,328 posts)the logical/rhetorical error you made. There is no 'now' aspect to his 5 year rollout. It is not at all a new stance, thus your analogy falls apart and fails logical scrutiny when you tried to inject a critique of his critiques of incrementalism in such manner. Anyone following along with this colloquy can easily see that.
I also gave a bit of background and context to the subject of phase-in durations for macro wage increases that partially (there may be other reasons that I did not touch upon) explains the reasons Sanders has previously taken a multi-year approach in regards to phased-in increases of the minimum wage. The same multi-year phase-in he is doing right now has been his modus operandi for years.
betsuni
(25,472 posts)Celerity
(43,328 posts)OnDoutside
(19,953 posts)did they want it ? NOW !!!
I applaud Bernie for his stance, and his acceptance of realpolitik. I would rather people encourage him to do more of it and that his supporters understand why he is doing what he is doing. This is all positive.
betsuni
(25,472 posts)isn't, it's all positive.
Incrementalism is okay.
Nixie
(16,950 posts)him with this incrementalism thing. I was called many names for remembering he said incrementalism was bad.
Thank you. Incrementalism was very very bad. The myth that Teddy Roosevelt, FDR and LBJ were democratic socialists and Democrats have shifted to the right or whatever. No.
Nixie
(16,950 posts)Donkees
(31,383 posts)Rep. Sanders H.R.2812 - Minimum Wage Restoration Act 2001
Sponsor: Rep. Sanders, Bernard [I-VT-At Large] (Introduced 08/02/2001)
Committees: House - Education and the Workforce
H.R.2812 - Minimum Wage Restoration Act
Minimum Wage Restoration Act - Amends the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to increase the minimum wage (currently $5.15 per hour): (1) to $6.65, for 2002; (2) to $8.15, for 2003; and (3) by indexing to the cost of living, in the same manner as benefits are indexed under the Social Security Act, for 2004 and thereafter.
(Just one example)