General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT editorial: The Case for a Higher Minimum Wage
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
The political posturing over raising the minimum wage sometimes obscures the huge and growing number of low-wage workers it would affect. An estimated 27.8 million people would earn more money under the Democratic proposal to lift the hourly minimum from $7.25 today to $10.10 by 2016. And most of them do not fit the low-wage stereotype of a teenager with a summer job. Their average age is 35; most work full time; more than one-fourth are parents; and, on average, they earn half of their families total income.
None of that, however, has softened the hearts of opponents, including congressional Republicans and low-wage employers, notably restaurant owners and executives...The minimum wage is a battlefield in a larger political fight between Democrats and Republicans dating back to the New Deal legislation that instituted the first minimum wage in 1938 over governments role in the economy, over raw versus regulated capitalism, over corporate power versus public needs.
<...>
WHATS THE POINT OF THE MINIMUM WAGE? Most people think of the minimum wage as the lowest legal hourly pay. Thats true, but it is really much more than that. As defined in the name of the law that established it the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 the minimum wage is a fundamental labor standard designed to protect workers, just as child labor laws and overtime pay rules do. Labor standards, like environmental standards and investor protections, are essential to a functional economy. Properly set and enforced, these standards check exploitation, pollution and speculation...The minimum wage is specifically intended to take aim at the inherent imbalance in power between employers and low-wage workers that can push wages down to poverty levels. An appropriate wage floor set by Congress effectively substitutes for the bargaining power that low-wage workers lack. When low-end wages rise, poverty and inequality are reduced. But that doesnt mean the minimum wage is a government program to provide welfare, as critics sometimes imply in an attempt to link it to unpopular policies. An hourly minimum of $10.10, for example, as Democrats have proposed, would reduce the number of people living in poverty by 4.6 million, according to widely accepted research, without requiring the government to tax, borrow or spend.
<...>
IS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE? No. Other programs, including food stamps, Medicaid and the earned-income tax credit, also increase the meager resources of low-wage workers, but they do not provide bargaining power to claim a better wage. In fact, they can drive wages down, because employers who pay poorly factor the government assistance into their wage scales. This is especially true of the earned-income tax credit...There are good reasons to expand the tax credit for childless workers, as President Obama recently proposed. It is a successful antipoverty program and a capstone in the conservative agenda to emphasize work over welfare. But an expanded E.I.T.C. is no reason to stint on raising the minimum wage just the opposite. A higher minimum wage could help offset the wage-depressing effect of a bolstered E.I.T.C., and would ensure that both taxpayers and employers do their part to make work pay
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/the-case-for-a-higher-minimum-wage.html
ProSense
(116,464 posts)the interactive graphic:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/09/opinion/minimum-wage.html
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)spanone
(135,873 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)When low-end wages rise, poverty and inequality are reduced. But that doesnt mean the minimum wage is a government program to provide welfare, as critics sometimes imply in an attempt to link it to unpopular policies. An hourly minimum of $10.10, for example, as Democrats have proposed, would reduce the number of people living in poverty by 4.6 million, according to widely accepted research, without requiring the government to tax, borrow or spend.
And we all know the republican response will be "But raising the minimum wage will cause unemployment." This has just enough 'logic' in it (the ol' "if something is more expensive you get less of it" to convince those who want to believe despite " d)ecades of research, facts and evidence show that increasing the minimum wage is vital to the economic security of tens of millions of Americans, and would be good for the weak economy." At least they are predictable.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)This is the sort of thing DU is all about, not the divisiveness being sown by the Trolls.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)We have privatized so much government work. Why not privatize the cost or at least part of the cost of food stamps, for example, or Medicaid (what is left of it), etc.?
If privatization is good for the post office, it should be good for other aspects of our economy. If Republicans are really serious about downsizing the food stamp program and Medicaid, etc., they should eagerly support a higher minimum wage.
Hey! While we are at it, if Republicans are serious about paying off our national debt, they should support raising the minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage would, as wages overall rose, possibly increase tax revenue without changing the tax code all that much. If Republicans fight raising the minimum wage, it will be because they enjoy Schadenfreude -- pleasure at the misery or loss of others.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)workers also pay more into social security, unemployment insurance, improving their own economic security in the future.
But, the big winner is the capitalist on Main Street where the money is spend within hours or days of payday!