Log In | Register
23 Comments
Printadvertisement
This article is over 14 days old and has been removed by requirement of the Associated Press.
10 Votes- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
Published to:
- The Associated Press's Column, All of Newsvine
- Groups: none
- Regions: none
 | GOP-Run Senate Kills Minimum Wage Increase | Associated Press | Wed Jun 21 | 1 |
 | Senate Votes Against Raising Minimum Wage | FOXNews.com | Thu Jun 22 | 0 |
| GOP-run Senate kills minimum wage increase - Yahoo! News | Yahoo! News | Thu Jun 22 | 8 |
- Public Discussion (23)
What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user
has on the current conversation.
The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd
row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera).
Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group
is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the
left, in their corresponding group.
Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the
number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative
one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their
relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
9.2
3.7
1.1
{"commentId":172335,"authorDomain":"kylen"}
Why were they trying to put it on as an amendment to a defense appropriations bill? True believers in minimum wage should sponsor a bill and support it with facts and debate not try and backdoor it in.
I realize that both parties do this tacking junk onto unrelated bills and I dislike it either way. It it an abuse of the amendment process, that process is supposed to be there to allow changes in the context of the bill not to add totally unrelated things to it.
{"commentId":172335,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"kylen"}
- 2 votes
#1 - Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:09 PM EDT{"commentId":172351,"authorDomain":"softfacts"}
Funny. They have no qualms giving themselves raises...
{"commentId":172351,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"softfacts"}
- 7 votes
#2 - Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:17 PM EDT{"commentId":172431,"authorDomain":"MissDev"}
Eight in eight years, to be specific.
{"commentId":172431,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"MissDev"}
- 5 votes
{"commentId":172496,"authorDomain":"gleuch"}
divisions of the social classes
{"commentId":172496,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"gleuch"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":172518,"authorDomain":"softfacts"}
Anyone else catch the debate on C-SPAN? There was a wonderful plea about how people didn't need more money, they needed more time to love their family. Good stuff.
{"commentId":172518,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"softfacts"}
- 4 votes
{"commentId":172528,"authorDomain":"krisr"}
If a higher minimum wage is a good thing, why don't we raise it to $20? It's simple, most people would agree that it would result in fewer jobs and higher prices.
For some reason feelings are more mixed when the increase isn't as high as $20.
{"commentId":172528,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"krisr"}
- 1 vote
#3 - Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:33 PM EDT{"commentId":172647,"authorDomain":"TheMightyEmu"}
Except that no one is trying to raise it to $20. People's feelings are more mixed because at $20/hour a person supporting a family of four would make double the current poverty threshold established by HHS. As it stands people making minimum wage barely make half the poverty level.
Maybe the minimum wage could be tied to the current poverty threshold. Anyone have any ideas on this?
{"commentId":172647,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"TheMightyEmu"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":173278,"authorDomain":"theottoshow"}
How are you doing your math on this? I come up with completely different numbers when I try to figure out the hourly poverty threshold.
{"commentId":173278,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"theottoshow"}
{"commentId":173343,"authorDomain":"TheMightyEmu"}
The 2006 poverty threshold for a family of 4 is $20,000 according the HHS site. If someone is making $20/hour, I figure:
$20/hour * 40 hours/week = $800/week * 52 weeks/year= $41,600/year gross.
Using the same method at minimum wage, I figure $10,712/year
I didn't figure for net income because of varying state taxes and because whether they use gross or net depends on the government agency. I'm also not accounting for the fact that I wasn't a math major :). If I'm forgetting something, please tell me.
{"commentId":173343,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"TheMightyEmu"}
{"commentId":173444,"authorDomain":"thedaily"}
If you get over the emotion-based arguments, the stubborn fact is that there is almost no one supporting a family on the minimum wage.
The vast majority of minimum wage earners are part-time workers, typically teenagers just entering the labor pool. A high minimum wage would prevent a lot of those inexperienced workers from ever getting their first job, similar to the situation in France (where high wages and job protections give the nation 25% youth unemployment).
Not getting your first job makes it a lot harder to get a second job and so on. Without that relatively low paying first job, a lot of people will never make it to the first rung on the career ladder. Dooming someone to permanent unemployment is not fair or compassionate.
{"commentId":173444,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"thedaily"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":174644,"authorDomain":"TheMightyEmu"}
What is your source for this statement?:
The vast majority of minimum wage earners are part-time workers, typically teenagers just entering the labor pool.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, of the 1.88 million people aged 16 and over making at or below minimum wage, 51.8% work under 35 hours a week, and only 26.1% were aged 16-19. Hardly a 'vast majority' in either case.
The comparison to French youth doesn't match exactly because American businesses paying minimum wage are generally providing at-will employment. Also the argument that businesses won't hire young workers is weak because, according to the act establishing the minimum wage, businesses are allowed to pay a sub-minimum wage (currently $4.25) to workers under 20 years for their first 90 days. If they aren't cutting it at that point, the business owner could choose to let them go for any reason.
{"commentId":174644,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"TheMightyEmu"}
{"commentId":172585,"authorDomain":"moser"}
If broccoli is good for your health, why don't we all eat five pounds of broccoli a day? It's simple, most people would agree that it would result in poor health.
Allright, that's a bit sarcastic, but what I'm trying to get across is that exageration that takes a discussion and pushes it to the level of absurdity to prove that the original argument is invalid, undermines the conversation.
If there is merrit to the oposing argument, then take the time to lay it out. What was the level proposed, what percentage is the increase, what is the current level, why specifically is it a problem?
{"commentId":172585,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"moser"}
- 1 vote
#4 - Wed Jun 21, 2006 7:00 PM EDT{"commentId":172610,"authorDomain":"divbyzero"}
At a part-time job I was working in a computer store a few years ago, the store owner started everyone's wages at $5.25 per hour and ended those wages at $5.25 per hour regardless of experience, unless you were an assistant manager or the store manager. The assistant manager's pay was $5.35 per hour. The manager's pay was $6.00 per hour. Period. End of story. When asked why he didn't pay more despite his business being very profitable, the owner said "Minimum wage is $5.15 per hour. What are you complaining about?" I was thankful that I only worked there out of convenience instead of necessity.
Setting the wage floor is a government function in as much as there is a minimum standard of living that should be acceptable to a civilized society. Government legislates tax breaks for business to promote prosperity and minimum wages to promote a minimum standard of living. If government set the minimum wage at $1.00 per hour there would certainly be employers who would only pay that much. Business defines a "competitive wage" as as being the minimum they can get away with.
{"commentId":172610,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"divbyzero"}
- 1 vote
#5 - Wed Jun 21, 2006 7:12 PM EDT{"commentId":173280,"authorDomain":"softfacts"}
Companies paying their employees the bare minimum is a wonderful way of saying, "We sure wish we could pay you less. Pity that law."
{"commentId":173280,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"softfacts"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":173955,"authorDomain":"vincentgrayson"}
I'm going to have to disagree with you there, Division.
Businesses, that wish to prosper are always going to pay their employees what they are worth.
If an employee is only worth $4/hr to a business for whatever reason, and they're required to pay them $5.15, this benefits no one.
People who are simply trying to be greedy and save/make more money will end up with very few employees to choose from, as all worthwhile employees will seek jobs with companies that pay appropriate wages.
I often wonder how removing the minimum wage completely would effect things...most of the economics books I've read suggest odds are, people would be better off, not worse, on average.
{"commentId":173955,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"vincentgrayson"}
- 3 votes
{"commentId":172619,"authorDomain":"unlogikal"}
And this is why I will never vote Republican. Nevermind the fact I'm unemployed and can't find a job worth diddly @!$%#. Yay for big business, screw the little guy that makes a business big.
{"commentId":172619,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"unlogikal"}
- 2 votes
#6 - Wed Jun 21, 2006 7:17 PM EDT{"commentId":174942,"authorDomain":"PurelyPolitical"}
Nice victim stance there...
{"commentId":174942,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"PurelyPolitical"}
{"commentId":173299,"authorDomain":"PurelyPolitical"}
Every time you raise the minimum raise, you cost someone their job. This system is not supported by a majority of economists and is a bad practice.
{"commentId":173299,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"PurelyPolitical"}
- 2 votes
#7 - Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:33 AM EDT{"commentId":173590,"authorDomain":"Jynne"}
This system is not supported by a majority of economists and is a bad practice.
I would be willing to give these economists more credit if they were living on minimum wage. I understand that most people do not support a household on a minimum wage job (as if the could), but maybe our representatives could stop voting in pay raises for themselves.
I think the fair thing to do, would be to let those making minimum wage vote on the next pay increase for our representatives.
{"commentId":173590,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"Jynne"}
- 1 vote
#8 - Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:03 AM EDT{"commentId":173650,"authorDomain":"thedaily"}
I would be willing to bet that a large number of the economists' first jobs were for the minimum wage (or less).
My first job was for less than minimum wage, but I was a teenager living at home, like most minimum wage earners are. It gave me some needed experience and my next job was for more than minimum wage.
Minimum wage is for entry-level jobs. That is how it is supposed to work.
And that is how it works.
{"commentId":173650,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"thedaily"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":174140,"authorDomain":"abenton"}
Exactly, and this is why its an awesome incentive to go to College. I don't buy the "i never finished high school but why am I only being paid 5$/hr" claim. If you want to be paid for your services, make them worthwhile.
{"commentId":174140,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"abenton"}
{"commentId":174941,"authorDomain":"PurelyPolitical"}
About 2% or less of the American population gets paid minimum wage, and then it is not for very long. Most people get paid more than the minimum, even those working at Wal-Mart.
What? But, but Wal-Mart is evil....that can't be right?
Yep, even Wal-Mart.
When you raise the minimum wages, small business owners have to make a choice, make less profit because of higher wages to workers, or cut some workers loose. Those cut loose then cost money to the total population through welfare/social service costs.
Even when I didn't have a college degree, I was never offered a job at minimum wage. It was always higher. Minimum wage laws are unnecessary.
{"commentId":174941,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"PurelyPolitical"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":176171,"authorDomain":"divbyzero"}
I agree that minimum wage jobs are often entry-level lobs but they do also reflect what a business owner can get away with. In my part of the country entry-level fast food jobs are paying $11 an hour, but at the same time 1-bedroom apartments are renting at $900 per month. If employers in this area could get away with paying less I'm certain they would, but they would simply not find anyone to hire at lower wages. Yes, Wal-Mart pays more than the minimum wage (and always has, as far as I know) but they pay less than most other retailers because they can get away with it. At the same time Wal-Mart store managers make 2-3 times their salary in bonuses for keeping payroll expenses low. It is those of us who have nice jobs that pay far above minimum wage who tend to view minimum wage laws as unnecessary.
My very first job paid 15 cents more than minimum wage. During college I worked for the university and was paid at minimum wage. My first job after finishing college paid twice minimum wage. My current salary is more than 8 times minimum wage. I could easily argue that minimum wage laws are unnecessary but I can't be on the side of "The Man" on this issue because I know "The Man" has never been on my side.
{"commentId":176171,"threadId":"19631","contentId":"262623","authorDomain":"divbyzero"}
- 1 vote
#9 - Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:40 PM EDT{"canLink":false,"threadId":"19631","isPrivate":false}
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
Start Tracking
Stop TrackingCOMPANY STUFF:
LEGAL STUFF:
- © 2005-2009 Newsvine, Inc. |
- Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
- Newsvine is a property of
