Minimum Wage - Does it Help or Hurt?
Today the minimum wage bill from Senator Kennedy (D) was shot down in the Senate (article).The bill wanted to increase the minimum wage in incremental steps to $7.25 an hour after a little more then a year once the law would have been enacted. It was known the vote would lose, but Democrats had brought it up as an election year issue (like the gay ban for the republicans), it gives them ammo to use in campaigns.
I always wondered which side of the argument had more merit, whether increases in minimum wages helped low income workers or hurt them by causing small businesses to lay them off. Senator Enzi (R) had a proposal that would raise the minumum wage by $1.10, but give businesses tax breaks.
Supporters of the minimum wage says it helps workers since the increase in income will mean more buying power (the republican philosophy on tax cuts is the same, more tax cuts means more people buying). They also say it encourages low wage workers to complete or return to school. Opoonents say it takes away jobs and decreases the field of available low wage workers. It also increases the burden on the government due to layoffs.
After doing a bit of reading, I would have to support the minimum wage increase. While the bill Senator Enzi brought was reasonable middle ground, it is not good at this point due to the massive budget deficits we currently have. Taxes will eventually have to go up somewhere to pay for all the debt our country is in. We are already seeing the change at the local level in many of the states where aid is being cut and taxes are going up to pay debt and make up for a lack of federal funding.
The argument that opponents make saying less low wage workers will be available with a raise is very poor in my book. Their should not be any person who is paid that low a wage. Paying someone $5.15 an hour is pretty much free work in today's economy and the argument that workers laid of will be a burden on the government is poor, since those workers are already a burden due to their income, most are probably on food stamps and MedicAid, if they had a decent income, they would have more buying power and would need less from the government. I cannot see how even two parents making minimum wage would be able to support a family or themselves, the combined income would be about $21-$22,000. A single person would not even be able to pay rent for an apartment, they would be making $824 a month before taxes were cut out.
In a lot of states they have already taken the initiative to raise the minimum wage. It has not been raised in 8 years to even stay up with inflation. In this time, politicians have received nearly $30,000 in raises. If we make the argument that it will hurt small businesses, then when will we finally raise it? That argument cannot be made forever.
Digg
Today the minimum wage bill from Senator Kennedy (D) was shot down in the Senate (article).The bill wanted to increase the minimum wage in incremental steps to $7.25 an hour after a little more then a year once the law would have been enacted. It was known the vote would lose, but Democrats had brought it up as an election year issue (like the gay ban for the republicans), it gives them ammo to use in campaigns.
I always wondered which side of the argument had more merit, whether increases in minimum wages helped low income workers or hurt them by causing small businesses to lay them off. Senator Enzi (R) had a proposal that would raise the minumum wage by $1.10, but give businesses tax breaks.
Supporters of the minimum wage says it helps workers since the increase in income will mean more buying power (the republican philosophy on tax cuts is the same, more tax cuts means more people buying). They also say it encourages low wage workers to complete or return to school. Opoonents say it takes away jobs and decreases the field of available low wage workers. It also increases the burden on the government due to layoffs.
After doing a bit of reading, I would have to support the minimum wage increase. While the bill Senator Enzi brought was reasonable middle ground, it is not good at this point due to the massive budget deficits we currently have. Taxes will eventually have to go up somewhere to pay for all the debt our country is in. We are already seeing the change at the local level in many of the states where aid is being cut and taxes are going up to pay debt and make up for a lack of federal funding.
The argument that opponents make saying less low wage workers will be available with a raise is very poor in my book. Their should not be any person who is paid that low a wage. Paying someone $5.15 an hour is pretty much free work in today's economy and the argument that workers laid of will be a burden on the government is poor, since those workers are already a burden due to their income, most are probably on food stamps and MedicAid, if they had a decent income, they would have more buying power and would need less from the government. I cannot see how even two parents making minimum wage would be able to support a family or themselves, the combined income would be about $21-$22,000. A single person would not even be able to pay rent for an apartment, they would be making $824 a month before taxes were cut out.
In a lot of states they have already taken the initiative to raise the minimum wage. It has not been raised in 8 years to even stay up with inflation. In this time, politicians have received nearly $30,000 in raises. If we make the argument that it will hurt small businesses, then when will we finally raise it? That argument cannot be made forever.
Digg
I always wondered which side of the argument had more merit, whether increases in minimum wages helped low income workers or hurt them by causing small businesses to lay them off. Senator Enzi (R) had a proposal that would raise the minumum wage by $1.10, but give businesses tax breaks.
Supporters of the minimum wage says it helps workers since the increase in income will mean more buying power (the republican philosophy on tax cuts is the same, more tax cuts means more people buying). They also say it encourages low wage workers to complete or return to school. Opoonents say it takes away jobs and decreases the field of available low wage workers. It also increases the burden on the government due to layoffs.
After doing a bit of reading, I would have to support the minimum wage increase. While the bill Senator Enzi brought was reasonable middle ground, it is not good at this point due to the massive budget deficits we currently have. Taxes will eventually have to go up somewhere to pay for all the debt our country is in. We are already seeing the change at the local level in many of the states where aid is being cut and taxes are going up to pay debt and make up for a lack of federal funding.
The argument that opponents make saying less low wage workers will be available with a raise is very poor in my book. Their should not be any person who is paid that low a wage. Paying someone $5.15 an hour is pretty much free work in today's economy and the argument that workers laid of will be a burden on the government is poor, since those workers are already a burden due to their income, most are probably on food stamps and MedicAid, if they had a decent income, they would have more buying power and would need less from the government. I cannot see how even two parents making minimum wage would be able to support a family or themselves, the combined income would be about $21-$22,000. A single person would not even be able to pay rent for an apartment, they would be making $824 a month before taxes were cut out.
In a lot of states they have already taken the initiative to raise the minimum wage. It has not been raised in 8 years to even stay up with inflation. In this time, politicians have received nearly $30,000 in raises. If we make the argument that it will hurt small businesses, then when will we finally raise it? That argument cannot be made forever.
Digg
posted by Amar Shah at 2:31 PM
Site Feed
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home