Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Congressman: I Would Vote To Repeal The Minimum Wage
Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) told the National Journal that he thinks the country should get rid of the minimum wage. I think its outlived its usefulness, he said. It may have been of some value back in the Great Depression. I would vote to repeal the minimum wage. Can Obama Unilaterally Raise the Minimum Wage? - NationalJournal.com
Bartons not the only lawmaker to hold such a view. In June, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) told a meeting of the Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee to mark 75 years since the signing of the Federal Labor Standards Act, which guaranteed a minimum wage, that he do[es] not believe in it and that he would abolish the minimum wage. And while he hasnt called for the full repeal of the minimum wage, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has said, I dont think a minimum wage law works.
Congressman: 'I Would Vote To Repeal The Minimum Wage' | ThinkProgress
These people want other people living in shit on the side of the street. The minimum wage demands fairness for the workers.
If you can't get 7.25/hour to hardly pay for food after you're done working. You're no more then a slave. These bastards want Africa, mexico or china for Americans.
Are you sure?
More jobs, yes, but wage growth holds up recovery
The job market may be gradually improving, but the gains aren't showing up in worker's paychecks.
And the resulting belt-tightening continues to weigh on an economy heavily dependent on consumer spending.
<snip>
Wages for those at the very bottom of the income ladder have been falling, in real terms, for the past 45 years. Despite periodic increases, the current federal minimum wage adjusted for inflation has about the same buying power as it did in the 1950s.
<snip>
In better times, that so-called "wealth effect" might have helped spur consumer spending as households see the benefits of those rising markets in their retirement savings or home equity. But because so many of those households saw their homes repossessed or savings accounts wiped out, the impact of the wealth effect has been muted.
Meanwhile, wealthy households tend to spend a smaller portion of their overall income than those at the bottom of the income ladder living paycheck to paycheck.
That means that less of the overall growth in national income is flowing back into the economy in the form of demand.
More jobs, yes, but wage growth holds up recovery - NBC News.com
The last three recessions have last longer than previous recession because of the flat wages since the 1980s. (See chart below) Is it some kind of weird consistence? It's a no brainer for people who understand economics and the structure of the American economy.
I did not mean ARTIFICIAL wage growth.
Wage growth because of low unemployment, which happens when economy is booming - now THAT what is called recovery.
How can you have a growing economy when 70% of our economy is driven by consumer spending, you know the group who is/hasn't seen significant wage growth since the late 1970's? You know the shrinking middles class.
What I can't figure is why no wages is the compassionate solution
How many employers would be able to hire anyone for no wages? Do you know how many people work for nothing now? Do you know what an unpaid intern is or a volunteer docent?
The universal minimum wage needs to go and be replaced by a categorized minimum wage.
I think that was satire. if you increase minimum wage administratively, the majority of the now working people will lose their jobs - therefore - zero wages.
Yeah, let's subsidize WalMart and other mega-corps instead.
no, we subsidized the FAILED projects a.k.a. as Solyndra - and THAT is the DIRECT reason why economy is not growing, jobs are not being created and wages are not rising.
Jobs ARE being created - by the left. Jobs are being destroyed by the right.
total BULLSHIT
But, didn't you say you were in favor of Bush?
comparing to the humongous failure NOW in the WH, Bush was almost divine.
The right gives tax money to huge corporations while fighting against Americans at every turn.
rw's are against everything this country was built on.
Hate the US? Leave and take traitorous Bolton with you.
you mean left is creating government jobs?
those are not jobs which make unemployment low and the wages rise, as those jobs are the RECEIVING end of the taxes being paid.
They do not create wealth per se - they are parasites on the wealth creators ( in the literal meaning - they can not exist on their own).
and this country WAS NOT built on the robbing the working men and women who create welath by the greedy government.
this country was built by the people who were pursuing their happiness FREELY without too much government intervention.
Don't like it?
Then - LEAVE and take your failed marxist redistribution ideology with you.
together with the whole left and the failure in the WH.
yeah, the various econ theories aside, back when I was in HS and got min wage, or near it, I got raises when it went up. So, even if the economists who argue against it are right, which I doubt, it's simply a political loser positon unless you're in a district that is dominated by older white people on soc sec or in the top 20%.
you were getting raises because the economy was growing, the unemployment was low and if you were a good worker, you were appreciated.
Now we have economy in stagnation, extremely high unemployment rate and one worker can be substituted by 10 others any second he is fired.
The minimum wage is not going to be raised in such conditions and should not.
because it will cause just more misery to those whom it is supposed to help.
Making the economy grow, stimulate jobs creation - THAT is going to raise the minimum wage by itself.
Sure, a rising tide helps. But what good is it when the monied elites / business owners pay take home the lion's share of a business's productivity while Labor takes home crumbs.
If there were no minimum wage, no unions, no worker rights, no environmental regulations, etc., Labor, including childredn, would be working in hellish conditions for food/subsistence.
If not, where's the noblesse oblige?
Are you sure?
More jobs, yes, but wage growth holds up recovery
The job market may be gradually improving, but the gains aren't showing up in worker's paychecks.
And the resulting belt-tightening continues to weigh on an economy heavily dependent on consumer spending.
<snip>
Wages for those at the very bottom of the income ladder have been falling, in real terms, for the past 45 years. Despite periodic increases, the current federal minimum wage — adjusted for inflation — has about the same buying power as it did in the 1950s.
<snip>
In better times, that so-called "wealth effect" might have helped spur consumer spending as households see the benefits of those rising markets in their retirement savings or home equity. But because so many of those households saw their homes repossessed or savings accounts wiped out, the impact of the wealth effect has been muted.
Meanwhile, wealthy households tend to spend a smaller portion of their overall income than those at the bottom of the income ladder living paycheck to paycheck.
That means that less of the overall growth in national income is flowing back into the economy in the form of demand.
More jobs, yes, but wage growth holds up recovery - NBC News.com
The last three recessions have last longer than previous recession because of the flat wages since the 1980s. (See chart below) Is it some kind of weird consistence? It's a no brainer for people who understand economics and the structure of the American economy.
I did not mean ARTIFICIAL wage growth.
Wage growth because of low unemployment, which happens when economy is booming - now THAT what is called recovery.
How can you have a growing economy when 70% of our economy is driven by consumer spending, you know the group who is/hasn't seen significant wage growth since the late 1970's? You know the shrinking middles class.
Please out anti-minimum wage, anti-epa,
hell, Please out as your self for what you believe in. I'll respect you more
yeah, the various econ theories aside, back when I was in HS and got min wage, or near it, I got raises when it went up. So, even if the economists who argue against it are right, which I doubt, it's simply a political loser positon unless you're in a district that is dominated by older white people on soc sec or in the top 20%.
you were getting raises because the economy was growing, the unemployment was low and if you were a good worker, you were appreciated.
Now we have economy in stagnation, extremely high unemployment rate and one worker can be substituted by 10 others any second he is fired.
The minimum wage is not going to be raised in such conditions and should not.
because it will cause just more misery to those whom it is supposed to help.
Making the economy grow, stimulate jobs creation - THAT is going to raise the minimum wage by itself.
Sure, a rising tide helps. But what good is it when the monied elites / business owners pay take home the lion's share of a business's productivity while Labor takes home crumbs.
If there were no minimum wage, no unions, no worker rights, no environmental regulations, etc., Labor, including childredn, would be working in hellish conditions for food/subsistence.
If not, where's the noblesse oblige?
yeah, the various econ theories aside, back when I was in HS and got min wage, or near it, I got raises when it went up. So, even if the economists who argue against it are right, which I doubt, it's simply a political loser positon unless you're in a district that is dominated by older white people on soc sec or in the top 20%.
you were getting raises because the economy was growing, the unemployment was low and if you were a good worker, you were appreciated.
Now we have economy in stagnation, extremely high unemployment rate and one worker can be substituted by 10 others any second he is fired.
The minimum wage is not going to be raised in such conditions and should not.
because it will cause just more misery to those whom it is supposed to help.
Making the economy grow, stimulate jobs creation - THAT is going to raise the minimum wage by itself.
Sure, a rising tide helps. But what good is it when the monied elites / business owners pay take home the lion's share of a business's productivity while Labor takes home crumbs.
If there were no minimum wage, no unions, no worker rights, no environmental regulations, etc., Labor, including childredn, would be working in hellish conditions for food/subsistence.
If not, where's the noblesse oblige?
I did not mean ARTIFICIAL wage growth.
Wage growth because of low unemployment, which happens when economy is booming - now THAT what is called recovery.
How can you have a growing economy when 70% of our economy is driven by consumer spending, you know the group who is/hasn't seen significant wage growth since the late 1970's? You know the shrinking middles class.
By working to produce things instead of working to buy things.
Are you sure?
More jobs, yes, but wage growth holds up recovery
The job market may be gradually improving, but the gains aren't showing up in worker's paychecks.
And the resulting belt-tightening continues to weigh on an economy heavily dependent on consumer spending.
<snip>
Wages for those at the very bottom of the income ladder have been falling, in real terms, for the past 45 years. Despite periodic increases, the current federal minimum wage adjusted for inflation has about the same buying power as it did in the 1950s.
<snip>
In better times, that so-called "wealth effect" might have helped spur consumer spending as households see the benefits of those rising markets in their retirement savings or home equity. But because so many of those households saw their homes repossessed or savings accounts wiped out, the impact of the wealth effect has been muted.
Meanwhile, wealthy households tend to spend a smaller portion of their overall income than those at the bottom of the income ladder living paycheck to paycheck.
That means that less of the overall growth in national income is flowing back into the economy in the form of demand.
More jobs, yes, but wage growth holds up recovery - NBC News.com
The last three recessions have last longer than previous recession because of the flat wages since the 1980s. (See chart below) Is it some kind of weird consistence? It's a no brainer for people who understand economics and the structure of the American economy.
I did not mean ARTIFICIAL wage growth.
Wage growth because of low unemployment, which happens when economy is booming - now THAT what is called recovery.
How can you have a growing economy when 70% of our economy is driven by consumer spending, you know the group who is/hasn't seen significant wage growth since the late 1970's? You know the shrinking middles class.
Thank you, Pope Francis, for calling out the lie of trickle down, which creates pee-ons.
yeah, the various econ theories aside, back when I was in HS and got min wage, or near it, I got raises when it went up. So, even if the economists who argue against it are right, which I doubt, it's simply a political loser positon unless you're in a district that is dominated by older white people on soc sec or in the top 20%.
How can you have a growing economy when 70% of our economy is driven by consumer spending, you know the group who is/hasn't seen significant wage growth since the late 1970's? You know the shrinking middles class.
By working to produce things instead of working to buy things.
With the consumer class having less expendable income, who's going to be the market for the produced things? You can produce things like crazy but if there's no market for the produced goods you're producing failure.
By working to produce things instead of working to buy things.
With the consumer class having less expendable income, who's going to be the market for the produced things? You can produce things like crazy but if there's no market for the produced goods you're producing failure.
and the workers that does the producing gets paid for that production the more they produce the more they make the more they spend so more needs to be produced so the more the worker makes and the more they spend so more needs to be produced so the worker makes more money so more money they spend and the more that needs to be produced
By working to produce things instead of working to buy things.
With the consumer class having less expendable income, who's going to be the market for the produced things? You can produce things like crazy but if there's no market for the produced goods you're producing failure.
and the workers that does the producing gets paid for that production the more they produce the more they make the more they spend so more needs to be produced so the more the worker makes and the more they spend so more needs to be produced so the worker makes more money so more money they spend and the more that needs to be produced
