or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Government/Politics
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| Alright US Citizens And Legal Residents... |
Judgment_Day |
06/22/06 |
Ted Kennedy was screaming his lungs out again and this time it was for a national minimum wage increase. I think it already was shot down by some of his miserly cohorts. I was with Ted on this one all the way. It's been at least nine year since the last federal increase. Too bad it will not happen. In recent posts we addressed tax-cuts, limitations to welfare programs, and reduced funding for such programs as the arts...on balance I believe the one natural resource that's not a just a figure is humans, our families. Some States were so embarrassed by our federal governments lack of response to increase the wage for almost a decade that they chose to increase the minimum wage statewide on their own.
Meanwhile....
WASHINGTON -- Despite record low approval ratings, House lawmakers Tuesday embraced a $3,300 pay raise that will increase their salaries to $168,500.
The 2 percent cost-of-living raise would be the seventh straight for members of the House and Senate.
Lawmakers easily squelched a bid by Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, to get a direct vote to block the COLA, which is automatically awarded unless lawmakers vote to block it.
In the early days of GOP control of Congress, lawmakers routinely denied themselves the annual COLA. Last year, the Senate voted 92-6 to deny the raise but quietly surrendered the position in House-Senate talks.
As part of an ethics reform bill in 1989, Congress gave up their ability to accept pay for speeches and made annual cost-of-living pay increases automatic unless the lawmakers voted otherwise.
The pay issue has been linked to the annual Transportation and Treasury Department spending bill because that measure stipulates that civil servants get raises of 2.7 percent, the same as military personnel will receive. Under a complicated formula, the increase translates to 2 percent for members of Congress.
Like last year, Matheson led a quixotic drive to block the raise. He was the only member to speak on the topic.
"I do not think that it is appropriate to let this bill go through without an up or down vote on whether or not Congress should have an increase in its own pay," Matheson said.
But by a 249-167 vote, the House rejected Matheson's procedural attempt to get a direct vote on the pay raise.
The pay raise would also apply to the vice president - who is president of the Senate - congressional leaders and Supreme Court justices.
This year, Vice President Cheney, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Chief Justice William Rehnquist receive $212,100. Associate justices receive $203,000. House and Senate party leaders get $183,500.
President George W. Bush's salary of $400,000 is unaffected by the legislation.
|
Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 06/26/06 1:45 pm:
The probplem with wellfare, JD, is not that it pays more than minimum wage. The problem is that it pays for not working. If the common person had a choice between doing no work and collecting a paycheck vs. working hard and collecting the same or slightly more, most people would choose to not work. The problem with welfare isn't that it outpays the minimum wage, its that it pays people to not work at all. Even if the minimum wage were higher than welfare, most people who are on welfare unnecessarily today would REAMIN on welfare... because it's FREE MONEY. So I don't agree with your assessment that the low minimum wage is what is driving people toward welfare. The FREE MONEY aspect is what drives them toward welfare.
And as I said before, every time we have raised the minimum wage, it has resulted in higher unemployment. Every time. The only way that such unemployment rates are cured is though incentives to hiring such as lower taxes, small-business-tax-credits, or something else that artificially induces hiring. Its not a coincidence that this happens every time.
By my way of thinking, allowing businesses to pay what they wish to pay, and allowing workers to demand what they wish creates a system in which wages directly follow cost of living, and vice-versa. If there is a level of wages below which no worker will work, then cost of living will start from that point. As more people become employed, demand for goods increases, prices increase, and employees demand more money to do their jobs. If they fail to get it, they buy less stuff and prices come down. Wages will directly effect cost of living. But if you have a system of artificial minimum wages, then cost of living is ARTIFICIALLY DRIVEN UP, which is detrimental to employees, and wage increases can't catch up with COLA increases. Simply put, minimum wages are bad for employees.
Elliot Clarification/Follow-up by Judgment_Day on 06/27/06 2:29 am:
Elliot-
You have to view through their "intentions." You and I know that for many it's pure laziness and they don't deserve a dime, yet they will stay at home and abuse the system. Your right minimum wage is horrible, I don't know how anyone could ever survive on it. I agree that in most cases businesses are responsible enough to provide a fair starting wage according to market demand. Of course this does not effect most of us because we have a skill or enough education to get hired on at a higher rate. So I want Congress to evaluate this based upon those with the lesser skills still needing the cost of living increase built in for at least the last nine years.
As more people become employed, demand for goods increases, prices increase, and employees demand more money to do their jobs.
Sounds nice but that has not been the track record. Too much outsourcing and illegals doing the work. The minimum wage law is a good and much needed.
Wages will directly effect cost of living. But if you have a system of artificial minimum wages, then cost of living is ARTIFICIALLY DRIVEN UP, which is detrimental to employees, and wage increases can't catch up with COLA increases. Simply put, minimum wages are bad for employees.
There is nothing artificial about the cost of living expenses that have risen in the past nine years. Two-thirds of Congress the other day thought "people" were artificial.
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
