Democrat Governors Call For Automatic Minimum Wage Increases

minimum wage cartoon2

Chris Gregoire and John Kitzhaber, the governors of Washington and Oregon respectively, want the federal government to raise the minimum wage and then put in place a system for automatic wage hikes in the future.

Based on our experience, we offer three proposals to help build an American economy that works for everyone. First, Congress needs to raise the federal minimum wage. At $7.25 per hour, or roughly $15,000 per year for full-time work, the minimum wage no longer provides a path out of poverty and remains decades out of date. If the minimum wage had simply kept pace with the rising cost of living since the late 1960s, it would be more than $10.55 today.

Second, Congress needs to raise the sub-minimum wage for tipped workers, which has been stuck at $2.13 per hour since 1991. Tipped workers are almost twice as likely as are all other workers to fall beneath the federal poverty level. Our states have set the minimum wage for tipped workers equal to the full value of the minimum wage for all workers, eliminating the disparity in pay levels altogether.

Third, Congress should learn from the example of our home states and index the minimum wage to rise automatically each year with the consumer price index. Indexing the minimum wage will prevent the purchasing power of the minimum wage from gradually eroding as a result of the rising cost of living. The small, automatic cost-of-living adjustments that our states have adopted also give businesses greater predictability over their payrolls each year by breaking the cycle of political gridlock over the minimum wage.

It never ceases to amaze how liberals refuse to believe that the economy reacts to policy like this. They seem to think that they can waive the government’s magic wand and raise wages without the people who pay those wages reacting in some fairly negative ways.

The additional wages for these workers doesn’t appear out of thin air. It must come from somewhere. Business owners must fine room in their budgets for higher labor costs. That means several things will happen. Prices will go up as business owners charge more to cover additional overhead. Jobs will be eliminated as employers seek more labor inefficiencies to cut costs. The quality of goods, services will come down as employers find ways to cut corners.

Raising the minimum wage is terrible policy – the last round of federal minimum wage hikes drove unemployment rates for young and low-skill workers to record levels – that ends up hurting the very people it’s intended to help.

Think of it this way: The minimum wage is a tax on low-wage labor. And you get less of what you tax of. Some workers might enjoy higher wages, but others are going to lose their jobs entirely.

Regulations are static, but markets are dynamic, and react to the regulations. But liberals never quite seem to catch on to that.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • HideFromObama

    And what about the rest of us making above minimum wage? We don’t get those nice raises guaranteed, so our buying power goes DOWN. And in what world is “minimum wage” supposed to be a “living wage?” Since when was the intent of the minimum wage to feed a family of four? Markets will drive low wage jobs up as needed. And if minimum wage was indeed a “living wage”, what incentive is there for that low-skill worker to improve their skills and find a higher paying job?

    • SusanBeehler

      Family of one or two would be nice

      • Hal736

        What, exactly, do you think the minimum wage should be?

  • mikemc1970

    They are more than welcome to do that, in their own states, then everyone else can just sponge up all their jobs as companies flee.

    • SusanBeehler

      Yes and it is so cheap to pick up your business and move, maybe to China but not in the US

      • Bat One

        Nonsense. There are plenty of business moving out of both California and Illinois. I think you are assuming, wrongly, that wage scales are the principal reason that businesses, particularly small and mid-sized one, move. It isn’t so. Taxes and regulatory requirements are the primary reason.

        • SusanBeehler

          I wasn’t assuming this I think mikemc1970 was, I agree with you Bat One taxes and regulatory would have more influence than a wage scale.

        • Bat One

          Taxes and regulatory requirements are also the principle reason that so many larger businesses have chosen to expand their overseas businesses and shifted operations including manufacturing out of the US. Particularly over these past four years.

  • JW-American

    The whole minimum wage discussion is a scheme for middle and higher upunion hacks to all get a raise as well, because if you give the new guy a raise, the guy with one year at the job is paid the same, So now we must raise his wage accordingly- then the guy with 2 years etc. it pushes the whole salary structure up, one level of experience after the next. (Seen most effectively in organized labor shops where its rare that anybody even makes min wage, but the scale is there so they all move up)

    Say you have 10 employees and the min wage goes up a buck. but you only have one guy actually making min wage. The sliding salary scale says that it will actually cost the employer 10 dollars per hour for that 1 guy, 1 dollar raise- as each employee on different levels each get their responding 1 dollar raise. That 10 dollars would have hired another whole employee. or possibly, cost one employee his/her job to pay for the 1 dollar per hour increase on that single employee.

    This really shows up in low skilled low income, maybe min wage but right at that level or above, the management has to weigh out the cost of the min wage increase to the level of staffing required to do the job. Something has to give, either product pricing goes up (seen many dollar menus lately?) profit margins go down, (at a certain point ROI drops to the point where continuing is fruitless and every one gets to find new jobs)

    This I hope illustrates the folly of mandated wages. When the employee applied for the job they would be told the duties and the pay for that job. after agreeing to those terms the employee set the value of his/her time. $X per hour. If they think there time is worth more they don’t accept the job, if the job is the only one they have the talents or skills for then the must accept the fact that they need to improve their “edjukation” or talents, or just accept the fact that their free market time is worth $X.

    The Gov. setting values on labor is like setting values on Gold, Silver or Milk, as seen in the farm bill debate eventually the markets collapse with out some sort of Gov. support, for those set prices.

    Finally there is the Rush Limbaugh theory of Min wage, if 7.75 is good, why not 10? or 15? maybe everyone should make a min of 20 dollars per hour. Why not?

    • HideFromObama

      The Limbaugh Theory is a good point. Why not just go higher? The bottom line though, which we all understand (minus Woof) is that it doesn’t matter how high it goes, it’s STILL minimum wage! Prices will adjust and those people will still have the same valued dollar as before. i.e. proportional cost of bread to their hourly wage will not change.

    • SusanBeehler

      People in union shops do not get paid minimum wage, they make union wages. Minimum wage has very little to do with union wages in North Dakota because we are a right to work state. I do not not think wages are a conservative or liberal issue, I believe wages are a business issue. As a business owner I believe you should pay your employee as much as you can afford above the minimum wage. Minimum wage is a reality for those just starting in the work force and many times for single parents. I believe our minimum wage certainly has not kept up with inflation and certainly has not kept up with tax increases. Most working in jobs paying minimum wage will not even see a 2% increase to cover the payroll tax, this I think is bad for business because it will increase the need for more social services and food stamps than in turn increase our taxes. A major problem is our government wages grow faster than the wages of the private sector.

      • Bat One

        Actually, many union contracts, and nearly all such contracts with federal, state, and municipal government entities, are formulated based on minimum wage. When the minimum wage goes up, so do the wages paid to those working on federal projects. What a business pays each of its employees should be a mutually agreed upon decision between the employee and the business.

        • SusanBeehler

          Are you a government worker?

          • Bat One

            Hardly. I own my own business.

  • WOOF

    Federal minimum wage has existed since 1938.
    Starting the largest most prosperous economic
    expansion evah.

    • Bat One

      That “prosperous economic expansion” certainly wasn’t the result of federal minimum wage legislation, and would surely been a good deal more prosperous and expansive without it.

  • Bat One

    The problem is that those on the Left who are so enamored with the whole minimum wage concept simply refuse to understand the difference between money and wealth, as well as the difference between money and purchasing power. Its willful ignorance and political expediency that drives this discussion, as it always has been in the past.

  • Roy_Bean

    They have learned well. The low information voters respond to Santa Claus.

  • WOOF

    Keep telling working people they would be better off with less money.
    Trickle down nonsense.
    Minimum wage cuts into profits .

    What do you think happens when a large part
    of the populace can’t make a living ?
    Those costs can be enormous,

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      You keep forgetting that the same people who employ us also sell us food, clothing, etc.

      If you inflate their costs, they’ll inflate their prices.

      The minimum wage hurts people, Poodle.

      • WOOF

        Prices have limited elasticity raising price ain’t a guarantee to making money..
        Why not , (like the conservative argument of a $100@hour minimum wage), just 10X price? Cause you can’t.
        The minimum wage hurts people” is pie in the sky talk. If you get more money , later it will hurt. Election losing rhetoric.

        • Spartacus

          McDonalds will have to sell an awful lot of $3 Big Macs to pay their burger flippers $10 an hour. And let’s not forget everybody involved upstream in the making of those two all beef frozen patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and sesame buns also get that same minimum wage, so your $3 big Mac just became a $7 Big Mac. The last time I had a $7 hamburger it was a helluva lot better than something you get through a drive through window within 3 minutes of placing your order. But if you think $7 is a fair price for a Big Mac then by all means let’s raise the minimum wage again, in fact maybe you should buy a franchise. I don’t eat that crap and those that make them will find them to be even less affordable.

          • WOOF

            They sell an awful lot of big macs. They are paying $10/hour in Minot ND.
            Hours: opening shifts
            Pay: starting at $10 per hour
            For a limited time only! We are hiring openers at $10.00 per hour.
            You need to be available to open at least three days per week McDonald’s Insurance Program,
            $150 Referral Bonus,

            Pay Day Perk,
            Free Meals on Break,
            Uniforms Provided,
            Flexible Schedule,
            Meal Discounts Off The Clock,
            Unlimited Growth Potential,
            and you get to work with Great People!

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            That must be an old listing. The signing bonus is up to $500 per postings at the restaurant here.

          • SusanBeehler

            They already have to pay their employees more here in North Dakota just to get the employees.

        • mickey_moussaoui

          It’s obvious that for you anyway, an election is all about being bought and paid for

      • SusanBeehler

        It is not as simple as what you state. Women/single parents are often the most impacted by minimum wage. Costs will go up without a minimum wage increase too because an employer will need to pay more to retain a trained employee and trained employees are more valuable than a constant turnover. Not increasing a minimum wage hurts women and the children they support. If people are not paid enough than you will pay with an increase in taxes for supplemental programs for daycare, food stamps and other assistance.

        • two_amber_lamps

          Hate to break this one to ya.. but the taxpayer pays either way. Either thru higher taxes to pay for your entitlement spending or thru increased costs of buying a burger.

          Sorry Ms. Suzy…. there’s no free lunch.

          BTW- did you remember to apologize to all the assault rifle owners out there you insulted by insinuating “the bushmaster” was used to kill children at Sandy hook? No such long gun was in evidence at that murder scene… to include the shotgun left in the car.

          • SusanBeehler

            I rather pay it to the business for the product than to the government, so either way you pay but the means by which it is delivered is different. I apologize because you use a different source for information? “The primary weapon used in the attack was a “Bushmaster AR-15 assault-type weapon,” said Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance.” cnn.com LB

          • two_amber_lamps

            And that information was contradicted:

            http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/340113

            Make sure you watch both video links. Particularly the one regarding the gun found in the trunk, which I can assure you is a shotgun. But by all means, take it to a more gun savvy friend of yours to corroborate since I know you won’t know what you’re looking at. It was a shotgun and as mentioned in the other link, all wounds were from pistols. No “Bushmaster” was taken into a school, and the ATF records show Mrs. Lanza didn’t own one.

            Please in the future, if you’re going to comment on such things and insult others in such a manner as you did, keep up on the current events.

            Thanks!

          • SusanBeehler

            Thank you for sending me to your website which also said exactly what the cnn.com report said: “The primary weapon used in the attack was a “Bushmaster AR-15 assault-type weapon,” said Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance.”

          • Bat One

            Lt. Vance is mistaken, as is CNN.

          • two_amber_lamps

            As I told her… WATCH THE VIDEO LINKS. Ms. Suzy failed to follow the simplest of instructions. Then she would have understood Vance’s info was WRONG… all she saw was an outdated quote which fit her agenda and latched onto it like a pitbull.

          • Bat One

            I’m shocked!

          • SusanBeehler

            What are you “right” fighting now? I watched the videos. The cnn reports are dated days after the links on this web blog or page. You are choosing to believe a website I never heard of to fit your “agenda”, it is using reports and sources prior to December 19, all your website shows is their were discrepancies in the first reports of the shooting. If you don’t like Cnn than this is from Fox news ” The rifle used was a Bushmaster .223-caliber, according to an official with knowledge of the investigation who was not authorized to speak about it and talked on condition of anonymity. The gun is commonly seen at competitions and was the type used in the 2002 sniper killings in the Washington, D.C., area. Also found in the school were two handguns, a Glock 10 mm and a Sig Sauer 9 mm.

            Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/16/at-least-26-dead-in-shooting-at-connecticut-school/#ixzz2HGkGvT6o

            Not everything on the internet is true. Oui

          • two_amber_lamps

            , it is using reports and sources prior to December 19, all your
            website shows is their were discrepancies in the first reports of the
            shooting.

            And you back it up with a Fox report from December 16th… LOL!

            Well here, how about an NBC quote that says there were no long guns used in the school? FYI, “long gun” includes “bushmasters”…

            http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495

            I’d say all the networks are drinking each other’s bathwater and NO ONE has a straight story…. nor will we until after the authorities release the official story since they already know the Lt. and the Coroner were both misstated. But that isn’t gonna stop you from spouting anti-assault gun rhetoric which had nothing to do with the incident.

          • SusanBeehler

            I just thought you might like fox news better than cnn and fox trumps your msnbc dated December 15 and than I call you out with this transcript Quote from the LT Vance “The weapon that was utilized most of the time during this horrific crime was identified as a Bushmaster AR-15 assault type weapon. It had high-capacity magazines.
            In addition to that, the subject had in his possession a Glock 10mm, a Sig Sauer 9mm – both weapons – all weapons had multiple magazines and additional ammunition.
            The fourth weapon recovered was a shotgun that was recovered from the suspect’s vehicle that was parked outside the school.” Like I have said I told care what kind of name you want to give the gun, we need to have a serious discussion on what to do to help keep our children safe, we can do better. If you want to argue what the news reporters didn’t get straight go ahead because you or I do not know any more than what we have read or heard.

          • SusanBeehler

            So you know more than the investigating Lt. wow, you live there or something?

    • HideFromObama

      How does Minimum wage cut profits? No business man or business at all is going to take it in the shorts to pay his workers more. Owner Smith is going to raise his prices or fire employees to keep his earnings the same or better. It’s the only way he stays in business.

      • SusanBeehler

        Have you ever owned a business? Any employer who has so little regard for their employees to fire them rather than pay a higher a wage, will not be in business long,most businesses have to have employees to run their business, it is a balance, a dance if you will to find out what wage is the “perfect” amount to keep and motivate employees.

        • Bat One

          The best way to “motivate” employees is to structure their compensation based on their performance. Commissions for example. Incentives work!

          • SusanBeehler

            Not every person responds to commissions or you would have a workforce of only salespersons. Humans are different like that, they have different “currencies” so to speak, different “risk” levels they are willing to take and then they have physical abilities and aptitudes which play into motivation too. Every heard of Maslow

          • Bat One

            What you say is true. Mostly. Which is why I only hire those motivated by incentives. Ever heard of Aldi Foods? Its a no-frills, low cost grocery chain, out of Chicago I believe, but owned by a German company. The company’s cashiers are paid based on how quickly they process each customer transaction. Not for every potential employee’s taste, to be sure. But then, they don’t hire just “everyone” either.

          • SusanBeehler

            Walmart cashiers are timed also but than we have to subsidize many of their workers wages with government assistance. Walmart figured out a little pin or token worked well for an incentive.

          • Bat One

            I’ve noticed that when a Walmart store is opening the number of applicants for jobs always seems to exceed the number of jobs available. Substantially.

            Curious too, those who do nearly all the complaining about Walmart’s pay and benefits are folks who don’t work there.

          • SusanBeehler

            Any large retail corporation will overstaff when they first open and than they cut the hours to eliminate if they have too many or some employees will just leave because the “Wal-mart” culture or the wages will not cut it. I worked there, it was the worse place I have ever worked. They use to give tests not on abilities but to search out the type of candidates which would make the best “Wal-mart” employee, a submissive type, one you could enslave.

          • Bat One

            What you say may be true. I’ve never worked for Walmart. But you are missing the points. The number of applicants always exceeds the number of jobs. And those who complain the loudest are rarely those who work there.

          • SusanBeehler

            So….. the number of applicants exceed the number of jobs, so what…. is your point? As an employer if you had employees complaining about their job, what would you do to them, for them? Whistle blower laws in employment are not that great. Of course the ones working there are not going to complain the loudest, they need their jobs.

          • two_amber_lamps

            WE don’t have to subsidize anything…. that’s a false dilemma. You and your leftist ilk CHOOSE to subsidize those substandard employees. Ever heard of Mazlow? Physiological needs are a powerful motivator… but you and yours contradict these base motivators with government goodies… therefore, no desire to work let alone succeed or excel.

          • SusanBeehler

            in your world

          • two_amber_lamps

            Yes, we call it reality. You should try it sometime.

  • Waski_the_Squirrel

    This isn’t a strictly libertarian comment, but might be workable as a compromise. The minimum wage is supposed to be entry level. Rather than change minimum wage, perhaps government should look at welfare. The welfare program actually discourages people from taking these jobs. What if there were some sort of sliding welfare scale where the more one made, the less benefits one got. It should be designed to encourage working.

    I recall when minimum wage was raised during my high school years. I had gotten several raises at the local restaurant because I had increased responsibility, experience, and did good work. This was a great incentive, especially to a teenager. However, when the minimum wage was raised, everyone’s wages were flattened. Suddenly, I made no more than the newest employee despite my experience and extra responsibilities. It turned me against raising minimum wage at a very young age because the question I asked was, “Why bother doing any extra?” Luckily I had a good work ethic even then.

    The other thing I discovered was that even though the restaurant didn’t lay anyone off, they didn’t replace workers either. As time went on, fewer and fewer people did the same work, so working there became far more difficult. Also, prices started rising on a regular basis. It was all very eye-opening to my high school self.

    • SusanBeehler

      From your post you may not understand welfare: it does get cut when the more you make, it is a “sliding scale”. Also most do not receive cash, they receive daycare or food stamps or services. Welfare does not discourage taking these jobs, welfare subsidizes these employers indirectly by paying for things a job should provide for. What a better thing than to have the government subsidize your low wage paying business if you promote NOT increasing minimum wage your profits are insured by allowing taxpayers and “obligors” of the child support system to pick up what your business is not willing to pay. Many who would have a minimum wage increase would be bumped off assistance they receive now. So the choice could be pay more in taxes or require a higher minimum wage.Employers or the taxpayer. As far as your wages going flat after a minimum wage, that is the employers choice. A good employer will reward good employees to keep them or they will look at a higher turnover as a way to conduct business.

      • Bat One

        Do you really think minimum wage workers or those on public assistance of some sort pay income taxes?

        • SusanBeehler

          Does it matter to you? Is it relevant to a minimum wage discussion? I am saying if employers do not pay a decent wage than it us the taxpayers who pick up the tab for the government assistance through property tax, income tax or in some places with sales tax. I think employers should pay, not the taxpayers.

          • Bat One

            Do you have an authoritative source you could cite showing that as wages increase the “tab for government assistance” decreases? I can see where that line of thinking might appeal to a simple, static analysis, but I don’t believe the real world, made of dynamic individuals, works that way at all.

          • SusanBeehler

            Nope, but it might be interesting to research.

          • Bat One

            I think you’ll be hard pressed to find even one honest example of decreasing public assistance, never mind one tied to increased wages. Do let me know what you find, however.

          • SusanBeehler

            I believe the rise in food stamps usage is a direction connection to the unemployed or underemployed, and not just because Obama is president.

          • Bat One

            Once again, simple and static analysis. Despite his campaign promises and speeches to the contrary, Obama’s policies have not encouraged the economic growth necessary for job creation. If anything, his policies have discouraged growth and inhibited employment gains. This is amply borne out by business owners and managers, large and small. From the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable to repeated NFIB studies and polls.

            And its not just food stamps, either. The number of folks on disability and long-term unemployment are also at all-time record levels. And the ONLY reason the unemployment rate has decreased is because the number of those included in the labor force keeps getting smaller and as more and more people give up looking. That unemployment rate only counts those who have actively applied for a job in most recent 30 days.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Lol… yes, let US research your blind conclusions?? You’re killing me Ms. Suzy!

          • two_amber_lamps

            “I think employers should pay, not the taxpayers.”

            OMG…. don’t you get it? Employers don’t pay addl. taxes in tax environment you describe. The TAX is passed on and paid by consumers.

            No free lunch Ms. Suzy. No free lunch.

          • SusanBeehler

            I am not talking about employers paying additional I am talking about the average Joe taxpayer has to pick up the tax tab for the assistance those who are in the low paying jobs receive from the government, it is a win for employers they do not have to pay for what the employee needs to live because the government can help them if they don’t make enough money even though they are employed.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Again, you miss the point… the employer doesn’t pay additional costs. The CONSUMER does. OR if the government pays then the TAXPAYER does.

            In most cases they are one in the same. The only difference is if the government forces a business to increase their prices, the consumer can shop elsewhere, the employer can decide the business is unprofitable and go out of business.

            Then nobody works… and they end up on public assistance… which then your benevolent government can merely print more $$ or burglarize the contributing taxpayers income for more to redistribute.

            This is simple stuff Ms. Suzy… Your Argumentum ad misericordiam aren’t taking you anywhere.

          • SusanBeehler

            A consumer chooses to pay, a taxpayer is taxed, no choices with taxes, a tax is a tax. When in the history of our country has the minimum wage caused “nobody” to work? Business go belly up all the time. You don’t like redistribution than make businesses accountable for their employees, they don’t like doing business without the government supporting their employees than they can get out of business. There is no reason for taxpayers to pay for things a employer should provide “money” for services an employee gives. You don’t like redistribution than stop allying with the businesses who fail to pay wages that require the government to give food stamps to make up the difference. Simple stuff, make the businesses pay for the cost of their business, don’t tax others to make up the difference.

          • two_amber_lamps

            LOL!! Food stamps ARE redistribution! It’s the government forcibly taking money from the taxpayer and giving it others. Where does the fed/state government get the $$?? The money tree? Obama’s stash? Don’t you get this?

            I’ve already explained to you businesses will not “eat” the costs of subsidizing their employees via wages and benefits, they shall pass their costs down to the consumer. It’s called “increased prices”…

            Get it?

            No you don’t… :)

            Are you sure your name isn’t Jo?

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGDpYTots_M

          • SusanBeehler

            Yeah , I get it ha ha ha, and you don’t get what I am saying: I rather pay as a consumer for the increased price of the product. And food stamps may go down if employers paid a better wage to the working poor, ha ha get it, you might not have so much redistribution of your wealth if the business owners paid their employees more, ha ha ha.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Ha ha ha… and people who do menial unskilled work should get a wage commensurate with the work they do, NOT based off of some hypothetical social social justice formula you and your leftist ilk concoct and then FORCE upon the economy via the heavy hand of the government. Is it a business’s fault people like you make bad decisions and throw their fate on the “good graces” of the federal dole? Is it a business’s responsibility to take care of your financial obligations? Your children? NO, NO, and NO.

            Ever hear of living within your means? Why bother? It’s the government’s responsibility to fix your mistakes…. Oui?

          • SusanBeehler

            Ever try to live on minimum wage? ha ha ha. I didn’t say it was the government’s responsibility. You are making up your idea of who you think I am and than arguing about your made up beliefs.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Can’t say I have… my abilities have always placed me above minimum wage since I was about 18 years old. Apparently you sympathize with the plight of the poor…. or should I say you still empathize?

          • SusanBeehler

            I do empathize with the “plight the poor”, I see the poor in our city. Amber lights may have caused you to be blind to them. Glad you have abilities.

  • mickey_moussaoui

    Minimum wage is all about union pay scale. In the construction industry, minimum wage is all about union pay scale. Union workers are paid on multiples of minimum wage. For example: Joe Plumber, union plumber, theoretically gets paid 5 times minimum per hour for his skills. If minimum wage is increased, then lucky Joe gets a raise per hour for his union contracted labor. If the minimum wage goes up, say .50 cents per hour and Joe makes 5 times minimum wage, he just got a $2.50 per hour raise. Joe now makes an additional $100 a week. Yaaaa for Joe. Did I mention that Joe pays union dues and those dues
    ultimately go back to the Democrat party>>> Now you know why democrats
    push for raising the minimum wage. It has NOTHING to do with the poor kid
    trying to make a buck on his first job….unless he is a union employee that is.

    Now you say: “but Joe deserves a pay raise”…Okay. ALL those union workers also got that raise. And who ultimately pays for that huge expense in payroll for ALL those lucky workers? You do.

    How much of a raise did you get? (Public
    sector workers need not reply) If you were a public sector worker would you object?
    Ethics be damned.

    Welcome to big government
    America. You pay, they play

    • SusanBeehler

      Unions have to negotiate contracts; wage increases are not guaranteed with a minimum wage increase. The taxpayers pay for low wages with a increase in burdens on social services. Who should be paying employees, an employer or the taxpayer? I think employers should pay, it is the cost of doing business.

  • kevindf

    What are you going to do with all the people who can’t provide enough value to an employer for the minimum wage they are forced to pay?

    • SusanBeehler

      Mentor? or Clone yourself?

Top