As the Democrats take control of Congress, one of the legislative issues they've pledged to address is raising the minimum wage. It's something they've brought up from time to time before, and now that they have control of the national legislature, it's going to come up as a serious proposition, likely with the goal of raising the minimum wage by a proposed 40%, to about $7.20 an hour. Republicans have traditionally opposed raising the minimum wage for fairly sound reasons, but in the current economy it may be wise to consider that opposition might be a foolish course to take and that the GOP might be wiser to cynically turn the tables and take the lead on raising the minimum wage.
The truth that the Democrats will point out is that the minimum wage hasn't been raised in ages, and it's lagging way behind the general increase in the cost of living. This would be a serious concern for anyone who is actually paid the minimum wage. The counter-argument is generally that raising the minimum wage is a bad idea for economic reasons, could spur massive inflation, and run small businesses into the ground - that's the usual Republican take on the issue. The thing which renders the traditional Republican arguments irrelevant on grounds of political reality if not pure economic theory, is that virtually no one earns the minimum wage in America.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, excluding waiters and waitresses and other groups who are exempted from the minimum wage because their primary income is from tips, of the 66 million US workers earning an hourly wage, only about 450,000 workers earn at or below the minimum wage. That's less than 1% of hourly workers and less than 1/4 of 1% of all workers. In statistical terms that means that virtually no one actually earns the minimum wage. It's such a small number that it could be nothing more than a counting error or a representation of a small number of transient part-time jobs or most likely, a representation of probational wages for starting workers who are almost immediately raised to a more competitive wage - a common practice in some businesses. What's more, the number of people earning at or near the minimum wage has declined to its current level from a high of 15.1% of the workforce in 1980 and has declined particularly dramatically in the past few years.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Lumpy
So. You're basically advocating shameless political opportunism?
2 - Joe
Everything about politics is shameless opportunism, R and D alike.
3 - PeterJ
All of the two or three income families, people working jobs salaried at 300. dollars a week, non-union laborers in right to work states who do indeed earn seven to eight dollars an hour ($280.-$320 a week or $14,560.-$16,640. a year) are imaginary. As are people earning not very much more with no or negligible insurance.
Spitting out logistics are fine, you can convince yourself that anyone who can't live on their income is a sloth but spend 30 years working middle management jobs for corporations whose CEO's are earning upwards of $250,000. a year and see how corporate America really views and treats employees.
Drain them dry until they burn out. As they make more money or gain benefits work them harder until they quit. A guy who's been there 90 days and just earned his first raise and company paid 50% of his insurance has just stepped up to being one step closer to termination. When he starts getting vacation time he just may find that when he gets back from vacation his job is gone. Don't believe it? I did this for 30 years and I don't lie.
You'll find one person doing the job of two and if you're foolish enough to think that you can get ahead by being an honest, exemplary employee you'll more than likely become your boss's major pain in the ass looking for a raise or a promotion, again,almost out the door.
When you're working in a corporation as an hourly or low level salaried manager it's not a matter of your worth. You're being paid from a pre-designated budget, usually based on your departments net income. If that budget is calculated at 20% then you and the rest of your department have 20% of the net to share. Whether you do a good job or not is mostly in-consequential, nothing will change that 20%. The most you could hope for is that a co-worker is fired or quits that you can prove that you can accomplish both his and your own job but even that can only last so long.
To top it off, that supervisor who you answer to, that nice, sympathetic guy or gal is being paid a bonus if they can keep payroll down to another level. Do you think that person will sacrifice a $50. a week bonus so that you can earn more money? Don't count on it.
Eventually you may catch on and resign yourself that this is your life, you're tired of changing jobs twice or more a year or you can choose to find the field in which you're most qualified and apply for management positions. You'll earn a more livable income but you'll travel, work about 55 to 60 hrs a week, make decisions that affect the lives of your employees, and catch all of the shit that rolls down your way. I've watched as others tried to do the job I did and last maybe a month to a year. They have become ill, burned out, even had breakdowns. I'm not complaining, just stating facts as I've lived them. This is sometimes the only way for a non-college educated person to get by. That's all I did.
The bottom line is that you can spit out all of the statistics, spin all of the numbers but there is still a very large proportion of working America who make barely enough money and have insurance to carry them one year to the next. It's a continuous battle, pay the rent which just was raised again, fix the car, the one with 140,000 miles on her, buy food and neccesities, pay the DR. bill, on and on with no relief in sight.
To top all of this off you have to listen to someone who lives quite comfortably tell you that they don't make any more than you and they did this and they walked 50 miles , uphill, barefoot in the snow to that $1.20 an hour job and did quite well. They have the gall of adding insult to injury.
I've sat and listened to those quarter million dollar a year VP's whine over a dollar like it was their last. It is a sickening sight.
I hope someday, someone will step up and make the neccessary adjustments. It doesn't affect me, I'm finished with all of that shit, but it pains me to see so many having to lead their lives under these conditions while the opposite end of the spectrum spews their "woe is me" spiel.
Of course, this is only my imagination.
4 - Dave Nalle
ll of the two or three income families, people working jobs salaried at 300. dollars a week, non-union laborers in right to work states who do indeed earn seven to eight dollars an hour ($280.-$320 a week or $14,560.-$16,640. a year) are imaginary. As are people earning not very much more with no or negligible insurance.
No, Peter. These people DO exist. However, they are earning more than the proposed new minimum wage. $320 a week is $8 an hour and no one is talking about raising the minimum wage that high except some extreme left crazies in the ridiculous 'living wage' movement.
And the truth is that very few people even earn as little $8 an hour. That's what teenagers are getting as starting salaries at MacDonalds. No one with any skills at all or any longevity at their job is stuck at a wage like that.
Spitting out logistics are fine, you can convince yourself that anyone who can't live on their income is a sloth but spend 30 years working middle management jobs for corporations whose CEO's are earning upwards of $250,000. a year and see how corporate America really views and treats employees.
Drain them dry until they burn out. As they make more money or gain benefits work them harder until they quit. A guy who's been there 90 days and just earned his first raise and company paid 50% of his insurance has just stepped up to being one step closer to termination. When he starts getting vacation time he just may find that when he gets back from vacation his job is gone. Don't believe it? I did this for 30 years and I don't lie.
I suggest that your experience is atypical. This is certainly not the way most modern companies are run. There's a shortage of qualified middle-range executives and headhunters go out trying to recruit them aggressively, with enhanced salary, bonus and perks packages.
You'll find one person doing the job of two and if you're foolish enough to think that you can get ahead by being an honest, exemplary employee you'll more than likely become your boss's major pain in the ass looking for a raise or a promotion, again,almost out the door.
If this was the environment in which you were working the logical thing would have been to leave the job, pack up and move if necessary, and find a job where you were valued more.
The bottom line is that you can spit out all of the statistics, spin all of the numbers but there is still a very large proportion of working America who make barely enough money and have insurance to carry them one year to the next. It's a continuous battle, pay the rent which just was raised again, fix the car, the one with 140,000 miles on her, buy food and neccesities, pay the DR. bill, on and on with no relief in sight.
And my point in the article is that raising the minimum wage will have ZERO impact on these people. There might be other, better ways to address their needs, but that's not something the government is likely to get into. Right now the best hope for them is to keep the economy strong and dynamic so that they have opportunities to move to better jobs or companies feel some pressure to provide a decent work environment.
I've sat and listened to those quarter million dollar a year VP's whine over a dollar like it was their last. It is a sickening sight.
Have you ever considered WHY they exhibit that particular pathology? In my experience it's because when they were younger they went through hell and worked their asses off and scrimped and saved and that got ingrained into their character, and even though they don't need to do it now, they still have those habits.
You seem to lack a certain basic human empathy.
Dave
5 - Dr. Kurt
We could solve the illegal immigration "problem," beat the deficit back into submission, almost eliminate unemployment, and reduce some forms of crime, if we raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Why be half-arsed about it?
6 - Dave Nalle
Seems to me that raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would make the currently fictional problems with illegal immigrants stealing jobs a reality, because there would be lots of Americans out of work and jobs would be going overseas or to illegals at an alarming rate.
And BTW, we HAVE almost eliminated unemployment. It's debatable whether it's even possible to lower it much lower than it currently is.
Dave
7 - Baronius
Dave, you're making a cynical argument in favor of a meaningless populist gesture. The problem is that your plan wouldn't work on that level. Republicans aren't in a position to take the initiative on anything. They couldn't lead the charge on the Puppies for Gulf Vets Act.
I was listening to C-SPAN radio last night (I'm living the dream), and if I followed the story correctly, the House was voting on new Transparency and Civility rules, but the Dems wouldn't let the GOP read the rules prior to voting. The next two years are going to be bad.
So if the Republicans rallied for a minimum wage increase, it would go unnoticed. If Bush lead the charge it would be seen step toward cooperation. The Democrats would push it through, they'd get credit for it, and they'd NEVER STOP TALKING ABOUT IT.
And what about the Republican faithful? How would they feel? You want to abandon (my biased word, not yours) the social conservatives already; now you want to publicly support government intervention in the labor market. The 2008 GOP Convention will be held in the Vista Room at the Houston Airport Ramada.
8 - PeterJ
You say;
"And the truth is that very few people even earn as little $8 an hour. That's what teenagers are getting as starting salaries at MacDonalds. No one with any skills at all or any longevity at their job is stuck at a wage like that."
Not neccessarilly Dave. Every time you frequent a high volume,low cost service or retail business they are making a bottom line by using the very techniques I've described. Who do you think pays the balance on that 1/2 price, oil change, tune-up or auto paint job, CEO's and VP's generous pay cuts? You can't possibly be so naive or in-experienced in the real world that this has never occurred to you.
"I suggest that your experience is atypical. This is certainly not the way most modern companies are run. There's a shortage of qualified middle-range executives and headhunters go out trying to recruit them aggressively, with enhanced salary, bonus and perks packages".
Maybe on another planet Dave. As I said, when a company is offering services or merchandise at costs that are more discounted than would usually be the case the employee's pay the difference. It doesn't matter how hard they work, how effective they are or how dedicated to the job. For someone without college an employee becomes a source of revenue for the company.
"If this was the environment in which you were working the logical thing would have been to leave the job, pack up and move if necessary, and find a job where you were valued more."
You don't comprehend the written word well, do you Dave? As I stated, and not as a complaint but a reality, a person without a college education does whatever he has to do to pay the bills.
"Have you ever considered WHY they exhibit that particular pathology? In my experience it's because when they were younger they went through hell and worked their asses off and scrimped and saved and that got ingrained into their character, and even though they don't need to do it now, they still have those habits."
Yes Dave, I have considered it and have been around the environment long enough to have heard all of the "old days" stories and that's exactly what they are. Those Cinderella stories are very few and far between these days. I'd put my work ethics against any of theirs any day, what's the point? I worked hard, I don't begrudge anyone what they are fortunate enough to make, especially if they're earning it and sharing the fruits of the labor with those who are earning it for them and not at their expense. And speaking of empathy, these men would throw a 20 yr top employee out on their ass if it meant a few bucks more to them.
"You seem to lack a certain basic human empathy."
I'm sorry to be repetitious here but just your statement not only displays your lack of empathy, especially since you know nothing of me or where I've been but it also proves that you have a certain pompous arrogance about you that makes one want to gag.
9 - Jonathan Scanlan
On the argument that raising the minimum wage reduces job security... I've always been curious why no one couples an increase with unfair dismissal laws.
I've never felt that it was the wage that causes the problem, so much as the job security.
In fact, I'd have thought that increasing job security would force employers to train and in turn increase the wages of those they hire since they cannot just let them go when they want to make a quick buck.
10 - Dave Nalle
On the argument that raising the minimum wage reduces job security... I've always been curious why no one couples an increase with unfair dismissal laws.
Because the fear is that this will cause companies to keep workers around who can't do their jobs and never fire them, causing huge financial hardship and forcing some small businesses into bankruptcy.
I've never felt that it was the wage that causes the problem, so much as the job security.
Your job security should be that you do your job well and make yourself indespensible.
In fact, I'd have thought that increasing job security would force employers to train and in turn increase the wages of those they hire since they cannot just let them go when they want to make a quick buck.
But what about when the company hits hard times and needs to scale back and let a few people go to keep itself solvent? They might even be good workers, but the company just can't afford them. Do you just say 'sorry' and let the company fold and put their entire staff in the unemployment line? This is the kind of problem which government regulation generally only makes worse.
Dave
11 - Jonathan Scanlan
Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying that.
Of course, I'm still a little skeptical, but I guess that comes from being trained as a journalist.
12 - Dave Nalle
Having been trained as an editor I tend to be more pragmatic.
As for skepticism, there's lots to be skeptical about when it comes to raising the minimum wage no matter how much you raise it. Frankly, the entire idea makes no sense at all.
But the point of the article is that in this instance the circumstances dictate that the impact of a change in the minimum wage would be minimal, so why not go for it.
Dave
13 - Zedd
Dave,
If the rationalle for giving people a check from the government ($200..."tax break") was that it would stimulate the economy, how much more of an affect would a $4000 increase/yr increase in wages have?
I know squat about economics... I'm just asking.
14 - Zedd
Dave
Also, the argument from law breaking employers is that immigrants do jobs that Americans wont do. I think the truth is that Americans wont do those tasks for pennies.
Would the population that is more likely to work for minimum wage be more apt to take less desirable jobs if they paid more?
Our excuse for hireing illegals would be reduced.
15 - Zedd
Dave
Your picture really creeps me out. You look like Satan.
Can you take another one?? I scroll really quickly when I know its comming up. You seem to be handsome. Why the spookiness??
If you are a fan of Dr. Who, you look like The Master (he was the most evil man in the universe)or The Count on Sesame Street.
16 - Dave Nalle
Zedd, I've got some other photos, but they might be more scary. I don't photograph well. My face is made up of all sorts of wrong angles. That picture actually makes me look MORE normal than usual. And I was handsome at one time - almost pretty - but the ravages of time have done away with that. Think Marlon Brando in Apocalypse now, perhaps.
Dave
17 - Lono
Nalle,
Great piece. I am usually here to call you the great satan and a heartless conservative bastard. This piece was well thought out and beautifully communicated.
Oh, and that last dude was right. Your picture is super freaky. Take care, man! We'll spar again soon... but I might actually be with you on this thinking.
18 - Dave Nalle
I'm still a heartless conservative/liberal bastard, but fighting the minimum wage just doesn't make any real political sense.
Oh, and I forgot Zedd's other questions.
If the rationalle for giving people a check from the government ($200..."tax break") was that it would stimulate the economy, how much more of an affect would a $4000 increase/yr increase in wages have?
It would stimulate the CONSUMER economy, but at the same time it would cause so many bankruptcies and lost jobs that the cost would be incredibly high. Plus, remember the point of the article. Raising the minimum wage by $2 an hour isn't really $4000 more in anyone's pocket each year because no one working for a living actually earns $5.15 an hour.
Also, the argument from law breaking employers is that immigrants do jobs that Americans wont do. I think the truth is that Americans wont do those tasks for pennies.
True, but they likely won't do them for $7 an hour either. Right now we're paying Mexicans more than that in most cases to do those jobs, and Americans aren't lining up for them.
Would the population that is more likely to work for minimum wage be more apt to take less desirable jobs if they paid more?
The problem is that forcing companies to pay a wage high enough to be an incentive to change the labor dynamic would raise wages so high that certain types of essential businesses would be unable to survive.
Dave
19 - Bliffle
Hey, I was prettier than you, Dave! As a child my eyelashes were particularly pretty. Relatives used to comment "too bad he's a boy with long pretty eyelashes like that!" Unfortunately for them, I had the wrong accoutrements.
20 - STM
I advocate going even further. How the f.ck can people live on a mimumum wage of under US$8 an hour? Even that is a paltry figure. I realise many states have set wage awards much higher than the US minimum, but really, it's pretty bad.
As Dave has pointed out here, even the lowest-paid workers in many jobs are earning above the minimum - at above $10 an hour but under $12. If this is the case, why doesn't the government go out on a limb make the official minimum wage both protected, and somewhere in between.
With America's GDP (measured $US dollars) about 30 per cent higher than those of Canada and Australia, the closest in overall living standards, it is possible. Here are some comparison figures of minimum wages in other developed nations:
Britain: £5.35 (pounds sterling) (around $US10 plus).
France: €8.27 (Euro) (around US$10.80)
Australia: AU$13.47 (Aussie dollar) (around US$10.50)
Ireland: €7.65 (Euro) (around US$10.15)
New Zealand: NZ$11.25 (New Zealand dollar) (around US$8 per hour)
I have not included Canada's, as they differ from province to province, but overall are actually lower even than those of the US.
It's worth noting here, too, that in cases like New Zealand and Australia, purchasing power parity would make their figures even higher as the exchange rate is based on US dollars and in many ways is an artificial yardstick useful only for such things as trade comparisons.
For instance, if I were a New Zealand doctor and lived in Auckland and earned NZ$120,000, what I could do with that figure would be identical (or pretty close to it, and may even work in the New Zealander's favour)) to what I could with US$120,000 if I lived in New York. It is all relative.
In Australia, the rate of around AU$13.50 an hour would probably buy a little more in Sydney than would $US13.50 in Los Angeles. Even so, on the exchange rate figure of US$10.50, it is still much higher.
That is less true of Europe (for instance, in much of Europe petrol prices are three times the price of those in the US, but in Australia are only marginally higher than the US amount), but by and large a similar situation exists there.
No one can live on a wage of under ten bucks an hour, and no-one should be expected to.
Not only would it make good political sense for a party in power to raise it, it makes good sense on a human level as well.
On a personal level, I find it disgusting that many corporate bigwigs on multi-million dollar salary packages think it's OK to whinge about the corporate hardships that would be caused by raising a minimum wage by a couple of dollars.
It's an obscenity. Perhaps they would be better off coming to an accord with their workers, where higher wages (AND bonuses), weekend/night penalty rates and what have you are offered for higher productivity.
Either that, or taking marginal cuts to their own over-inflated pay packets.
21 - Clavos
Actually that dude is a lady.
You don't really know that, emmy; all you know is she's female...
22 - Dave Nalle
They used to say the same about me, Bliffle, and the Arab ladies went wild for my blond hair (sadly not that color anymore). Is it time to start comparing baby pictures?
Dave
23 - Clavos
True, but they likely won't do them for $7 an hour either. Right now we're paying Mexicans more than that in most cases to do those jobs, and Americans aren't lining up for them.
True. they're paying $15-20 an hour for construction jobs in Miami, and getting mostly Latino workers. Most of the people rebuilding N'Awlins are Latinos, too; though I don't know what they're paying over there.
24 - Clavos
Dave sez:
Is it time to start comparing baby pictures?
Look, Dave, I know it's your article and all, but...
Puleeeze spare us...:>)
25 - Dave Nalle
#23 is dead on, Clavos. The higher paying jobs are out there. If you don't like working in MacDonalds for $8 an hour then go work construction for twice as much. Or if you're not that physical, they pay that much or more for work with a good maid service.
Dave