The Pennington County Democrats forward this poster on who stands to benefit from raising the minimum wage. (Hint: it's not just teenagers buying video games!)
That poster boils down a boo-yah busload of research from the Economic Policy Institute on what really happens when we raise the minimum wage. The South Dakota Democrats' ballot initiative to raise our minimum wage can't be dismissed as some sop to people we can belittle. Raising the minimum wage helps working people, your neighbors, folks putting food on the table. And whether you're 17, 37, or 70, you deserve a fair wage for the time and liberty you surrender to the boss.
Penn Dems, SD Dems, keep walking those petitions!
I would add this to the mix as well. The Bishops should be on this minimum wage deal as it has a profound effect on the working poor. Where are they? To busy with Cruz, Thune and Denny fighting Medicaid and NOem fighting food stamps.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/francis-chronicles/light-pope-francis-interview-where-are-bishops
Republican opponents of a minimum wage increase continue to say an increase would harm the working poor.
Elementary school math would tell you that $10.50 per hour is more than $7.25 per hour.
Or, as President Clinton would say, "Its ARITHMETIC".
Roger who pays for the extra $3.25 an hour?
Why, we all do, Aaron, as customers paying a fair price for the goods and services we demand.
Aaron, either the employer or the or the government. The government because it will have to continue to offset minimum wage incomes with housing subsidizes, food stamps, medicaid, etc.
Or, if you are a major corporation, oil company, farmer, etc. you will likely get a tax break or subsidy to cover an increase.
Ultimately, the consumer pays it, you know that.
Exactly the customer pays for it and what is the business owner going to do to offset that cost? He is either going to raise prices on the product, which will make him lose some customers, or he is going to fire some people.
Aaron, wages increased over the 20th century, right? How many customers and/or jobs did the economy lose during that period?
Wages have increase only because the value of the dollar has lost 95% of its value over the last 100years.
Check this out: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/
1964 min wage was $1.25
that equates to $9.43---- so this where min wage should be if we want to keep it adjusted tied to inflation.
But remember in 1964 our money was redeemable in silver coins. That $1.25 in 1964 US quarters would be worth $19.67 if you had them today. http://www.coinflation.com The problem is with our money not some mandatory price control of labor. Maybe you should just go for $19.67 an hour? or go for $100 an hour min wage? Price controls on labor, or interest rates or any item is never a good idea.
Customer service in South Dakota is atrocious: if Mayor Huether wanted to elevate his cred he should propose a $10/hour minimum wage for Sioux Falls.
A large number of minimum wage employers are major corporations, particularly for young workers, if these employers don't want to pay minimum wage or healthcare they can fire the workers or go out of business. Perhaps they can sell an acre or two of their mansions to meet the financial needs of today's workers.
If business' can't adjust their profit margins enough to pay a livable wage, they should not be in business in the first place
Once again minimum wage reflects the Republican theory of trickle down economics, except that it has not trickled down to the people that need it most.
Inflation hurts the poor the most.
Exactly Aaron, "Inflation hurts the poor the most".
What's the solution?
Arron, The people making that $3.25 per hour pay the same price for a loaf of bread for there children as the person knocking down $170,000 per year plus a few perks!!!!!! AND they are grinding away as many days a week as they can to keep that bread on the table!!! How many actual working days do our congressional people from pierre to DC put in??? they just came off of a 5 week
break a few days ago!!!!
The money will just come from the rest of us middle class folks. While their(min wage workers) value goes up, our stock goes down along with our buying power. The rich will stay rich while the middle class are bled into the lower class. Fix the tax code first before you come looking for more dollars from the working class.
"The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation." - Vladimir Lenin
This much is fact. One in eight in Minnehaha County are on SNAP. 34,500 in SF make less than 11.25 an hour. Fix minimum wage and these numbers change for the better. So what if Miles Beacom will have to pay $2.00 for a $1.00 burger on the dollar menu at McD's.
Oh, dang! The Dollar Menu! I love the Dollar Menu. Guess I'll have to change back to being a Republican. ;-)
"One in eight in Minnehaha County are on SNAP. 34,500 in SF make less than 11.25 an hour. Fix minimum wage and these numbers change for the better. So what if Miles Beacom will have to pay $2.00 for a $1.00 burger on the dollar menu at McD's."
Why bother with raising the minimum wage then? Why not just increase gov't handouts and raise the sales tax? You'll be accomplishing the same thing. You surely aren't covering those increased costs by hitting the rich in the pocketbook.
The middle isn't crushed by the working poor, it is crushed by the wealthy that keep the middle class in "their place" and not allowing them to prosper.
Oddly, wealthy Republicans are not celebrating the income disparity between the poor and the rich that has continued to grow over the past few years. I think they should blame President Obama, don't you?
As the cost of goods and services rises and the poor can't afford basic essential they turn to the government for assistance with food, shelter, healthcare, etc.
Some say the solution is to fix the tax code, nice thought. Do you really think the wealthy with their millionaire lobbyists are really going to allow that?
If there is not a significant increase in the minimum wage, the government will pay that $3.25 per hour in one way or another.
Productivity has increased steadily but most people's wages have not. It isn't a question whether a raise in the minimum wage is necessary but more of how much and when so it becomes more sensible to work than to have to depend on government assistance.
"Dayton says he'd 'settle for' $9.50 minimum wage"
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2013/09/25/politics/dayton-minimum-wage
Aaron, there have been a numerous amount of studies on the issue that have shown through historical models after increasing the minimum wage that prices are only marginally increased for multiple reasons, most of which is the bases that the cost can be spread out on a large scale.
The more money a person makes, the more they have to spend. A drastic increase in minimum wage isn't going raise prices that much.
If you have a living wage, you could afford to maybe have a meal at one of the places you work at. We could even put a name on this and call it capitalism.
Stubborn ignorance hurts far more than the inflation which is caused by greed and occurs regardless.
I agree $10.00 should be the minimum in Sioux Falls with the goal to increase it to $12.00.
Cory, every family has at least one. Mine had two unfortunately.
Aaron, instead of the question "who pays for the raise in minimum wage?" the more accurate question may be to aks who pays for it to be sustained? The employers using minimum wage to pay less than a livign wage allow thier workers to be subsidized by the public dole. As such, STAMP and other assistance programs become the public responsibility BECAUSE the employer is not providing that living wage.
Certainly the consumer will pay for any minimum wage increase (heaven forbid we scratch a corporate profit margin), but let us not sit around and pretend that the low minimum wage has no related costs being bourn as it sits.
The US needs windfall corporate executive salary taxes. The ratio between lowest paid and highest in the US is insane.
Exactly, Steve. Under the current system, we pay for Walmart low-wage workers' welfare benefits whether we shop there or not. At least if we raise the minimum wage, we only pay those workers wages if we choose to shop there.
[Edited by CAH]... when poor people go grocery shopping, with or without food stamps, the last thing on their minds are economist and their studies or how it was in 1963. Their concern is how much can I buy with what I have.
The argument of a minimum wage increase causing a price increase on goods and services is perplexing. Obviously those that maintain this contention have not been grocery shopping for a few years.
Food prices and nearly everything else have been inching higher and higher each year while the minimum wage has remained stagnant. What caused these price increases over the years? It clearly isn't the cost of labor.
Mr. Wiken, it is insaner than most and almost as bad as the Tholian salt reactors that they are installing in Igloo and Dewey.