The Defeat of the Minimum Wage Hike

[Locutus]

Chan Lowe: The defeat of the minimum wage hike

By Chan Lowe


When you hear about business honchos leaning on their Republican lackeys in the U.S. Senate to make sure America's minimum wage remains one of the lowest in the industrialized world, you first think of their miserliness.

These are people who aren't going to miss their next meal if they pay their labor force a living wage, yet they never seem to be able to accrue enough for themselves. They scream about the consequent loss of jobs, as though there's something sacrosanct about their obscenely high levels of income.

Once you're done getting steamed about that, you think of the bald-faced cynicism and hypocrisy of "job creators" who caterwaul about government handouts like the food stamp program, while conveniently ignoring the fact that their own employees — members of America's working poor — are the very same "freeloaders" who are forced to avail themselves of such largesse. Rather than pay them adequately and offer them company-provided benefits, the business owners are happy to let the taxpayers pick up the slack.

Finally, there's the shortsighted stupidity of their position. Henry Ford knew that if he paid his workers a generous wage, the benefits would ultimately redound to the captains of industry — because those higher wages would immediately be spent acquiring consumer goods, thereby fueling the engine of the economy.

Today's fat cats, so preoccupied with preserving their investment margin, don't even realize that priming the pump by putting more cash in the pockets of those who would immediately use it is the best investment of all. In addition, were they to allow the minimum wage to rise to a decent level, dependency on government would lessen as more people pulled themselves out of poverty. The deficit would shrink, the tax base would increase, and there would be more money to spend on important needs like education and infrastructure.

But this kind of reasoning requires people to think beyond themselves. They would need to realize that while they don't actually see the suffering of working-class Americans from their gated enclaves, there's no upside, even for them, in perpetuating the enormous gap in income. It isn't a matter of having a heart. It's about having a brain.

Link

[Locutus]

^^  Pretty spot on. 

[The Troll]

Chan Lowe: The defeat of the minimum wage hike

By Chan Lowe


When you hear about business honchos leaning on their Republican lackeys in the U.S. Senate to make sure America's minimum wage remains one of the lowest in the industrialized world, you first think of their miserliness.

These are people who aren't going to miss their next meal if they pay their labor force a living wage, yet they never seem to be able to accrue enough for themselves. They scream about the consequent loss of jobs, as though there's something sacrosanct about their obscenely high levels of income.

Once you're done getting steamed about that, you think of the bald-faced cynicism and hypocrisy of "job creators" who caterwaul about government handouts like the food stamp program, while conveniently ignoring the fact that their own employees — members of America's working poor — are the very same "freeloaders" who are forced to avail themselves of such largesse. Rather than pay them adequately and offer them company-provided benefits, the business owners are happy to let the taxpayers pick up the slack.

Finally, there's the shortsighted stupidity of their position. Henry Ford knew that if he paid his workers a generous wage, the benefits would ultimately redound to the captains of industry — because those higher wages would immediately be spent acquiring consumer goods, thereby fueling the engine of the economy.

Today's fat cats, so preoccupied with preserving their investment margin, don't even realize that priming the pump by putting more cash in the pockets of those who would immediately use it is the best investment of all. In addition, were they to allow the minimum wage to rise to a decent level, dependency on government would lessen as more people pulled themselves out of poverty. The deficit would shrink, the tax base would increase, and there would be more money to spend on important needs like education and infrastructure.

But this kind of reasoning requires people to think beyond themselves. They would need to realize that while they don't actually see the suffering of working-class Americans from their gated enclaves, there's no upside, even for them, in perpetuating the enormous gap in income. It isn't a matter of having a heart. It's about having a brain.

Link

  I would love for these fat cats and their fellow Republican/Tea Party voters to lose all of their money, homes, well just lose everything and the only job they could get is working for Walmart and any other job that pays minimum wage.   

[Bo D]

It isn't a matter of having a heart. It's about having a brain.

Republican heart ... (when it exists)




The Republican Brain Trust ...

[The Troll]

Republican heart ... (when it exists)




The Republican Brain Trust ...

  Also their nuts!   

[Y]

^^  Pretty spot on.

The corporations, the wealthy, and their bought and paid for primarily Repug representatives in Congress are intent on guaranteeing the continual transfer of assets from the rest of us to them.

A certain greedy - but not farsighted nor intelligent - strategy.

[Palehorse]

Chan Lowe: The defeat of the minimum wage hike

. . .
Finally, there's the shortsighted stupidity of their position. Henry Ford knew that if he paid his workers a generous wage, the benefits would ultimately redound to the captains of industry — because those higher wages would immediately be spent acquiring consumer goods, thereby fueling the engine of the economy.

Today's fat cats, so preoccupied with preserving their investment margin, don't even realize that priming the pump by putting more cash in the pockets of those who would immediately use it is the best investment of all. . . .
Link

Exactly. I'll tell you something else as well; the new "living wage" employers are paying their employees is right at the new minimum wage level, or 10-11 dollars an hour.

Postions in lower management, like hourly supervisors for example, are not paying much more than that at 12-14 dollars an hour. And just a decade ago these same lower management positions  were paying 40-50k a year to start, and you had to have a high school diploma. Today they are paying 50% LESS and requiring a college degree!

The republicans will continue to take this stingy approach until there is a republican president in the oval office. IF it is ever changed at all. By that time they'll be so used to the supplemental income they're getting from these captains of industry that they may never reverse course.

Moreover, these captains of industry have "pay for performance" clauses in their contracts, that provide them multi-million dollar bonuses that correspond with the profit levels of the companies they run. They will squeeze the life out of the workforce, pinch every single penny they can, and slash hourly wages and benefits in order to hit their bonus marks. And companies look at NOTHING but their bottom lines. They do not care one damn bit about how their workers lives are, or how this country's economy is; until it begins impacting their bottom line and bonuses.

That's the way they role. And now they have the right to buy legislation . . . 

[The Troll]

  What is so  unbelievable is the die hard Christian Wingnuts who are working their ass off 40 hours a week        These dumbasses will vote against their own benefit and vote again for the damn Republicans who won't let them have a raise in the minimum wage.  These people are what you would call      they are completely  crazy. 

  In the book 'What's wrong with Kansas'  the poorest county with the average income of $18,000 a year, voted 97% Republican because of abortion and gay marriage.  WTF!   

  These dumbasses don't seen to know that the Republican/Tea Party have been boughten by the Rich and Powerful.   

                                                                                                           

[me]

Excuse me but the dems had the majority and some of them voted against it also. 

[Exterminator]

Excuse me but the dems had the majority and some of them voted against it also.

The dems had the majority of what and when?

[me]

The dems had the majority of what and when?

Last I heard they held the majority in the Senate.

[Bo D]

Last I heard they held the majority in the Senate.

The measure failed to get the 60 votes needed to open debate in the 100-seat Senate, with only one Republican joining majority Democrats in an unsuccessful effort to overcome the GOP filibuster.

[Exterminator]

The measure failed to get the 60 votes needed to open debate in the 100-seat Senate, with only one Republican joining majority Democrats in an unsuccessful effort to overcome the GOP filibuster.

Exactly.  The statement that some of the dems voted against it is either ignorance or an outright lie.  It didn't happen.

[Bo D]

Exactly.  The statement that some of the dems voted against it is either ignorance or an outright lie.  It didn't happen.

It is an outright lie! Where does she get this crap. 

The final vote count was 54 to 42. There are 53 Democrats in the Senate. One republican voted for it - Bob Corker.

Do the math.

[The Troll]

It is an outright lie! Where does she get this crap. 

The final vote count was 54 to 42. There are 53 Democrats in the Senate. One republican voted for it - Bob Corker.

Do the math.

  Any time "ME" opens her extra large mouth, all she says is the talking points from Fox News.  Fox News ---->  <--- "ME" ---->