Just three years after a Democrat-led Congress imposed the federal minimum wage on two U.S. territories in the Pacific, lawmakers last month halted the program in its tracks, acknowledging the move had sapped thousands of jobs from American Samoa and the commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
The two-year delay in the case of American Samoa and one-year reprieve for the Northern Mariana Islands was imposed even as both parties have sparred over the effects of the minimum wage in the U.S. during the troubled economy.
"We said this increase would be harmful in 2007, and the Democrats did it anyway," said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, North Carolina Republican. "It proves our point that the federal government setting wage rates is destructive to job creation, whether it's in American Samoa or western North Carolina."
The story is a complicated study in political pressure, lawmaking and unintended consequences. It began just after Democrats took control of both chambers of Congress in early 2007.More here
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
10 comments:
The rich people resent the setting of minimum wages. Therefore they will "make us pay" by reducing the workforce.
They demand a certain amount of return on their investment and they will make sure they get it.
This is why monopolies are un-American. But our government has not protected the People from monopolies for a long long time.
That's just class warfare rhetoric, 10:19.
I'm a businessman, and I need to make a reasonable profit if I'm going to risk my capital.
I have a right to do that, and to offer the wage I choose to offer for the work I need done.
Your butt is portable, and if you don't think what I'm offering is fair or reasonable, you are free to move on to something you think is.
Would it be better to have a job making $10/hr (what I can afford to offer for the work I need done), or to have no job and $0?
Let the market forces decide.
If I can't find people who will do the job for $10/hr, I will end up offering more or go out of business, right?
Simple as that. Supply/demand.
10:47
you are totally right except for in the cases where large scale labor is being controlled by "monopolies".
That is the point I think of the commenter. Big corporations like Walmart do not pay $10 per hour. They can control the pay to lower and lower levels and I believe it is true that they resent minimum wage laws. Walmart would pay even less if it were legal. They do not care that their employees live below the poverty line.
It is because they face minimal competition that they are able to pay so little.
What do you think?
10:47
You are paying a respectable wage. $10 per hour is a good wage. However, there are others in the minimum wage level who are taking advantage of workers to inflate their profits.
Look at seasonal labor which is not controlled by minimum wage laws because they are in agriculture. Those places pay so little that most Americans simply will not do the work. So they use illegal immigrants to do the work because those folks are desperate.
If the farms or produce growers paid a fair wage then Americans would do the job.
10:47, if only it were true. Businesses don't play by supply and demand. Instead of raising wages they just hire illegals then support politicians who will blame illegals for everything that ills us instead of going after the employers.
They hire illegals because the govt demands so much. If supply/demand dictates the wages, it would be different.
If can pay $10/hr to get somebody to crawl under a house and pull wire, that works for me.
But if Big Govt demands that I offer insurance, vacation, family leave time, sick pay, etc etc, and it ends up costing me $30/hr to get the wire from point A to point B, I'll just do it myself.
Or hire Pedro, who will gladly do it for $10.
(I have no problem with immigrant labor-- just ILLEGAL immigrant labor.)
10:47
12:53, where that is where we can agree. If there are LEGAL immigrants ready to do the job for cheaper, more power to them. But you know for a fact that many companies are hiring folks that they know are illegal which is considerably breaks the rules. I just wonder what crazy business you work in where gov. "demands" all these things. While I have a great job now, I've worked several, as well as my mother as I was coming up, that did not offer insurance. And I doubt that sick leave/family leave are grinding your business to a hault unless you have rampid abuse, which means your problem aint gov., it's your human resources.
Supply and demand is a powerful force in economics, 10:47. However it is skewed by a number of factors, including the presence of huge entities like Wal-Mart (just an example, but NOT the only example). When Wal-Mart comes to town and shuts down dozens of other businesses, then offer PART-TIME work, with little to no benefits at $8/hr, is the whole town supposed to "portable" themselves somewhere else? Your argument is simplistic and misleading...
Illegal or not, I can say this. The manager of the complex where I live, hired people to power wash our exteriors. However, we were not notified so that is the Managers fault. I came home as mine was being done and saw my ornaments on my porch and yard were litteraly sliced in half from the power of the spray. One particular ornament was that of a garden gnome and his head was actually cut off and I have had him for over 30 years. I hollered to the workers to stop because my windows were also open. No one spoke English. I pointed to the damage and they just shook their heads. I then hollered out that they had also broken a ceramic flower pot. That got their attention I guess because they stopped and said, "Pot"?
Dumbocrats think that if they pass a law to shorten the seasons and make summer longer that it will happen. Dumbocrats are stupid. You can't fix stupid!
Post a Comment