Tweet
July 24, 2009, marks the last time the minimum wage was increased in America, to its current dollar amount of $7.25 an hour. At various times in their recent political lives, both candidates for President have called that figure too low. Both have agreed that the minimum wage ought to be indexed to inflation, to maintain its purchasing power for the poorest workers in America. And yet no action has been taken at the federal level since the end of the last phase-in of the minimum wage increase in 2009.
Now a group of activists have begun a quixotic quest to get the minimum wage increased, which would have a definitive economic impact on millions of Americans, and improve the overall economy by increasing purchasing power at the low end.
As the three-year anniversary of the last federal minimum-wage hike arrives July 24, a coalition of labor, religious and women’s groups is preparing to fight for an increase once again. The activist groups are launching a nationwide campaign to raise the federal minimum wage, starting with a national “Day of Action” on Tuesday.
Marches and rallies are planned Tuesday at congressional district offices and at businesses that pay low wages. In Chicago, protesters will hold a trolley tour of low-wage employers, while activists in Pittsburgh will rally for higher wages outside City Hall. Similar events are planned in dozens of cities, including New York, Washington, Miami, Kansas City, Mo., Sacramento, Calif., and Philadelphia.
Democrats in Congress also are weighing in. Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., soon will introduce legislation to raise the federal minimum wage by 85 cents an hour for three straight years – taking it from $7.25 to $9.80 per hour – and then index it annually for inflation thereafter. Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, and Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., already have introduced similar bills. The proposals would provide raises for about 28 million people, according to estimates by the nonprofit Economic Policy Institute.
The 28 million figure is striking. That doesn’t include just people on minimum wage, because an increase would rise the tide for a whole set of low-wage workers, who would see increases in their take-home pay.
The legislation isn’t going anywhere soon. But the issue ought to be front and center. In a time of reduced demand, you cannot have a better policy for economic recovery than to raise the purchasing power of 28 million people who will unquestionably spend the money. This increases consumer spending and cycles a lot of money through the economy. Republicans can say that the minimum wage hurts jobs all they want, but there’s simply no evidence for it. And in our current state of low aggregate demand, it’s not debatable that it would help the economic picture. And there’s the fairness issue. Today’s minimum wage is actually lower than 1979, adjusted for inflation. For tipped workers it’s even worse.
A few states have recently indexed their minimum wages to inflation, which has led to small increases over the past year or so. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have minimum wages above the federal level. This is going to be a long fight, but it’s entirely necessary and just.
16 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
(40 hrs x $7.25= $290.00) – (32 gal gasoline x $3.75= $120.00)= $170.00
So after working forty hours and filling one’s gas tank twice in a week, you take home $170.00, to live on. Never mind all the other costs in life!
This is abject servitude. So how much economic value will America squander today out out tailpipes today going to work? In a year? In five years? The problem is not minimum wage the problem is America’s leveraged servitude to oil corporation who exploit us using their monopolized potential energy, just as the slave owners had a monopoly on people of color as fee labor. Humans considered and treated as property to benefit the institution of slavery, which was all about energy! Wake up this sleeping giant and end the corporate sponsored rape of this republic by aristocrats using corporate shells, as hostage takers use innocents shielding themselves from a barrage of police bullets. America is like drunk in a state denial. Meanwhile congress protects this rancid system wrought with waste and inefficiencies, at the expense of life and liberty. Its called protect the slaveholders Justice
RobertsTaney!The proposed $2.55 per hour increase equals an additional $400 per month in gross income, approximately.
That would change lives. Significantly.
Lucky to see it go up 75 cents.
You can always count on them to do that and very little else.
Lucky to see it go up at all.
You know who mostly pays minimum wage? Mom and pop businesses located in small towns. The large fast food chains and other national companies pay above minimum wage already. Sure there are some head of households that have a minimum wage, but how long do they stay at that wage. The majority of minimum wage workers are teenagers of middle to upper middle class families. If the minimum is rasied would they have a job at all. If you raise the minimum wage on a small business they will cut hours and raise prices so the effect of a raise is canceled out by increased costs and reduced hours available for work.
According to the BLS in 1979 13.4% of workers earned minimum wage. In 2011 5.2% of workers earned minimum wage. This shows that companies that need to pay more to attract workers already are paying higher wages. The ones left more than likely can’t afford to pay more.
let’s pray for an increase in the minimum wage and deflation, meaning no QE. It’s the only way our paychecks are going to go up.
mmcmenus said: You know who mostly pays minimum wage? Mom and pop businesses located in small towns. The large fast food chains and other national companies pay above minimum wage already.
WRONG!
A new report shows that large, profitable companies employ the most minimum wage workers:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/168969/large-profitable-companies-employ-most-minimum-wage-earners#
I really have fatigue over this issue (which is, I suppose, intended on the part of wing-nuts everywhere). The fatigue lies not in the wing-nuts in the legislatures, but in the at-large public who seems to believe right-wing nonsense about the minimum wage costing jobs. Whatever job loss there is, (and there will be some, but not nearly on the scale predicted by wing-nut economists) is MORE than offset by better living standards by those who rely on minimum wage jobs AND increased consumption by those earning those wages. Ironically, most economists who oppose increasing the minimum wage also aggressively advocate for a much more generous EITC (earned income tax credit). I guarantee not ONE nutjob in the tea-bagger caucus supports that (let alone could spell EITC).
When will the people learn the economy is here for us, we are not here for the economy? It is our society and our government’s DUTY to morally structure it; it won’t happen on its own.
Failed to include Wal-Mart which, even when they pay more than minimum wage resorts to less than full-time employment, thereby leaving the govt. to provide the difference in health care, food stamps, etc. By the way, most of the jobs created by Rick Perry in Texas pay minimum wage.
As Chris Hedges remarked to Bill Moyers last weekend; the people of the US are now viewed as nothing more or less than commodities by the PTB.
The big hole in conservative logic is that businesses are just keeping employees around out of the goodness of their hearts rather then employing people to meet demand and create profit. Barring technological advantages that allow the elimination of a job or an obsence increase that eliminates that profit employers would enjoy, employers will choose to keep employees because they need them in order to make money.
If you have spare employees sitting around that you can fire when wages are raised you probably aren’t the best business person to begin with.
Buildogliberal so when a company has to pay more in wages because an increase without a coresponding increase in productivity, they will have to either raise prices therefore the hours worked to purchase a good remains the same. The other option is to force a raise in productivity by cutting hours. This makes the raise a net 0 impact if there is no corresponding equal raise in prodcutivity.
Holybuybull
Failed to include Wal-Mart which, even when they pay more than minimum wage resorts to less than full-time employment,
Mmcmenus
If a person is working less than full time then they have more hours available to work and could earn more money. I am willing to work 60+ hours a week for my lifestyle and pay my taxes, give money to my university that gave me education to have my job,work for charity, work second job to help pay for my daughters dance. If you are healthy then I expect you to work if you can’t find paid work, there are lots of oppertunity to volunteer. And many of these volunteer positions will give contacts that lead to much better than minimum wage jobs. I am having this battle with my kids now. They want their parents lifestyle without putting in their parents hours at either work or education.
If you are working 60+ hours a week to support your lifestyle then your university education has filed you, you are consumed by greed & materialism, you desire to avoid your family, or you’re a fool. You obviously didn’t take any classes in economics and don’t understand the value of money.