A minimum wage is pointless in flush times, as competition for workers will keep wages up. In down times, it is necessary to prevent the exploitation of people who have to take what they can get. Raising the minimum wage to new heights is probably counterproductive, but ensuring that it retains a certain minimal level of purchasing power is something quite different. It doesn’t take much thought to see the difference. It has been raised several times, by Democrats and Republicans alike over the last 50 years. Should it have remained at $1 an hour? If not, then the question is never should the minimum be raised, but rather when and by how much? Every year there IS inflation and it is NOT raised, it is in effect lowered. Of course, dealing with the question logically and rationally is not something one frequently hears. Most of what I hear from the right sounds like this: It is obviously dangerous and destructive to to raise the speed limit by 100 mph, therefore it is also bad to raise it by 5 mph; it can kill you to swallow a bottle of aspirin, therefore you should never take aspirin; etc. THEORY says that any raise in the minimum wage causes increase in prices and the elimination of jobs. FACTS prove otherwise, as all empirical studies demonstrate. Provided of course that the increase is not too large.
So far, what I’ve seen in this thread is side attacking side.
I do wonder, though, why the law we already have doesn’t already cover this. The Equal Pay Act, a part of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1963, already expressly forbids paying one sex less than the other for the same job. It states,
“The Equal Pay Act (part of the Fair Labor Standards Act) prohibits wage discrimination by employers and labor organizations based solely on sex.(d) Prohibition of sex discrimination (1) No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex: Provided, That an employer who is paying a wage rate differential in violation of this subsection shall not, in order to comply with the provisions of this subsection, reduce the wage rate of any employee.”
Given this, it seems logical to assume that there is some other underlying cause that accounts for the disparity – one I’m not sure we can legislate. I’d be interested to hear from others what they think that might be.
Hey, the sixties called. They’d like their laws enforced. If Obama spent half the time using the laws on the books that he spends mugging for midterm votes, he’d actually accomplish something I could like.
The following two quotes are from a 2009 study commissioned by the U.S. Department of labor.
“There are observable differences in the attributes of men and women that account for most of the wage gap. Statistical analysis that includes those variables has produced results that collectively account for between 65.1 and 76.4 percent of a raw gender wage gap of 20.4 percent, and thereby leave an adjusted gender wage gap that is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent.”
“However, despite these gains the raw wage gap continues to be used in misleading ways to advance public policy agendas without fully explaining the reasons behind the gap.”
DoctorUmmmNo about 10 years ago
It’s not mens’ fault if they’re better at doing the high paying jobs, it’s basic biology.
WestNYC Premium Member about 10 years ago
So let’s start with political cartoonists. Cut the pay of male cartoonists and give that extra money to the female cartoonists.
Doughfoot about 10 years ago
Wow! I thought the “women just want pin money” and “men have to support a family” argument went out decades ago, but here is again.
jensmith20055002 about 10 years ago
Thinking for yourself is so over rated when the government can think for you.
Doughfoot about 10 years ago
A minimum wage is pointless in flush times, as competition for workers will keep wages up. In down times, it is necessary to prevent the exploitation of people who have to take what they can get. Raising the minimum wage to new heights is probably counterproductive, but ensuring that it retains a certain minimal level of purchasing power is something quite different. It doesn’t take much thought to see the difference. It has been raised several times, by Democrats and Republicans alike over the last 50 years. Should it have remained at $1 an hour? If not, then the question is never should the minimum be raised, but rather when and by how much? Every year there IS inflation and it is NOT raised, it is in effect lowered. Of course, dealing with the question logically and rationally is not something one frequently hears. Most of what I hear from the right sounds like this: It is obviously dangerous and destructive to to raise the speed limit by 100 mph, therefore it is also bad to raise it by 5 mph; it can kill you to swallow a bottle of aspirin, therefore you should never take aspirin; etc. THEORY says that any raise in the minimum wage causes increase in prices and the elimination of jobs. FACTS prove otherwise, as all empirical studies demonstrate. Provided of course that the increase is not too large.
woodwork about 10 years ago
hey Harley: can you spell mysognist? I can’t either, but I know what it means.
woodwork about 10 years ago
hey Harley: can you spell mysognist? I can’t either, but I know what it means.
seablood about 10 years ago
women are afraid of being called ‘BOSSY’ That will always stop them in their trax
curtisls87 about 10 years ago
So far, what I’ve seen in this thread is side attacking side.
I do wonder, though, why the law we already have doesn’t already cover this. The Equal Pay Act, a part of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1963, already expressly forbids paying one sex less than the other for the same job. It states,
“The Equal Pay Act (part of the Fair Labor Standards Act) prohibits wage discrimination by employers and labor organizations based solely on sex.(d) Prohibition of sex discrimination (1) No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex: Provided, That an employer who is paying a wage rate differential in violation of this subsection shall not, in order to comply with the provisions of this subsection, reduce the wage rate of any employee.”
Given this, it seems logical to assume that there is some other underlying cause that accounts for the disparity – one I’m not sure we can legislate. I’d be interested to hear from others what they think that might be.
jeffcollier about 10 years ago
Hey, the sixties called. They’d like their laws enforced. If Obama spent half the time using the laws on the books that he spends mugging for midterm votes, he’d actually accomplish something I could like.
JimmyM01 about 10 years ago
The following two quotes are from a 2009 study commissioned by the U.S. Department of labor.
“There are observable differences in the attributes of men and women that account for most of the wage gap. Statistical analysis that includes those variables has produced results that collectively account for between 65.1 and 76.4 percent of a raw gender wage gap of 20.4 percent, and thereby leave an adjusted gender wage gap that is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent.”
“However, despite these gains the raw wage gap continues to be used in misleading ways to advance public policy agendas without fully explaining the reasons behind the gap.”
http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf
Once again Obama and his minions are lying to the people in order to secure votes from the ignorant.