Boehner Shoots Down Obama’s Minimum Wage Hike - UPDATED: WH Hits Back Against Boehner
Last edited Wed Feb 13, 2013, 04:31 PM - Edit history (1)
Source: TPM
House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) on Wednesday shot down President Obama's proposal unveiled at the State of the Union to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $9.
"I've been deadling with the minimum wage issue for the last 28 years that I've been in elected office," he told reporters. "And when you raise the price of employment, guess what happens? You get less of it. At a time when Americans are still asking the question 'Where are the jobs?' why would we want to make it harder for small employers to hire people?"
He argued that raising the minimum wage makes it harder for low-skilled workers to enter the workforce and acquire skills to advance up the ladder.
"Listen, I've got 11 brothers and sisters on every rung of the economic ladder. I know about this issue as much as anybody in this town. And what happens when you take away the first couple of rungs on the economic ladder -- you make it harder for people to get on the ladder," Boehner said. "Our goal is to get people on the ladder and help them climb that ladder so they can live the American dream. And a lot of people who are being the paid minimum wage are being paid that because they come to the workforce with no skills. And this makes it harder for them to acquire the skills they need in order to climb that ladder successfully."
Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/boehner-shoots-down-obamas-minimum-wage-hike
WH Hits Back Against Boehner:
Minimum Wage Hike Wont Harm Job Market
White House Defends Minimum Wage Increase
SAHIL KAPUR FEBRUARY 13, 2013, 2:35 PM
House Speaker John Boehners (R-OH) swift rejection of President Obamas proposal during the State of the Union to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $9 has reignited a long-running, contentious battle over the economic consequences of a price floor for labor. Perhaps predictably the latest skirmish has begun with a salvo of economic studies from each side.
[W]hen you raise the price of employment, guess what happens? You get less of it, Boehner told reporters Wednesday morning during a Capitol Hill press conference with the House GOP leadership. And what happens when you take away the first couple of rungs on the economic ladder? You make it harder for people to get on the ladder. Our goal is to get people on the ladder and help them climb that ladder so they can live the American dream.
The White House shot back against Boehners claim that the policy would lead to job losses and particularly harm low-skilled workers.
We have a lot of empirical evidence on this question, and the best studies consistently find that the minimum wage has no adverse effect on unemployment, a senior administration official told TPM on Wednesday afternoon.
-snip-
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/02/white-house-defends-minimum-wage-increase.php?ref=fpa
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,170 posts)You don't know shit from shinola.
louis-t
(23,297 posts)until they're 75 and drop dead from exhaustion. You ain't foolin' anyone. Did I mention what an asshole he is?
RDANGELO
(3,434 posts)contributes to the income disparity and declining middle class that we now have.
Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)Guess he thinks we don't deserve to eat.
The Magistrate
(95,252 posts)He is wrong, of course: raising wages increases employment, as it increases consumer spending and economic activity over-all, but still, he handed us an excellent tool for nationalizing the election and driving turn-out. It does not get more basic than 'Want more money? Vote for the Democrat!'
KG
(28,752 posts)classykaren
(769 posts)No one or hardly anyone in other states want to pay minumun wage. The same Nursing Homes that were paying 10 for a CNA starting paying 8 and less for back breaking work they said there was so many people out of work they could do this
Roland99
(53,342 posts)Fact sheet for 2009 minimum wage increaseMinimum Wage Issue Guide
http://www.epi.org/publication/mwig_fact_sheet/
lib2DaBone
(8,124 posts)30 Plus years of a declining middle class because of Reaganomics.... and they STILL don't get it.
Let me change that.. they "get it"... alright... they just don't WANT people receiving a fair wage for fair labor.
And shamefully, of couse.... the MSM picks it up and repeats it exactly as the Republicans demand... while the economy slips into cardiac arrest.
indie9197
(509 posts)My first job was minimum wage at $2.10/hr in a grocery store in 1976. At the time I remember seeing signs at construction sites looking for carpenters at $10/hr and bricklayers at $12/hr. I couldn't wait to learn how to be a bricklayer! Back then you could support a family on $10/hr.
So at that ratio, today carpenters should be making 5X minimum wage but they are not. I don't have any answers I am just saying that minimum wage should not be so close to that of skilled labor. I wish carpenters could make $30-$40 an hour but for whatever reason, illegal immigrants, etc. it is not happening. That used to be a great profession but it has disappeared as a way to make a living (in general).
dotymed
(5,610 posts)As they should. Collective bargaining is the key. A damned wall street broker ( much easier skill set) gets paid about about 30-40 x times that amount. They take phone orders and stand on the trading floor shouting their orders.....that is fucked up and they have no Union (as far as I know). Some DU'er said that TPTB was nonsense, there is no such thing....
Collective bargaining is the only way a trades person can earn what they're worth..
Contractors are a different thing, especially residential ones. In TN. most of them pay $8-$10 an hour. No benefits and they 1099 the workers and claim they are "independent contractors." I remember when the wages were better but they still told you, "if you fall, you're fired before you hit the floor." I am sure that they are not all this way, I'm just relating my personal experience (and that of all the carpenters I know). Most residential contractors now use immigrant labor, they are easier to control...
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)they really need to come up with new BS.
midwest irish
(155 posts)In fact, it was just raised to that by Boehner's Republican buddies in the state house and gov seat. So he doesnt want it raised federally by a democrat but thinks its great policy when republicans do it?
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/01/02/a-few-dollars-more.html
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)the only way it doesn't is if Boehner can keep it from coming to a vote.
there have always been a substantial number of Republicans who cross the line to vote for increased minimum wages. there will be enough this time to pass it.
so when you see Boehner's comments, note what he DOES NOT SAY:
1) he doesn't say it can't pass the house
2) he doesn't say it's not popular
he just says it's a bad idea. because that's all he's got.
truthisfreedom
(23,152 posts)Under 18, one level. 18-21, another level. 21+, $9/hr.
surrealAmerican
(11,363 posts)... to replace older workers with younger ones?
timdog44
(1,388 posts)Does JB really have a brother or sister making only 7.25 an hour and is supporting a family on that? Boehner should have his house and car taken away from him, and his bank accounts and investments. Then keep him in DC at even $9/hour. I'll bet he would not be so tan. Then he might understand what things in the real world are all about.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Those are jobs most people would not consider meaningful employment, but are a huge challenge to those who are lucky enough to get them and get to feel pride of being workers. If he doesn't want to show the pay stubs of his siblings to prove his case, I'm sorry, but IMO, Boehner is flat out lying.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)It would be hard for me to believe any of those pay stubs to indicate anything less that $20/hour, because that is not even a lot of income. Family of 4, buying a house and a car and meals, etc. on $40,000 is almost impossible.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)GOPhers are into nepotism as part of their family values spiel. For their own families, not anyone else's.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)DallasNE
(7,403 posts)But let's call Boehner's bluff. Have CBO score raising the Minimum wage to $9 an hour. That is a straight forward thing to measure. How would that affect employment, inflation, aggregate demand and GDP growth.
B-ONE Lancer
(15 posts)There has been over 2,500 comments on what the DIC-HEAD, has said.
Now the DIC--HEAD wants to tell us his family likes making shit for money and everyone else should like it too and they ( his family and us ) should also figure out how to find the next rung of a ladder---really---with a family member like that who needs enemies.
This DIC--HEAD said he's been dealing with this issue for 28 years---REALLY---lets divide his 28 years of god damn right wing experience and lack of service on screwing citizens of this country and see how much money he has given to the poor/high school student/and the middle class living on $7.25 hour ( $7.25 / 28 years = $0.25 DIC---HEAD cents a year.
Better yet lets divide the the wage back when it $2.95 when he came into office and see what we get, shall we---$7.25-$2.95 = $4.30 a hour so $4.35 / 28 = $0.15 a hour raise every year of DIC ---HEAD money.
So for 10,220 days ( 28 years of golf ) this DIC--HEAD has been in office he has given this country and its citizens and his family members $0.15 cents a year more to live on---oh whoopee.
Now this DIC---HEAD wants, and his side kicks: Cantor/ Hersling/ Blackburn ( who drink $780 dollar bottles of wine while trying to undermine the country at lobbistist behests) and others of this DIC---HEAD ilk, are going to take another week off to do what---collect millions from DIC---HEADS like the John Birchers ( Kochs) to further damage the economics of this country.
This DIC ---HEAD and his DIC---HEAD buddies made the sequester deal and now there going to take break----REALLY, what about a standard of living wage.
My answer to him take your DIC---HEAD $7.25 and live on it for a hour while your not in office doing your DIC ---HEAD job---what a full blown DIC---HEAD drunk.
bamacrat
(3,867 posts)It means different things to different people. Some people see it as becoming an uber rich person who is powerful and connected. Others see it as simply not having to worry about money. They don't want to be rich, they just want to be able to buy a house, a car, send their kids to a good school. The people the minimum wage applies to have no chance at attaining anything other than the American Nightmare. This has become more of a reality than the dream. Hard work means nothing if you aren't paid for the work you do. Lack of skill is a problem, but it is a problem because the stupids in our government won't invest in people to ensure we all have the chance to attain our version of the dream. You do not care about humans if you are more concerned with the few that have most instead of the many that have the least. We will be judged by history and the world by how we treat those less fortunate in our society, not by the billionaires we have created on their backs.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)Actually, I think "two cats in the yard" is a guarantee. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Should be a bare minimum for all Americans.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)"And a lot of people who are being the paid minimum wage are being paid that because they come to the workforce with no skills. And this makes it harder for them to acquire the skills they need in order to climb that ladder successfully."
This IS the going wage no matter how many years experience you have asshole.
Historic NY
(37,452 posts)$125,100 (Representatives) January 1, 1991
$223,500 as speaker 2013.
appacom
(296 posts)the devil
(42 posts)When you raise the minimum wage, you put money into the hands of people who are going to spend it. Now, more money being spent means more products being purchased or services being rendered. That means that more products are going to be produced, or more services are going to be done for people. More money exchanging hands means a healthier economy.
Which is why I don't understand economics. Those who have a lot of money want to have more of it, but they are unwilling to give more to their employees, even though it could mean that their own incomes would increase as a result. Businesses are in business, it seems, to reward business owners and shareholders, but it's the workers who are going out and buying what they need. The workers are the ones who are driving the economy...when they have money.
Put it this way...if you give your child $20 a week as an allowance, the gifts you get for holidays are going to be nice. If you give your child $1 a week, you're getting dollar store gifts.
Raise the minimum wage. Here in Ontario (yes...Canada...), we went from $6.25 when I was younger to $10.25 an hour. The young people have a lot of spending power. Businesses passed the cost on to consumers (a coffee went from a buck to being about a buck and a half over those years) and not too many people complained.
Trillo
(9,154 posts)In America, the ladder is placed much like a carrot in front of a horses mouth. When someone starts climbing it, some one else comes along and kicks it out from underfoot. That person could be a banker, it could be an employer, it could be a school, it could be another malicious human, that fact remains that someone is always there to kick the ladder down when someone is on it. People are resilient, and great propaganda can convince them to get up and try again. After doing this umpteen times, people begins to question whether the ladder is really there, if instead there is merely the illusion of a ladder. Few question that there are a very small minority of folks that seem to be at the top of the ladder. Perhaps they are directing the kickers on the ground, paying them perhaps to kick the ladder away.
By not getting on that ladder, illusion or not, nobody can kick it out from underneath. The lie is "work to get ahead", the truth is, "Work to get someone else ahead." The transformation is "Work to get someone else ahead?"
airplaneman
(1,240 posts)I think the reason why corporations are against it is because american capitalism has gotten really good at making lots of money only for a few. They figured out that screwing the employee was one of the greatest ways of getting there. This is a change that has occurred in the last 30 years. You never hear them say that raising the CEO pay from 10 million to 50 million is bad for business even if the company is going bankrupt. With this mentality ruling american capitalism how could they ever give a shit about their workers or see a different model.
-Airplane