Prague Twin

Saturday, July 29, 2006

The House of Representatives passed the minimum wage increase.

But, very big but, this bill would be a serious reduction in the estate tax. I haven't read the bill yet, so I'm not sure how much, but the Democrats would surely not be getting so upset about it if it wasn't significant.

In any case, I doubt this bill will get through the Senate.

The most interesting thing I heard about this issue was from a comment that Stephanie left on the last post which is....

Something people on the top just don't understand is that the difference between $6/hr and $9/hr is a big deal to those who've earned the raises to be getting $9/hr.

For some reason, this reminded me of the illegal aliens who were prejudiced against the new illegals. Not to compare legal wage earners in the states to illegal aliens, but to compare two distictly different groups of working people who don't want advantages given to those that are ever so marginally under them.

Stephanie is right: the people at the top have no idea what a difference that is. Hey, just tell them in percentage terms at they will get it.

The proposed increase will mean a 40% increase in wages for the lowest paid americans.

As much as they deserve it, this will have a very large impact on the economy. The prep cook $7.25 now, will need to quickly get raises since the diswasher now makes the same money. There is a knock-on effect with minimum wage increases. The end result is inflation. The Fed will continue to raise rates trying to stop it, but with oil and wages up, there will be no stopping it.

But what else can you do? $5.15 is riduculous.

8 Comments:

  • That is what happens when an economic program strips social considerations from the agenda.
    It is no longer for the people as a whole, but for the top end.
    This type of thinking goes way beyonf tradition liberal economics to that feudalism we have talkd about.
    People are essentially slaves to capital.
    To include people in an economic system does not imply socialism, it rather implies a healthy society.

    By Blogger Cartledge, at 9:14 PM  

  • PT et al,

    In the 10th response to your penultimate posting, Reality Based Educator stated: “It’s a shame the estate tax cuts aren‘t going to pass though。”

    I challenge this person to defend cutting the estate tax。

    Currently, an individual may pass 2 million dollars tax free; a couple may pass 4 million dollars tax free。 Unfortunately, a million dollars does not go as far as it used to。 I haven’t checked the exact figures but in the US, it probably only buys 2/3 as much gasoline as it did a year or 18 months ago。

    W/ a little estate planning, one is able to protect one‘s estate from Uncle Sam。 You may have to pay a lawyer a few thousand but its worth it。

    The bottom line is this。 Our government has been hijacked by King George and his brainwashed court of neocons whose idea of a great society is to the protect the uber rich at the expense of all others and any policy that runs counter to the protection of the assets of the uber rich。

    Let’s hear it REE。 Defend cutting the estate tax。 If you are going to mention the term ”family farm“ please be prepared to cite chapter and verse, naming family farms that had to be sold by the heir b/c they had to pay estate taxes。

    Be ashamed。 Be very ashamed。

    Of course, if you were being ironic, all is forgiven。

    The Kid

    By Anonymous The Loop Garoo Kid, at 11:35 PM  

  • Kid

    So you believe in the redistribution of wealth?

    By Anonymous Arch Stanton, at 12:48 AM  

  • Minimum wage hikes are nothing more than a defacto tax on business that only results in higher prices in the long run. They fix nothing and move jobs off shore. Cant anyone see this?

    By Anonymous Arch Stanton, at 1:09 AM  

  • So you believe in the redistribution of wealth?
    Under unregulated monerast policy you are quite correct.
    Without reasonable regulation business has a free hand.
    But might I ask, where is the much trumpeted 'trickle down' which is supposed to provide the equity in this system?
    You have already said business will not opart with their goodies.

    By Blogger Cartledge, at 1:20 AM  

  • $5.15 is ridiculous, not because of the number but because of the buying power. Unfortunately, changing the number does not necessarily change the buying power.

    If one wage earner working full-time could earn $5.15/hr. and gaurantee that his family had nutritious food to eat, clothes to wear, and a safe warm/cool place to sleep, running water and electricity, then $5.15 wouldn't be the least little bit ridiculous.

    Raising it to $7, or whatever, isn't going to be any less ridiculous, because it still is not going to provide the above. And that, imo, is what the goal should be. And that is something neither Democrats nor Republicans, at least not those on Capitol Hill, could care less about.

    By Blogger Stephanie, at 4:04 AM  

  • Arch. Arch, Arch, Arch, Arch.

    Think about your response. Your inquiry: "So you believe in the redistribution of wealth." That's a telling reaction.

    But no, I am not a wild eyed revolutionary. Well, maybe I am a bit wild eyed but I am certainly no communist. I am, however, against the establishment of an American peerage based upon wealth.

    Warren Buffet stated: "Without an estate tax tax, you will in effect have an aristocracy of wealth, which means you pass down the ability to command the resources of the nation based upon heredity rather than merit."

    We already have an aristocracy of wealth. Let me give 2 of its most egregious examples. Paris Hilton. If my 18 and 20 year daughters have made sex tapes, they haven't made the internet (at least so far as I know). Paris Hilton parlayed her wealth into partying, being famous for being famous, and now has her own reality TV show and various lines of gee gaws.

    And then there is our current President. He's never been varsity material. He was accepted to Andover and Yale b/c his name was Bush. He distinguished himself at neither instititution.

    In fact, a good argument could be made that everything he has accomplished has been through family $, family connections, and name recognition. This may account for the underwhelming success of our foreign policy, a subject of which our wealthy scion was happily ignorant b/f the Supremes annointed him leader of the free world.

    As the Alvin boys wrote:

    "With one hand on the Bible,
    He says he only here to serve,
    But everyone says that for better or worse,
    We get what we deserve."

    You may be right about the minimum wage. But let's see. Last year minimum wage was $5.15 and the price of price of gas hovered near $2. Now it hovers near $3. Everything requiring fuel in its production or transportation has gone up. Is it any wonder thant Americans don't want minimum wage work.

    So Arch, I don't necessarily believe in the redistribution of wealth, but Isure believe in putting curbs on the ability to accumulate obscene amounts of money through inheritence.

    Besides, w/ the war in Iraq costing 3 billion a week, the gauged profits of Exxon Mobile's last quarter would pay for less than a month of it.

    Stay cool.

    The KID

    By Anonymous The Loop Garoo Kid, at 4:59 AM  

  • Kid

    It's OK; you can just say you believe in the redistribution of wealth, without having to dress up your opinion with terms like "obscene wealth" etc.

    By Anonymous Arch Stanton, at 6:19 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home