Chicago’s Living Wage

Yeah, the Senate is too busy giving themselves raises to worry about the average Joe/Jane working for a living.  All of the “It’s bad for the economy.” arguments are total B.S.  I say give small businesses a tax break, but, we all know that small businesses aren’t the real issue.

Absolutely agree with you Generic. When George gave us $300 back on our income taxes--what wonders that was going to do? Like hardly anything at all in the wake of rising energy costs, rising health costs, dropping in the meantime unfunded mandates on states so that they have to raise their tax rates-- but the trumpets have been out ever since playing fanfare after fanfare. Raising the minimum wage is too much like the real deal in putting money into the pockets of people who need it the most which would really have a beneficial effect on the economic well being of society as a whole. Don’t want to do that--so many pols might lose their stipends from their corporate sponsors without which they couldn’t spread enough lies about whoever might oppose them and then have to look for real work.

So what exactly do the other “entry-level job” providers do when they can’t get help because WM is paying $2-3 per hour more than they can afford to pay?  In my opinion, WM will absorb the expense increase, and the local small businesses will suffer from lack of help.  Good job, alderwomen/men.

A typical WM Supercenter will only hire 350-400 employees at a time and maybe as many as 500 during the holidays.  A typical Staples will hire quite a bit less than that and a Super Target will hire a little more.  Considering the employment limitations of these companies and the current unemployment rate, I don’t think we are going to be in a labor shortage any time soon.

BTW-Here’s a little trivia for you to digest.  Every time the minimum wage is raised, the economy gets better.  Why?  When people (including corporations) with a lot of money are forced to pay it down, then the people at the bottom will spend more too.  The economy is measured by how much money circulates, not by how much is horded.

Salutation, you hit the nail right on the head.  “The Economy” is a code for corporate greed.

Salutation-

That only works when you assume that all the low-income workers keep their jobs.

A 2003 survey by Dan Fuller and Doris Geide-Stevenson reports that 46% of academic economists in the US agreed with the statement, “a minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers”. Another 28% partly agreed, and 27% disagreed.

I see that you are in that 27%.

Someone,

I never mentioned that some young and inexperienced workers would lose their job during a minimum wage increase.  I said that the economy gets better during that time.  That’s proven through historical numbers (look at what happened to the Dow-Jones Industrial average, NASDAQ index, S&P;500 index, or consumer level business sales numbers right after the ‘97, ‘91, or ‘81 increase).

If you are refering to my first paragraph, I just stated that smaller entry-level job providers wouldn’t eliminate applicants by applying the standard.

During the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s the minimum wage was increased by small increments - .10 - .30 an hour every several years, or every year, depending on inflation.  Business NEVER let workers go because of the higher wage.  Starting in 1980, with the Reagan Administration, the wage was allowed to fall by at least 40% in buying power and has never caught up.  The earlier wages kept up with not only inflation but the poverty level for a family of 3 as well.  Now, the Earned Income Tax Credit, medicaid, food stamps and other essential needs must be paid to workers by the taxpayers.  Just another give-away to corporations that refuse to pay a living wage.  The minimum wage, to pay the same standard of living as before the 80’s, would need to be at least $8.50.