Living Wage for All Act
Four Representatives have introduced the Living Wage for All Act. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill.; Chuy García, D-Ill.; Lateefah Simon, D-Calif.; and Analilia Mejia, D-N.J introduced the bill on Tuesday. It would raise the federal minimum wage to $25, up from $7.25. $25 per hour means $1,000 per week.
That sounds great! But. It is a direct attack on those of us on Social Security.* Many have problems with putting food on the table and will not enjoy having someone who makes a thousand a week putting our groceries in a bag when some of us draw less than that for a whole month. Some of those same people put the groceries on the shelves. Their time is to be 41.7 cents per minute. How many cans can they stock in a minute? We all know that the owner of the store gets the money to pay the thousand from us. It's a part of the cost of inventory, upkeep of the store, heating / cooling, real estate taxes, management, and profit.
Owners / management knows profit is going to take a hit. They may have been looking at self service checkouts. If a self checkout station costs $10,000 to put in, It will take much less time to pay for it at the new higher wage. Think of it as a manager: The station never fails to show up. The station never gets sick. There are no 'problems' with another station. The store can have 2 stations instead of 1 old fashioned checkout because they don't have someone filling bags.
This example, of a grocery store, is used to illustrate what happens with businesses country-wide. Present and future jobs are lost (Robots assembling cars?). Many young people will not get the experience (and its training) of responsibilities in having a job. Some of the sorting out of priorities, that young people do, will be lost; lives will be affected.
And the Representatives know they will not be held accountable for the losses and inflation which compounds on debt.
*"The SSI monthly maximum Federal amounts for 2026 are $994 for an eligible individual, $1,491 for an eligible individual with an eligible spouse, and $498 for an essential person."
There is 1 Comment
Lets look at basic economics!
Great article, Bob! One thing that needs to be said is that value needs to be what drives your wage. If a person works twice as hard and is twice as productive as another person, they should be paid twice as much. If that person works for me, I have an opportunity to make a product that others need, and I can do it at a price that a buyer can afford. If my employee is slow and works at half speed, I can not be competitive in my business.
It turns out that I can find enough productive people, so I have to pay them what they are worth and demand. When the half-speed guy wants a raise, I tell him no, as I can't be competitive when he works so slow. I explained that he should either work faster or get some training so he can provide a valuable service, and I will pay what the market demands. He said he would rather work casually and enjoy his lower wage, and going to technical school cuts into his fishing time. And besides, he says he can get a job elsewhere that pays a higher minimum wage mandated by the government. I said that counting on the government for your sustainability will lead to a long, hard life that is embarrassing to humanity, as his wage is determined by a failed government rather than his value to society.
A living wage for all has been tried, and it has failed every time. Free enterprise works when the government stays out of it, something they struggle to do. True capitalism creates jobs and leads to enormous potential for ambitious people and leaves the dead weight in the dust. This leads to many productive taxpayers who fund the government that these losers need and crave.
Add new comment