Help please with details of new minimum wage law?

[MethuenProgressive]

Google isn't being kind to me tonight.
The "it'll hurt mom & pop stores" arguement - didn't I hear there were limits as to who had to pay? Something to do with the numbers of employees, etc?

[RB TexLa]

1. Department of Labor

http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/wages/minimumwage.htm

[TahitiNut]

2. Most "mom and pop" stores aren't subject to the FLSA.

When folks make such claims, they both display ignorance and project ignorance on their audience. In addition, the most populous states (e.g. California, New York) already have state minimum wage laws that require wages higher than the federal minimums. Thus, there's virtually no impact on the wages of workers in those states.

Paying workers more equitably is NOT the same as throwing cash into the fireplace. That money is "paid forward" - those workers are able to buy more of that business's product ... and business actually thrives. When jobs pay more, more people are willing to take those jobs. That brings more people into the labor force - increasing participation in our economic system and producing more. "Producing more" is synonymous with "increasing the GDP." This is the only valid "supply side" reality: greater economic participation creates greater wealth overall.


Having engaged in such discussions more times than I can count in the last forty years, I'm convinced that in the race between 'education' and 'disinformation' more money is being spent on the latter. Too many people seem to WANT to be stupid. This stuff just ain't rocket science. After literally dozens of mandated minimum wage increases at the state and federal levels in the last 60 years post WW2, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the constantly repeated claims of the anti-labor crowd are true. None. Zilch. Nada. The specious 'references' sometimes used are totally deceitful.

[MethuenProgressive]

3. Thank you both very much!

:yourock:

[TahitiNut]

4. I think it should be noted by EVERY progressive ...

... that, by far, the most successful economic programs (in terms of cost/benefit) in this nation's history have been "trickle up" rather than "trickle down."

Perhaps the most stunning example of this is the post-WW2 GI Bill. In less than a decade, it was primarily responsible for more than doubling the size of the post-secondary education system in the United States. The direct and indirect benefits are almost immeasurable. Not only did it double the demand for teachers and facilities, those who benefited "raised the bar" for academic performance across the board, enormously enhancing the worldwide respect for American colleges and universities for the next fifty years! Before WW2, the U.S. was nowhere near the top in attracting the "best and brightest" in search of an education. England, France, and Germany were the centers of scholarship. I point out this one benefit because it's the one most often overlooked. It's easy to understand that people with post-secondary educations benefit our entire society - with increased earning power (and tax revenues), advancement in medical, scientific, and other professional arts, and a far more enriched social fabric. Reputable estimates of the cost/benefit ratio are huge.

In housing, the GI Bill resulted in the doubling of the proportion of people living in single-family homes. The construction trades grew enormously. The longer term 'benefits' of the Levittown phenomenon are questionable, however. Without commensurate public mass transit and ecologically sound construction techniques, we have probably condemned ourselves to a longer term quality of life that plummets precipitously.

Legitimate business relies on markets (that's the "trickle up" of legitimate business) ... people with both the willingness and ability to pay for products and services. When that market has a greater ability to pay (based on equitable compensation for their labors) then business can focus on providing those products and services in the most cost-effective manner. Cheap is not necessarily better. (Where did those dollars go?)

We are so far from being a "welfare state" (except in terms of "corporate welfare") it's ludicrous that anyone would ever make that claim. Yet they do - not out of knowledge but out of anti-social enmity.