Quote:

---

Originally posted by FellowTraveler:

Can't believe this isn't up yet.

So much for those rose colored glasses...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
That this 'booming' economy has less bang for the buck than some believe...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

instead of an economic discussion this is simply another bash the present administration and it's supporters thread.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Again???!
It's been done, BDN, please give it a rest, okay?
Look, I'm no fan, but it gets old, aiight?

Let's just explore the effects or causes or whatever. We can bash the admin. on plenty of other threads.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Actually, I was referring to peeps around here that use the 'booming economy' point to underscore what a good job a certain President is doing.
The global economy (like global warming) is a ]

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TheRightStuff1:

You CHOOSETO BE ONE!!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Just to make sure that this isn't a self-slected population, time-series studies also show that economies improve AFTER an increase in the minimum wage... not before.


So.... I hope I didn't kill this thread.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Again???!
It's been done, BDN, please give it a rest, okay?
Look, I'm no fan, but it gets old, aiight?

Let's just explore the effects or causes or whatever. We can bash the admin. on plenty of other threads.

---

That is what I was attempting to do by asking FellowTraveler the point behind his/her post. My apologies if I was mistaken regarding your response. Perhaps, when you mentioned 'some people', you were simply refering to an aquaintance of yours in the energy sector who thinks the economy is booming.

What is your opinion on the causes or effects or whatever?

De-lurking to clear stuff up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
There are a lot of ways to do this, and one of the BEST ways is to raise the minimum wage (which hasn't been raised over 10 years).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Raising minimum wage slow job growth??? Not at all....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Oh I see, instead of an economic discussion this is simply another bash the present administration and it's supporters thread.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Actually, I was referring to peeps around here that use the 'booming economy' point to underscore what a good job a certain President is doing.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Yep. Too bad the Dems voted it down in the Senate yesterday. Guess they'd rather penalize the 26,000 sub-$5 million estates per year that end up paying about $6 billion in estate tax, rather than see that two million+ minimum wage workers get increased pay.

Did you realize that the total Estate tax collected in 2004 (last year for which IRS figures are available) was just $21.5 billion? Now figure the tax benefits (not to mention the social benefits) of having two million people earning an extra $2.10 and hour ($80.40 a week, $4,000.00 a year). Seems like a fair tradeoff to me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
"Divergers welcome!"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

So while the Feds may wring their hands and look helpless about the problem, the solution is readily at hand... just fatally unpopular with the current administration and Congress. The solution is to end deficit spending and redirect money back into the larger economy. There are a lot of ways to do this, and one of the BEST ways is to raise the minimum wage (which hasn't been raised over 10 years).

---

Quote:

---

I wouldn't go so far as to say fatally unpopular./ www.republicanmainstreet.org/news072806.htm

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

So if you point to a small minority of Republicans scattered through several levels of government who timidly quibble with the Party and supposedly put up a poisoned minimum-wage bill, do you really expect me to think that is significant????

I THINK I'm a realist. You... you must be a practical joker?

---

Quote:

---

I think if you were a realist you would realize that the bill had to have a little something for everyone.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

So if you point to a small minority of Republicans scattered through several levels of government who timidly quibble with the Party and supposedly put up a poisoned minimum-wage bill, do you really expect me to think that is significant????

I THINK I'm a realist. You... you must be a practical joker?

---

I think if you were a realist you would realize that the bill had to have a little something for everyone. So what if estate taxes were cut, the minimum wage would go up. There were also provisions for college tuition (the future)and abandoned mine reclamation (the environment). Are rich people getting a little richer really worth not raising the minimum wage?

http://money.cnn.com/2006/08/04/news/economy/minimum_wage/index.htm

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Not at all. Since Republicans control Congress and the Presidency the GOP passes what it wants to pass and ignores what it wants to ignore. ...Now tell me I'm not being a realist!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Fair enough.
I suppose if the minimum wage was increased that might affect the Democrats voting base thereby solidifying the GOP's control. Crafty Democrats.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
So why didn't the Republicans pass a minimum wage increase all by itself? That way they could take credit for doing it. After all they're in control. No sane Democrat would vote against it.

The fact that they had to load it up with other things they knew the Democrats wouldn't vote on tells you exactly how seriously they take raising the minimum wage.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Why couple the two?

Why not have an up and down vote on a minimum wage increase?

Why not have an up and down vote on repealing the estate tax?

We both know the answer to that question. The Republicans want to have something they can use against the Democrats going into the midterms. And they figured they might, just might, have a shot at that estate-tax-repealing-wet-dream that has been plaguing their nights for the longest time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer, cutting taxes and raising minimum wages are not the equivalent items and they really don't belong together. Cutting taxes removes several billions of dollars from the budget, but raising the minimum wage doesn't replace that revenue stream and it doesn't directly transfer benefit to minimum-wage workers.

---

Quote:

---

As an aside, in addition to raising the minimum wage (which would increase purchasing power by about 4-6 billion over three years) the government could effectively raise ALL wages by providing single-payer health care.

---

Quote:

---

BTW_ Geezer- How DO you get your logic to be so.... twisty??? You must work at it AWFULLY hard!!!

---

Quote:

---

I doubt the 50,000 or so families affected each year by estate taxes can provide more political clout that the two million plus folks who'd profit from the increase in the minimum wage.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
I guess the Republicans were also trying to appease a portion of their voting base. Crafty Republicans.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Or why not couple the two? The Democrats get the minimum wage increase they've been talking about for the past several years, and the Republicans get the reduction in the estate tax that they've been pushing for the past few years. Looks like a win-win to me. The only real losers are the acountants who get rich figuring how to help their clients avoid estate taxes. I doubt the 50,000 or so families affected each year by estate taxes can provide more political clout that the two million plus folks who'd profit from the increase in the minimum wage. Why not let everyone make a few points?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
I just did a back of the envelope calculation on Slicks' stoopit flip little comment about relative wealth and influence.

The relaively few wealthy families will gain 10,000% more excess money from the tax break than the minimum wage families will gain from the raise.

Yeah, that sounds like a fair trade to me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Actually the real losers are the next generation who have to shoulder the debt incurred by cutting more taxes while increasing spending. And more and more burden gets shifted onto the shrinking middle class. As far as the political clout of the families affected, how much money do you think they've donated to politicians versus those who would benefit from a minimum wage increase?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Yikes. And the wealthy families will be doing nothing to get that excess money while those who earn minimum wage will actually be working for that pay.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Why do I get the feeling that this is all about punishing rich people for being rich? Why do I think that we passed up an opportunity to make a compromise that would let millions of people improve their lives, afford health insurance, feed their kids good food, buy homes, etc., just because some folks can't stand the idea of rich people's families inheriting money?

The tax money estates pay isn't going to help those folks working for minimum wage. It'll go to build a porkbarrel project for some congressperson of either party. Increasing the minimum wage goes right into the wage-earners pocket. No middleman. No trickle-down. 100 cents on the dollar. Money they'll spend to boost the economy.

---

Quote:

---

Why do I think that we passed up an opportunity to make a compromise that would let millions of people improve their lives, afford health insurance, feed their kids good food, buy homes, etc.,

---

Quote:

---

The tax money estates pay isn't going to help those folks working for minimum wage.

---

Quote:

---

I don't see the problem with bundling them as a tit-for-tat deal benefiting both sides, as mentioned above. I'm not sure what you mean stating "...raising the minimum wage doesn't replace that revenue stream and it doesn't directly transfer benefit to minimum-wage workers.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
You'll get no argument from me that passing the minimum wage increase would be a good thing. So pass it by itself. That Republicans will not put the minimum wage increase to an up and down vote tells you something about their priorities. It's almost as if the thought of paying workers more per hour is abhorrent to them.

---

Quote:

---

I'll turn it around a bit. Why do we have to reward the rich. Why make things easier on them?

I thought the American dream was you work hard, play by the rules and get ahead. Instead we continue to stack the deck so that the best decision you can make to ensure a successful future is to choose to be born rich.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
...do you (think) $7.20 an hour is going to allow anyone to afford health insurance, buy a home, and improve their lives? Assuming a full time job, $7.20/ hr grosses $17,000/ year before taxes.

---

Quote:

---

You're always (talking) about how "the system works". Have you suddenly (decided it doesn't)? That ... $6 billion loss could fund something like... Head Start which right now is funded at about $7 billion. Or WIC which is funded at about $6 billion.

---

Quote:

---

And now...let's examine your math.

---

Quote:

---

...do you (think) $7.20 an hour is going to allow anyone to afford health insurance, buy a home, and improve their lives? Assuming a full time job, $7.20/ hr grosses $17,000/ year before taxes-Signy

Actually, I do- Geezer.

---

Quote:

---

Figure a couple working minimum wage jobs would see an $8,000/yr income bump, to $34,000. Figure a couple with one spouse making the average hourly salary of $16.76(say $35,000/yr) and the other the new minimum wage. That's a $4,000/yr bump to $53,000.00. I can see lots of ways an additional $4,000 to $8,000 could improve people's lives-Geezer

---

Quote:

---

You're always (talking) about how "the system works". Have you suddenly lost faith? That ... $6 billion loss could fund something like... Head Start which right now is funded at about $7 billion. Or WIC which is funded at about $6 billion.-Signy

But we both know that, unfortunately, that money will never be allocated like that. Remember that when I mention "the system works" I also apply the caveat that it works slowly, imperfectly, and with many fits and stops.

---

Quote:

---

And now...let's examine your math. -Signy
My math is that I'd rather have lots of people getting a bigger paycheck at the end of the week, and if that means than the government gets a little less tax revenue, I see it as a fair trade- Geezer

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
This "inheritance for the wealthy" is really near and dear to your heart, isn't it? You'd scrape the poor off the bottom of your shoe like dog shit, and find all kinds of justifications for it. Now I know exactly who you are.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Perhaps the minimum wage issue is near and dear to Geezer's heart. I thought Firefly fans would see the necessity of 'greasing the wheels' on occasion for the greater good.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
I suspect that if the Minimum wage or estate tax parts could make it out of committee as individual bills, the opposition to either would load them with poison pill amendments and neither would get passed. Bundling them seemed like an acceptable compromise to me, with both sides giving a bit to get somthing they wanted.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
One part of the American dream is to provide a better life for your children. That's why you work hard to get ahead. The way it works now; if you're very successful, you get to give up to 30% of your children's inheritance to the government as the price of being smart enough to make more money.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TheRightStuff1:
You think your being clever but he is the reason we all have more money now! President Bush is saving us all financially and giving us the chance to save our souls. You want to laugh at him but I laugh at you! You want to be one with the Devil just keep on this path you idiot!
You CHOOSETO BE ONE!!!
PS.,its warming to get ready for where your headed l.o.l.

TheRightStuff1

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Only 38% of minimum-wagers work full-time. "Married, spouse present" makes up only 24% of the that and only 15% of the female minimum-wage population.

---

Quote:

---

Are you saying that Congress is irretrievably controlled by wealth? If that were the case wouldn't you say that is a good reason to vote them out in November?

---

Quote:

---

Of course you would see it as a fair trade. You're not the one trying to live on $12,000 a year and depending on WIC, Head Start, Food Stamps, and the other crumbs that are tossed to the poor.

---

Quote:

---

This "inheritance for the wealthy" is really near and dear to your heart, isn't it?

---