Political Crossfire Forums

Richard Owl Mirror · Joined: 28 May 2006 Posts: 9002

Minimum wage increase tied to tax cuts
Republican leaders are willing to allow the first minimum wage increase in a decade but only if it's coupled with a cut in future inheritance taxes on multimillion-dollar estates, congressional aides said Friday.

~@~

Now if this move doesn't reveal the Republicans true allegence, I don't know what would.

Quote: The maneuver is aimed at defusing the wage hike as a campaign issue for Democrats while using its popularity to spur enactment of the Republican Party's long-sought goal of permanently cutting taxes on millionaires' estates.

The Senate could take it up next week before leaving on a monthlong recess.

Up or DOWN votes are reserved for Republican give-aways alone ?
These guys are sure showing the American people their true colors !

Free Thinkr · Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:20 pm Post subject:

Yep; firmly against social engineering. Good.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7783

Minimum wage increases would have to come with tax cuts. As wage increases, so does the cost of labor, and thus the cost of product. Without more money to spend, consumption would decrease.

LeopardPM · Joined: 21 Oct 2005 Posts: 1226 Location: Arizona

LostSoul3412 wrote: Minimum wage increases would have to come with tax cuts. As wage increases, so does the cost of labor, and thus the cost of product. Without more money to spend, consumption would decrease.

the cost to produce the product would rise, but that does not necessarily mean that a market price would increase - prices are not tied to production costs except as a minimum level.

SouthernComfort · Joined: 29 Jul 2006 Posts: 75 Location: MA

I'll agree with you. The Republicans should stick to their guns instead of just trying to appease all groups. However I am against inheritence taxes on any level. I just don't like the way they are approaching this.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7783

LeopardPM wrote: the cost to produce the product would rise, but that does not necessarily mean that a market price would increase

How can the cost of product rise, but not the market price? Without an increase in market value, the cost of production would be greater than the price of the product.

LeopardPM wrote: - prices are not tied to production costs except as a minimum level.

Seeing as how this addresses minimum wage...

ubikk · Joined: 27 Jul 2006 Posts: 2091

Free Thinkr wrote: Yep; firmly against social engineering. Good.

According to a recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Center, 86 percent of Americans favor raising the minimum wage, and according to this report 43 percent of Americans consider raising the minimum wage a top priority.

ubikk · Joined: 27 Jul 2006 Posts: 2091

SouthernComfort wrote: I'll agree with you. The Republicans should stick to their guns instead of just trying to appease all groups. However I am against inheritence taxes on any level. I just don't like the way they are approaching this.

I support inheritance taxes. It's income like anything else. The person who receives the inheritance has an increase in net worth. It's a gift. We don't let people just give anybody else whatever they want without counting it as income. It should not matter whether the gift comes before or after someone's death.

A little research shows that before the inheritance tax cuts, on average only 1% of the estates are taxed and of those on average only 20% of the estate is subject to the tax. Well below the normal income tax bracket. That means that only 0.02% of the value of estates in the US are taxed. That's pretty low and seems pretty fair. Why cut even that little bit at the expense of working american's tax dollars? http://www.cbpp.org/pubs/estatetax.htm

We're a democracy, not an aristocracy.

ubikk · Joined: 27 Jul 2006 Posts: 2091

LostSoul3412 wrote: Minimum wage increases would have to come with tax cuts. As wage increases, so does the cost of labor, and thus the cost of product. Without more money to spend, consumption would decrease.

Not necesarily. Raising the minimum wage shifts the way money is spent and increases demand for goods and services at the bottom end of the supply chain. This has a "bubble-up" economic effect.

Note that raising the minimum wage 10 years ago did not lead to inflation, nor did it cause the economy to slow. Growth increased and inflation decreased.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7783

ubikk wrote: Not necesarily. Raising the minimum wage shifts the way money is spent and increases demand for goods and services at the bottom end of the supply chain. This has a "bubble-up" economic effect.

The only effect bubble-up economics has on the Capitalist system is the drop in quality of product to accommodate the demands of product at decreased price. The quality never bubbles, only drops. As the needs of society drop in value, the quality of such goods drops to meet that need. From there, society is spent purchasing poor quality goods which would hold no standing to goods imported from foreign nations. Essentially, business would be absorbed by foreign companies producing goods of greater quality.

ubikk wrote: Note that raising the minimum wage 10 years ago did not lead to inflation, nor did it cause the economy to slow. Growth increased and inflation decreased.

The value of the dollar has been in decline since WWII ended... growth and inflation were already dropping far before 10 years ago.

gavnook · Joined: 18 Jan 2006 Posts: 1916 Location: Arizona

ubikk wrote: Free Thinkr wrote: Yep; firmly against social engineering. Good.

According to a recent poll conducted by the Pew Research Center, 86 percent of Americans favor raising the minimum wage, and according to this report 43 percent of Americans consider raising the minimum wage a top priority.

Well, I guess that settles it.

Americans are stupid.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7783

gavnook wrote: Well, I guess that settles it.

Americans are stupid.

That or the 43% of Americans polled were on minimum wage...

SouthernComfort · Joined: 29 Jul 2006 Posts: 75 Location: MA

ubikk wrote: SouthernComfort wrote: I'll agree with you. The Republicans should stick to their guns instead of just trying to appease all groups. However I am against inheritence taxes on any level. I just don't like the way they are approaching this.

I support inheritance taxes. It's income like anything else. The person who receives the inheritance has an increase in net worth. It's a gift. We don't let people just give anybody else whatever they want without counting it as income. It should not matter whether the gift comes before or after someone's death.

A little research shows that before the inheritance tax cuts, on average only 1% of the estates are taxed and of those on average only 20% of the estate is subject to the tax. Well below the normal income tax bracket. That means that only 0.02% of the value of estates in the US are taxed. That's pretty low and seems pretty fair. Why cut even that little bit at the expense of working american's tax dollars? http://www.cbpp.org/pubs/estatetax.htm

We're a democracy, not an aristocracy.

Your probably right, I didn't know it was that low. But do you also receive capital gains tax for inheriting that property?

Gatz Nieblas · Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 99 Location: California

Shame on the republicans for once again displaying that all their game is is politics. The Republicans always speak of being the party of free enterprise and capitalism, but cant even argue, to the simplest extent, in favor of the free market. I watched the senate and House debates on the minimum wage that was proposed by Senator Ted Kennedy and not even Bill Frist, THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER, had any effective arguments against the minimum wage. The minimum wage stifles employee productivity and, overtime, does nothing but cause inflation. It is a political maneuver that still holds influence and it shows with the report brought up in this thread. As far as I am concerned, if the republicans want to cut taxes and add a minimum wage increase to it then they can keep their tax cut and all of their pathetic attempts to make compromises with socialism.

SouthernComfort · Joined: 29 Jul 2006 Posts: 75 Location: MA

Gatz Nieblas wrote: Shame on the republicans for once again displaying that all their game is is politics. The Republicans always speak of being the party of free enterprise and capitalism, but cant even argue, to the simplest extent, in favor of the free market. I watched the senate and House debates on the minimum wage that was proposed by Senator Ted Kennedy and not even Bill Frist, THE SENATE MAJORITY LEADER, had any effective arguments against the minimum wage. The minimum wage stifles employee productivity and, overtime, does nothing but cause inflation. It is a political maneuver that still holds influence and it shows with the report brought up in this thread. As far as I am concerned, if the republicans want to cut taxes and add a minimum wage increase to it then they can keep their tax cut and all of their pathetic attempts to make compromises with socialism.

Actually they did have an argument. The argument was that raising minimum wage would result in employers cutting jobs and cutting benefits in order to continue operating their business. I am for an increase, but 7.25 in three years is a bit extreme. That in ten years is a much more possible solution.

Gatz Nieblas · Joined: 20 Jul 2006 Posts: 99 Location: California

Why does the nation need the minimum wage at all?

SouthernComfort · Joined: 29 Jul 2006 Posts: 75 Location: MA

Gatz Nieblas wrote: Why does the nation need the minimum wage at all?

So employeers can't get away with paying $2 an hour. Of course you can say "just don't work at a place where that is all they pay you, but in some cases you may not be able to get a better job.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 7783

SouthernComfort wrote: So employeers can't get away with paying $2 an hour. Of course you can say "just don't work at a place where that is all they pay you, but in some cases you may not be able to get a better job.

If the price of labor is only $2 an hour, the demand for goods at that price level will cause production to accommodate such values. Business is always willing to accommodate all levels of wage...

Because it's a great opportunity for a new market...

SouthernComfort · Joined: 29 Jul 2006 Posts: 75 Location: MA

LostSoul3412 wrote: SouthernComfort wrote: So employeers can't get away with paying $2 an hour. Of course you can say "just don't work at a place where that is all they pay you, but in some cases you may not be able to get a better job.

If the price of labor is only $2 an hour, the demand for goods at that price level will cause production to accommodate such values. Business is always willing to accommodate all levels of wage...

Because it's a great opportunity for a new market...

But lets say that you live in a town where the only job available to you at this point is to work for a local privatley owned business. This business happens to sell shoes. Your employeer pays you $3.50 an hour. Yes the shoe prices might accommodate your wage but what about the other businesses around. Will the gocery store who pays it's employees $7.00 accomadate to your $3.50 wage? What about the other businesses in town? What if you are stuck in the only business that pays it's employess under $6.00?

LeopardPM · Joined: 21 Oct 2005 Posts: 1226 Location: Arizona

SouthernComfort wrote: Gatz Nieblas wrote: Why does the nation need the minimum wage at all?

So employeers can't get away with paying $2 an hour.

You say that, if not for the minimum wage, employers would pay rock-bottom $2 for labor... why not $1... or $.01? What explains why any employer would ever pay more than minimum wage - shouldn't every employer be paying minimum wage no matter what the job is then?

employers are not 'getting away' with paying $2 - do you see engineers or architects working for $10/hour? Why not? Don't those employers want to pay $2/hour as well, or, at least the minimum amount they can?

Employers want to pay as little as possible, and employees want to be paid as much as possible... so how are the market wages determined?

Labor is just a commodity, like apples or cars. People that sell their labor, their 'product', determine for themselves how much it is worth - employers do not determine this. Employers determine how much the purchase of labor is worth to them, just as a shopper determines how much an apple is worth to them. Advocating a minimum wage is the same as advocating forced purchase at a certain price of any good - shouldn't the apple picker receive at least a 'minimum' amount for their apples? Shouldn't shoppers be forced to pay this amount? Just as less shoppers would purchase apples at a certain 'minimum' price, less employers would purchase labor at the minimum wage.

Quote: Of course you can say "just don't work at a place where that is all they pay you, but in some cases you may not be able to get a better job.
in what cases? Are the factors relating to these cases changable by the worker? What type of worker/person has more options open to them as far as employment?