The Pros and Cons of Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage.

The Pros and Cons of Increasing the Federal Minimum wage.


Increasing the federal minimum wage could result in a net job loss of

approximately 500,000 workers (0.3%) (as the CBO states 0 percent impact on

employment is a reasonable trade off), although it would mean increasing

wages for 16.5 million others.


According to the Congressional Budget Office,  2 positive effects would occur

by increasing the minimum wage which would be: It would increase the family

income for 16.5 million,  and for approximately 900,000 of these workers they

would be lifted out of the federal poverty bracket.

The negative effects would be for the same said workers would be the

elimination of some jobs.

This is a "for the greater good" argument - are there more that would benefit

or more that would lose from this minimum wage increase? If you look at it in

those terms of black and white it appears it will be more of a positive than a

negative.

The proposal is to raise minimum wage from the current $7.25 an hour to

$10.10.

As a group, workers with earnings being increased would be paying more in

taxes and receive a reduction in federal benefits, however the trade off is

those few (in relation to those receiving a wage increase) who do lose their

jobs would pay less in taxes and have their federal benefits increased -

nullifying the positive and negative effect either way, in that respect.

Therefore, since it is estimated more people would be being positively

effected (16.5 million) versus those who would lose their jobs (500,000), the

wage increase appears to be something to be supported.

Republicans that are against this seem to have an insecurity issue. Does

supporting the lower income workers somehow threaten their elite salary

status? Does oppressing those who are already repressed somehow make

them feel more powerful?

This is an issue of wealth redistribution that seems fair, but the wealthy are

constantly wanting lower taxes - so they want to obtain their wealth and

continue increasing their income - it sounds like greed to me!

The world is a better place when everyone is happy - when equality is a goal

to be achieved, not something to avoid. We should not be striving to make the

gaps between income levels larger - but working to bring everyone closer

together.

What the wealthy seem to forget (often conveniently) is that where they came

from often supports where they end up. The wealthy will say that they have

worked hard for what they have and for what status they have achieved in life,

however, they fail to recognize to themselves and others that they were

brought up in a very conducive environment to allow their success to be

realized.

Often those that have come "from nothing" and have made something of

themselves - who have achieved a high status in the world - do not embody

the attitude that those who have come from nothing and have not achieved

great things should be further oppressed - but generally support the very

programs and services that allowed them to achieve the income and social

standing they are currently enjoying. Generally these people that have

achieved great things despite their background are very grateful and wish to

encourage and support those that came from the very beginnings they did.

It is very easy to live in a bubble when you are wealthy and forget about those

who are less fortunate than you are, but that is not a very "American" stance

is it? Aren't we "the land of opportunity"?

Republicans seem intent on highlighting that the focus should be on creating

not destoying job opportunities - but this seems just a convenient argument. If

they really cared about those less fortunate - why would their platform

generally always be about decreasing funding to social programs that

support the less fortunate? About increasing taxes for the poor and

decreasing taxes for the rich?

Personally, as our household income has increased throughout the years our

party idenitifcation could much more lean to the right, but morally and

ethically I cannot allign myself with a party that seems to want to keep those

that are at the lower end of the income bracket continually oppressed.

Equality is very important to me in all forms - racial, gender, sexuality, and

income. I enjoy seeing those less fortunate and who have come from meager

beginnings rise up and thrive - and if I can assist them through direct contact,

or taxes, or by being on the supporting end of passing laws that make it

easier for them to make something of themselves despite their humble

background then I'm all for it.

As House Minsority Lader Nancy Pelosi, D-California has stated, "It's time to

give America a raise" and I have to agree with her.