Wolfeboro/Gilford
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

That's what I meant then not now.

2 posters

Go down

That's what I meant then not now. Empty That's what I meant then not now.

Post  fshnski Mon Jan 06, 2014 9:07 am

"It may be true — as some economists argue — that any big jumps in the minimum wage discourage employers from hiring more workers," then-Sen. Obama wrote. Nevertheless, Obama still wanted to do it, so he laid out his best case: "When the minimum wage hasn't been changed in nine years and has less purchasing power in real dollars than it did in 1955, so that someone working full-time today in a minimum-wage job doesn't earn enough to rise out of poverty, such arguments carry less force," Obama added.

Little of Obama's 2006 case applies today. First, the minimum wage was last increased in 2007, and 2008, and 2009 — not quite the distance in time that Obama cited in The Audacity of Hope. Second, the minimum wage has had more or less purchasing power in real dollars at various times over the years. Obama's argument (in the inequality speech) that it is below where it was when Truman was in the White House is true of only one of Truman's eight years in office; the rest of that time, the real value of the minimum wage was below where it is today. And today's minimum wage is actually higher in real terms than it was a various points in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s.

Third, a minimum-wage worker today does in fact "earn enough to rise out of poverty." A full-time $7.25-an-hour minimum-wage job pays $15,080 a year, while the federal poverty level for an individual is $11,490.

The bottom line is, the case for raising the minimum wage is nowhere near open-and-shut, something Sen. Barack Obama realized before becoming President Barack Obama. But that older, more nuanced view of the minimum wage will likely be absent from Obama's rhetoric in coming weeks; the new campaign will be all about politics. "Democratic Party leaders, bruised by months of attacks on the new health care program, have found an issue they believe can lift their fortunes both locally and nationally in 2014: an increase in the minimum wage," the New York Times reported on Dec. 29. The paper added that leading Democrats hope to use the minimum wage as "not only a wedge issue that they hope will place Republican candidates in a difficult position, but also a tool with which to enlarge the electorate in a nonpresidential election."

That's what is coming. Republicans may hope to discuss the minimum wage as a policy issue rather than a wedge issue. But they'll get no help from the president; the Barack Obama of 2006 won't be around.


http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-on-the-minimum-wage-then-and-now/article/2541587

_________________
"If you like your health care plan … you can keep your health care plan! … Period!"

If you like your Doctor, you can keep your Doctor.
fshnski
fshnski

Posts : 4223
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : Woofbura

Back to top Go down

That's what I meant then not now. Empty Re: That's what I meant then not now.

Post  WHL Mon Jan 06, 2014 1:33 pm

He needs to get people's mind off his failing baby-Obamacare. So start class warfare again..
WHL
WHL
Admin

Posts : 6057
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-01-14

Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum