Not everyone in the United States earns enough money to live comfortably. According to the federal government's definition of poverty, any U.S. family of four whose annual income in 2006 was less than $20,444 was considered poor. In 2005, 12.6 percent of Americans—about 37 million people—lived below the poverty line. For a significant number of the poor, the condition is temporary, resulting from job loss, divorce, or unexpected and dramatic changes in living circumstances. But for some Americans, poverty is a chronic condition. Although many poor people are unemployed or employed only part-time, nearly 3 million full-time workers also live in poverty. The reason 3 million full-time workers live in poverty is because the minimum wage is set how it is. The minimum wage sat at $5.15/hour for more than ten years before it was finally raised to $7.25/hour. That poses a problem because the cost of living changes but the wage that many American workers were earning was not changing along with the cost of living. This is why many Democrats in Congress were pushing to get the minimum wage raised. They believed the increase would raise the take-home pay of millions of Americans, allowing full-time workers earning the minimum wage—and with the assistance of food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC)—to rise above the poverty threshold. It's a moral outrage that a full-time worker earning the minimum wage would still live below the poverty line, protest those who support the minimum wage increase. They argue that the wage hike will positively affect the lives of millions of American workers, including single mothers, a group at high risk of severe and ongoing poverty. More people with more money to spend will boost the economy and counter any negative effect from businesses raising prices to cover increased wages, say supporters. Finally, some proponents say that new tax cuts should not have been tied to the increase in the minimum wage because businesses have already received generous tax cuts in recent years. They fear the additional tax cuts will remove needed revenues from government coffers. Raising the minimum wage is counterproductive, declare opponents to the increase. These critics argue that the minimum wage is a weak weapon for fighting poverty because it affects only a small percentage of the workforce, and nearly half of workers receiving the minimum wage are teenagers, not people living in poverty. Raising the costs of doing business, opponents continue, will lead to higher prices and job cuts, which will hurt businesses and low-income workers alike. Critics insist that the market works best for the economy when the laws of supply and demand determine wages. Finally, many opponents suggest that a better way to help the working poor would be to expand the EITC, which rewards work without interfering in the market.
In my opinion, I believe that any person working full-time should be earning enough to live comfortably. I don't think it's right that a person can work 40, 50 or 60 hours a week and still live below the poverty line. And most likely they are working a minimum wage job that is not the most pleasant of all jobs. They could very well be working at McDonald's, or Wal-mart, or even as a factory worker. These are all very undesirable jobs, but someone has to do them. And yes, a lot of minimum wage workers are teenagers, but it wouldn't hurt to pay them more either. I mean I work at Menards and I get paid minimum wage during the week and an extra $2.50 an hour on the weekends, but it still doesn't seem like a lot. One week I put in over 50hours and I only get paid $350 for it. Only $350 for 50 hours of hard work. That just doesn't seem right to me. And the fact that there are people who work that much every week, and are only getting paid that when they have a family to support and way more living expenses then I have as a teenager, just doesn't seem right. I do understand the reaction effects of raising the minimum wage of prices at those businesses increasing for the consumer, but that contradicts the whole reason of raising the minimum wage. If the minimum wage gets raised, and then the price of consumer products also raises, that defeats the purpose and only continues on with the problem that we were trying to solve by raising the minimum wage in the first place. And it would be a lot to expect of businesses to not raise their prices for the consumer if they have to pay their workers more because that is extra money that the business owners don't have. So by the government providing tax breaks or some kind of financial aid to those small businesses who need time to adjust to the change financially, that help would be provided. Also, if the wages that workers were paid were determined by the laws of supply and demand, the workers of our country would not be in this financial crunch that they are finding themselves in right now. So, I believe that the minimum wage should be raised so that all working Americans are able to live comfortably, but I believe that it needs to be done in a way that keeps the cost of living in a realistic proportion with the wages that workers are being paid.
An article that supports my opinion: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/ideas/2008/06/060608.html
No comments:
Post a Comment