Type to search

AFL-CIO’s Trumka Challenges Heritage’s DeMint On The Minimum Wage

Memo Pad Politics

AFL-CIO’s Trumka Challenges Heritage’s DeMint On The Minimum Wage


Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and the Republican majority in the House of Representatives may have no intention of ever bringing a minimum-wage increase to the floor for a vote, but that doesn’t mean that liberals will allow the issue to die quietly.

In an effort to raise political pressure on Republicans, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka is challenging Heritage Foundation president Jim DeMint to debate raising the $7.25-per-hour federal minimum wage. Trumka and the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest labor federation, strongly support the Democratic plan to increase the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour. DeMint and Heritage, arguably the most prominent conservative think tank, disagree (in fact, while DeMint was serving in the Senate, he proposed an amendment that would have effectively abolished the federal minimum wage altogether).

“On behalf of the twelve and a half million hard-working men and women of the AFL-CIO, I would like to invite you to join me to participate in a public forum on the minimum wage,” Trumka wrote in an open letter to DeMint, dated March 11.

“It is clear that the AFL-CIO and the Heritage Foundation have starkly contrasting opinions on this crucial issue,” he continued. “I think that the public would find an in-depth conversation between the two of us to be illuminating about what is at stake for our nation.”

DeMint has thus far declined to take Trumka up on his offer, leading the AFL-CIO to launch a social media campaign pressuring him to accept. That tactic surprises Mike Gonzalez, the Heritage Foundation’s vice president for communications.

“The AFL-CIO should know very well that we responded to the invitation on Thursday, March 20 and said that we would be very happy to have our Senior Policy Analyst on Labor Economics James Sherk debate Mr. Trumka, or anyone else at their union, on the issue of the minimum wage,” Gonzalez told The National Memo. “James has been researching this policy area for years. The nation would indeed benefit greatly from a public and detailed examination of this question. What is the AFL-CIO afraid of?”

The AFL-CIO retorts that DeMint, as the public face of the think tank — and, thus, of the opposition to a minimum-wage hike — should have the courage to make the case himself.

“I’m not too surprised Mr. DeMint is afraid to debate,” AFL-CIO director of communications Eric Hauser told The National Memo in an email. “If I thought the minimum wage should be zero, I probably wouldn’t want to debate either. But a big part of life is facing your fears. Certainly millions of American workers bravely do that every day. I hope Mr. DeMint is willing to face his fear and debate President Trumka on the minimum wage.”

If DeMint, Sherk, or any other opponent of an increased minimum wage took the podium opposite Trumka, winning over the audience would be an uphill fight. Polls have consistently shown that an overwhelming majority of American voters support raising the minimum wage. In fact, recent surveys suggest that Tea Party Republicans are the only political group that opposes increasing the rate (Democrats, Independents, and moderate Republicans all support a raise).

Additionally, many economists dispute the Heritage Foundation’s claim that raising the minimum wage would destroy 300,000 jobs. Over 600 economists — including seven Nobel laureates and eight former presidents of the American Economic Association — have signed an open letter to Congress arguing that “the weight of evidence now [shows] that increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers.” And even some analysts — such as those at the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office — who do believe that raising the minimum wage would cost some low-income workers their jobs also acknowledge that a higher wage would lift many more Americans out of poverty.

Democrats have made no secret of their desire to make the minimum wage a centerpiece of their 2014 midterm election campaigns. Trumka’s challenge to DeMint reflects liberals’ determination to keep the issue front and center in the coming weeks and months — with or without the help of a recalcitrant Congress.

Photo via Wikimedia Commons

Henry Decker

Henry Decker was formerly the Managing Editor of The National Memo. He is currently an Online Associate at MRCampaigns.

  • 1


  1. pablosemenov321 March 25, 2014

    my Aunty Sienna recently got a year old
    Jaguar only from working off a home computer… Recommended Reading C­a­s­h­F­i­g­.­ℂ­o­m

    1. Duckbudder March 25, 2014

      Is that old slut still web camming?

    2. BillP March 25, 2014

      And I got a Hummer from your Aunt Sienna by not believing you bs

  2. disqus_ivSI3ByGmh March 25, 2014

    I think this would be great! DeMint has a record of being one of the worst debaters in the history of the Senate!

    1. Independent1 March 25, 2014

      Which is probably why either he, and/or others at the Heritage Foundation are not willing to let him be the one to debate Trumka.

  3. Dominick Vila March 25, 2014

    The only silver lining coming from the GOP opposition to raise the minimum wage is that it will improve our chances of keeping control of the Senate. The only conclusion I can reach to the GOP stance on this issue, other than defending the interests of their masters, is that they are so isolated from reality that they cannot conceive the idea that millions of Americans are struggling to make ends meet, that raising the minimum wage would help them overcome their financial limitations, that raising the minimum wage would reduce dependence on programs such as MEDICAID, and that raising the minimum wage would increase the amount of disposable income in a country with an economy that depends on consumerism.
    Another possibility is that they are aware of the positive effects of raising the minimum wage, and oppose it because it would help our recovering economy. Their chances to win big in November depend largely on whether or not a strong economy exists, further reductions in unemployment, and job growth. Republicans are very much aware of this and may be doing everything they can to slow down the economy recovery that should be evident to everyone.

    1. FredAppell March 25, 2014

      “Another possibility is that they are aware of the positive effects of raising the minimum wage, and oppose it because it would help our
      recovering economy.” You nailed it Dominick, I almost used that in my own post but decided not to, however, I would like to expand on your comment further. I believe that the GOP is relying on “We the People” having short memories and even shorter patience which in turn would allow them to take all the Democratic solutions and repackage those solutions as their own, just in time for the presidential campaign.

  4. paulyz March 25, 2014

    Even raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour will not satisfy many people, and soon after, there will be demands to raise it more. Because of the global economy, it has become much harder for American companies to compete in the World Market where labor costs are extremely low. Add to this the costs to companies of ACA, (Obamacare), the discrepancies will be even worse. The solution is a strong economy by strong companies, and less over-regulations & corporate taxes, of which the U.S. is one of the highest in the World. This would create many more jobs and competition for labor increasing wages.
    p.s. Only 2.7% of Americans are paid minimum wage or less!

    1. raginyank March 25, 2014

      Compete with the global labor market! are you insane; we do not want to compete for the lowest wages in the world. We need to provide goods and services that other countries do not have or can not provide, and get better and better at that.
      We have the highest corporate tax rate due to the freedoms of commerce, security, infrastructure enjoyed here in the US, unmatched throughout the world. Unfortunately deregulation almost always means; weaken supervision and environmental regulations for the same old tired industrial dolts to make larger profits and leave the tax payer to worry about the fallout.

    2. jakenhyde March 25, 2014

      If only 2.7% of Americans are paid minimum wage or less, then what’s the problem with raising it? Looks like the tea baggers are trying to start a tempest in a teapot.

      1. Tom_D44 March 25, 2014

        Likewise I would ask you why helping 2.7% of the workforce is such a high priority topic for the democrats? And how raising the minimum wage will be such a huge stimulus for the economy, if it only affects such a small percentage of the people? And if this was always such a huge issue to politicians, why is there such a huge push for it today, 6 years after Obama and the democrats took control of the government. Hell why didn’t they just pass this very quickly when they passed the ACA? There would have been no question it would have passed then. Since you likely won’t be very honest with your answer I will answer for you.
        It is a huge push for the democrats right now because of the political gaming by corrupt politicians, on both sides of the isle, to use issues like these to grab the emotions of voters, to win elections. Plain and simple. In this case it makes the democrats look good and anyone opposed to it look and sound really bad – which is why there is a lot of public and republican support now. No one wants to think that they are hurting people and politicians don’t want to be labeled as if they don’t care. So the increased support is obvious.
        Aside from that, why are the unions so concerned about this? They don’t get huge membership dues from minimum wage workers. Well did you know that many of these unions use the minimum wage as an index to arrive at compensation rates in their own labor contracts? How good will this make them look? Follow the money – there is always a reason why these big union guys and politicians are in bed together. And it is not always because they care so much about the little people. This is a big union payback in disguise – but don’t listen to me, look it up yourself.

        1. jakenhyde March 25, 2014

          First off, 2.7% was just a number that the poster threw out there. He/she didn’t offer any proof that 2.7% is accurate.
          No point in even writing an answer since you have already accused that my answer will be dishonest.
          BTW….democrats don’t need to “look good”. The tea baggers are making them look good by default.

          1. BillP March 25, 2014

            Jake just ignore paulyz’s comments. All he does is write one comment then he crawls away like the little snake that he is. He will never argue or debate his comments because they are based on vapors, he never offers proof of his statements.

          2. jakenhyde March 25, 2014

            @ BillP….I realize that. I take everything he/she says with a shaker full of salt.

            My last reply was to Tom_D44 who made the egregious error of answering my question with a question. He doesn’t have a valid answer, so he thinks he’s covered his a** with another question.
            Thanks for your heads up.

        2. Independent1 March 26, 2014

          Wow!! Are you off the deep end – keep on swimming and you’ll drown pretty soon in your cluelessness. Democrats have been pushing for improving the living standards of workers for decades, unfortunately, for the less than a year that they had enough control of the Senate to overcome the filibuster rule, the economy was in the tank with millions having just lost jobs and the focus needing to be on repairing the economic disaster that the GOP had allowed to happen once again to the country. IT WAS NOT THE TIME TO BE ADDRESSING MINIMUM WAGE ISSUES!!!


          And as usual, Pauly is faking it. Here are the facts on the number of folks working at or below minimum wage:

          In 2011, 73.9 million American workers age 16 and over were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.1 percent of all wage and salary workers.1 Among those paid by the hour, 1.7 million earned exactly the prevailing Federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 2.2 million had wages below the minimum.2 Together, these 3.8 million workers with wages at or below the Federal minimum made up 5.2 percent of all hourly-paid workers. Tables 1 through 10 present data on a wide array of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics for hourly-paid workers earning at or below the Federal minimum wage. The following are some highlights from the 2011 data.

          I’m back, about 5.2% of people are working at or below minimum wage. But there are millions more in states that have on their own raised the min wage to amounts between $7.50 and $9.50 which would also be affected by raising the min wage to $1010.

          And raising the minimum wage would impact more than just those who are at minimum wage; just like the raising the minimum wage would also require that companies adjust the wages of all their workers slightly to compensate for increasing the wages at the bottom of the ladder.

          The CBO has projected that raising the minimum wage would get enough people out of poverty that it would save the government 46 Billion dollars over the next 10 years in just SNAP payments alone – not even counting the savings in other welfare related payments. That 46 Billion in savings, is more than the 40 Billion the GOP wanted to cut from the SNAP program over the next 10 years.

          According to the CBO at least 16.5 million workers would have their incomes increased by raising the minimum wage. See this:

          At the same time, the CBO report finds that about 16.5 million low-wage Americans would see an increase in their earnings as a result of the hike in the minimum wage. A much smaller number of higher-wage earners would also see a jump in income, the CBO said.

          Here’s some key findings from a study on raising the min wage:

          Increasing the federal minimum wage to $10.10 by July 1, 2015, would raise the wages of about 30 million workers, who would receive over $51 billion in additional wages over the phase-in period.1

          Across the phase-in period of the minimum-wage increase, GDP would increase by roughly $32.6 billion, resulting in the creation of approximately 140,000 net new jobs (and 284,000 job years) over that period.

          Those who would see wage increases do not fit some of the stereotypes of minimum-wage workers.

          1. Tom_D44 March 26, 2014

            Indy, didn’t you just prove my point? Regardless of the number, 2.7% or 5.2%, it is a small and insignificant number. So you came up with a different figure mostly because you added in people who earn less than minimum wage and many of those people are in industries where their incomes are supplemented by tips – which you don’t account for. Regardless, exactly how many of these 5.2% of people, working for minimum wage or less, are actually supporting themselves and/or families on these wages? VS, the number of workers who are kids living with parents and using this money as gas money for their cars? I would have to research the numbers again but when I saw those figures it was greater than 50%. I still believe that the parties are manipulating these numbers for political positioning rather than being honest with them and what the real problems or solutions are.

          2. Independent1 March 26, 2014

            No, you missed some of my points. The 5.2% are just those earning EXACTLY $7.25/hr and less. The majority of McDonald’s, Wal-Mart, Target and other workers for example earn around $8 – so the 5.2% is missing them and millions of others. Overall the percent pauly quoted didn’t include as much as 25 plus million from one study that earn $8-$9.50/hr and more, who would also be affected by the increase to $10.10. Keep in mind that millions more earning over $10.10 would probably have their wages adjusted up in order to keep maintain a cushion between the lowest paid and people they maybe supervise. As one study showed – raising the min wage would pump over 50 billion into the economy in the 1st year of the increase alone.

    3. awakenaustin March 25, 2014

      That people might be encouraged to ask for more food is no justification for continuing to starve them.
      What next – if you pay an increased minimum wage, you will just encourage them to ask for a living wage next time.
      American companies have no trouble completing internationally. We are still the world’s largest economy. American companies are among the wealthiest and the most diversified. (As a small but more interesting point, for future reference the more global the economy and the more international they become the less “American” these business entities become. Large corporations lose their national-ness as they become more international. They cease to have national interests and begin to have only international interests.)
      Our industries are not over regulated. Corporate taxes are high on paper only. What the corporate rate is and what they pay are entirely different.
      Apparently it is impolite to complain about not having enough money when you are poor, but not when you are a corporation.

    4. Independent1 March 25, 2014

      More tiresome GOP ancient rhetoric that is wrong in everything account, including: “it has become much harder for American companies to compete in the World Market where labor costs are extremely low.”

      Fact is pauly, the wage differences between the US and foreign countries has shrunk dramatically – in fact, many companies are finding that they can produce parts in America cheaper than overseas when shipping and product quality are taken into account. Such that many companies, including some Chinese companies are actually bringing manufacturing work back to America – see this:

      The trend of companies relocating American manufacturing jobs to low-wage China has started to reverse, as shown by recent decisions by Apple Inc., General Electric Co, Caterpillar, DSM, General Motors and even Chinese electronics giant Lenovo to scale up operations here. The bottom line: For the first time in decades, several key economic drivers have created a competitive advantage for the U.S. that will encourage corporate strategic decisions on capital allocation and acquisitions for generations to come.

      A number of reasons why, but of importance here is this:

      4. Human capital. The wage gap between the U.S. and China has been shrinking. In 2000, U.S. wages were nearly 22 times higher than comparable wages in China, but by 2015 the difference will be less than four times. Factor in the U.S.’s faster gains in productivity and lower worker turnover rates, and by 2015 many pundits believe labor cost comparisons may no longer be a factor in determining the location of manufacturing operations. Most people don’t realize the U.S. also enjoys a future demographic advantage over other countries. By 2050, the U.S.is expected to offer the youngest labor force among the major economies, while China and Japan will have the oldest.

      For a complete rebuttal to just one more of your nonsense posts see this:

      Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/manufacturing-jobs-returning-to-america-2013-2#ixzz2x2MRFRHc

  5. paulyz March 25, 2014

    p.s. Even N.Y. has offered companies that relocate to N.Y., zero corporate taxes for 10 years!!!

    1. awakenaustin March 25, 2014

      This is apropos of what exactly?

  6. a_farmer_now March 25, 2014

    Raising the minimum wage will do nothing to affect our ability to compete in the global economy. The rest of “paulyz’s” comments are right wing talking points….usually based on anecdotal arguments. Actually, raising the minimum wage will reduce government payments to low wage workers, like Walmart workers, who use food stamps and medicaid to support their families. In fact, Walmart informs new workers how to apply for these government benefits. Now for the fun… Raising minimum wage rates will cause a loss of jobs in the short term. This is based on the simple fact that the largest employment churn in the US involves small businesses. These small service related business come and go .. start up..go bankrupt..or simply fail. If one looks at the medium term stats for failed businesses after a minimum wage hike, one will find that small business churn stats are below “normal”… this suggests that wage based business failures were pulled forward. The economy in the longer term will adjust to the increase in wage rates and the effect is a slight push in all wage rates and a return to normal/usual employment levels… which are not based on wage rates but on aggregate demand. “If you build it they will come”.. a field of dreams scenario… no self respecting banker will give you money to build a product..provide a service.. without a definable market and business plan. Failure of small business is a function of poor planning, lack of capital, bad management or for most.. just a bad idea…not minimum wage issues.

    1. rothgar March 26, 2014

      The small business churn data also could suggest as economic models suggest that raising the minimum wage increased incomes to the business owners due to increased business activity.

  7. charles king March 25, 2014

    I remember when John L. Lewis came to Johnstown, Pennsylvania then the People talked about Democracy and fair play for hard working people, Now? I do not know Where? the Unions are going and doing for the People. MONIES has taking the Voice of the People out of the government. Where? has Democracy gone. The Unions were the mouth-piece for the People’s Democracy, Where? has our Democracy gone. Mr. Trumka it is up to you to wake the People up because Plutocracy is moving in fast on our country’s Democracy and the country needs the help of all the Unions because (Capitalistic Pigs, Plutocracts, Republicans and Democracts Reps. doing nothing in Congress for the People) because of John L. Lewis I got the best education that this country had to offer. Thank You are the magic words in my book. I Love Ya All. Mr. C. E. KING

  8. JDavidS March 25, 2014

    I sincerely doubt that DeMint and/or Heritage, will take up this challenge. Rhetoric, dubious “facts” and skewed numbers might make fine sound-bites, provided one looks no deeper at them, but would never fly in a debate with someone who knows what they are talking about, and all that is ever spewed from either DeMint or Heritage is rhetoric, dubious “facts” and skewed numbers.

  9. Hutch King March 25, 2014

    Since most knowledge exists as personal insights into the ever-changing conditions each of us faces, it cannot be systematically organized.

    1. CrankyToo March 26, 2014

      You are what stupid people think intelligent people sound like…

  10. howa4x March 25, 2014

    Raising the minimum wage would help spur economic development in the urban areas where most of the workers are in the service industry. They would spend what they earn in the areas they live in and help lift the small business grow. Small business is a large employer and they need to have an economic lift and this would help them employ more people. The only ones that are against this is mega corporations like Wal-Mart who want to submerge workers. Every time a Wal-Mart opens the economy of the area has a downward pressure because of their low wages. We have to stop allowing billionaires like the Walton’s worth 115 billion to determine America’s economic future for their own gain and let’s make it for everyone’s gain.

  11. FredAppell March 25, 2014

    After doing a little research, though the GOP isn’t saying, it would seem one of the obstacles in the way of a minimum wage increase is that it would cause a hike in payroll taxes. We all know how the GOP feel about taxes. On the other hand, if DeMint and his ilk are unwilling to openly debate the issue with Trumpka, it would seem they really don’t have a substantial counter argument. The GOP better decide whom they want to represent, Corporate America or the everyday, hardworking men and women of this great nation. Win, lose or draw, Corporate America and many big businesses will be no worse off in the long run but the stakes are dangerously high for America’s working class.

    1. Tom_D44 March 26, 2014

      In the article the Memo stated that DeMint did respond and offered to have one of his policy experts debate the issue with Trumka. It also says that Trumka turned down the offer because he only wants to Debate DeMint. Unfortunately, this is political game to destroy DeMint and not really get to the truth of the issue, or solve the problem. DeMint is an ex-politician which means he is an expert in nothing but mis-truths and more political games. Since Trumka is an expert in labor, or at least he should be one since he is the leader of organized labor, he should debate whoever he can on the real facts and see how it shakes out. No one really ever wants to solve these problems. They only use them cyclically, to help win elections and retain power. And this is what both sides are doing right now – manipulating people.

      1. CrankyToo March 26, 2014

        You’re right, this is a cynical, political game. But beyond that, your argument turns South. The Repugnican dirtbag formerly known as Senator DeMint and those of his nefarious ilk are the ones who’ve made it so. Their opposition to raising the minimum wage is not based in economic reality, but in greed. Their steadfast support of the oligarchs, at the expense of the wage-earning class is avaricious on its face.

        If DeMint had a principled position on the subject, he should have the courage of his convictions. Indeed, he should shout his principled position from the top of the Washington Monument. DeMint is a lying, cowardly POS. And that’s why he’ll never debate Trumka – who, by the way, is no silver-tongued orator himself – on this or any other issue.

        Democrats need to grab ahold of this issue and beat the Repugnicans over the head with it every day from now until the first Tuesday in November, and then every day for two years beyond – until the rat bastards acquiesce.

      2. Independent1 March 26, 2014

        I’m not sure I agree that what Trumka is doing is “a political game”; I think it’s common sense. Trumka is the president of the AFL-CIO the guy they’re suggesting he debate with is nothing more than a lackey of the Heritage Foundation. Suggesting that Trumka debate some lackey is akin to suggesting that Obama should go on national TV and debate the Lt. Governor of some state on say “the expanding Medicaid Issue”. Do you even remotely believe that Obama would buy that?? Come on!!!
        DeMint is the nationally known figure who has for years been outspoken on numerous social issues and it’s HIM that should be able to either put up, shut up or admit he’s been spewing BS!!!

      3. FredAppell March 26, 2014

        Sorry Tom, I have to agree with Independent on this one. Trumka’s unwillingness to debate with anyone else but DeMint makes a lot of sense. Trumka could just as easily have one of his staff members do the debating for him as well, but since he is willing to take it on himself, he’s only asking for the same respect. DeMInt either is afraid to debate or he doesn’t feel it is worth his time, neither one makes him look very good. As to the rest of your comment, you make some very good points, this is the very reason why America must have more than a two party system. I believe voter turn out would be much stronger if everyone felt like their vote counts.
        Maybe there would be less opportunity for manipulation from either side if neither the monopoly they both currently enjoy.

  12. rzinny1 March 25, 2014

    UNLESS there is wage freeze or even a rollback, for people making over $100000 a year; AND a price freeze or rollback on the things we buy. I do not not support a min wage increase. Only thing a min.wage increase will do is rise in the cost of living, even more. It will be the “business excuse” for gaint raise on prices, even more than they are doing now. Big profits and big salaries will be maintained at all cost. Then in a short time, min wage employees will be in the same boat they are in now. BUT the big kicker in the butt will be to the people on social security and pensions. There income will never be adjusted for the increase in cost of living. Why , because retirement income is adjust by GNP and other indecies instead of thru cost of living.

    1. Independent1 March 26, 2014

      You are way off base. Elizabeth Warren demonstrated that many companies could raise the min wage to $10.10 by adding pennies to a number of their products. McDonald’s could cover their costs by raising the price of 1 combo meal by 4 cents (from $7.15 to $7.19. Also, McDonald’s stores in Europe where the min wage is $12/hr are more profitable than their stores in America where they average paying a little over $8/hr. Why? because even people working at a min wage can afford to order the more profitable items on their menu, not have to order off the $ menu where they almost lose money.

      Also over 600 economists have written a letter to Congress stating that there is no evidence that raising the min wage costs jobs or requires businesses to dramatically raise prices.

      1. rzinny1 March 26, 2014

        If you or any economist thinks that they will not raise prices to match the raises people get , then you are niave or completely not in touch with reality. I agree people cannot live on the present day min. wage. BUT the cost for those wage increases has to come from profits or corporate wages, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

        1. Independent1 March 26, 2014

          I’m not sure what you mean by “will not raise prices to match the raises people get.” but my sense is you’re really not visualizing what that really means. First of all, a lot of retailers and other companies do not have individually as many people earning close to the min wage as you may think; so raising the min wage isn’t as big a hurdle as they’d like people to think. Of course being human nature, most store owners want to get away paying as little as they can.

          But think for a minute about Costco, the CEO of Costco doesn’t think that way – he thinks paying a living wage pays the company back so Costco pays it’s cashiers $15-$20/hr and gives them not only healthcare benefits but also paid vacations and retirement plans and matchs contributions to 401ks. Yet, Costco is actually more profitable than Wal-Mart. Over the past couple of decades, Costco stock has more than doubled the performance of Wal-Mart and Target. –

          Obviously, smaller “mom and pop” operations that don’t have much sales revenues or customer base will find it difficult to match the increase in a min wage, but for larger corporations with a lot of customer turnover and products will have to raise their prices very little. For example, as I mentioned, Elizabeth Warrens accountant studied McDonald’s sales and employee base that was earning around the current min wage and discovered that during a normal day, the average McDonald’s sells enough of 1 combo meal to where all they’d have to do is at 4 cents to its price to cover what would be the costs of them upping the average they pay now (around $8 plus) to the $10.10 min.

          And think about WalMart – they sell more than a hundred thousand items. If they add a few cents to the price of may 20,000 of those items they would not only cover their costs of raising their average min wage to $10.10, they could also provide healthcare for their works by adding a few cents to a number of other items.

          And that doesn’t even factor in the benefits these companies would get from raising the min wage with respect to the increase in their customers who could purchase their more profitable items. Right now many stores with clerks that earn close to the min wage can only buy things they work for when they’re store has a clearance and they can get items their employer is selling at a loss. If the min wage is increased, even the employees of many small stores could maybe afford to buy things in the store they work for at regular prices when their employer is making a profit. This is basically what happens in Europe where the min wage is $12/hr.

          1. rzinny1 March 26, 2014

            Someone is blowing smoke into your eyes. I work for walmart as a cashier. after 2.5 yrs I make $8.70 an hour. Only thing the workers get cuts, cuts and more cuts. And the customers are getting higher and higher prices. While the ceo of walmart got a 10% raise we got had a incentive pay cut to almost nothing. They cut personnel and they expect us to do the same job that twice the numer of employees could baarely get done. They remolded a 4 year old store at a cost of $350,000 and customers can’t find what they are looking for and there is no servise people to help them. They got more shelves for stock and no stock to put on the shelves. They put self scans that don’t work half the time and the customers hate them. And prices are so high, it is rediculus i.e. Milk that I can get for $2.69 a gallon else where , are sold at Walmart for $4.79 a gallon. And we haven’t had a min wage increase.
            And as for McDonalds, my son worked for McDonalds for min. wage on the overnight shift, and never had a raise; and for Christmas he got a $5.00 gift target gift card from the owner. What can you buy from target for $5.00? Yet the owner CLEARED over $3,000,000 profit from this store every year. And the owner has 6 stores. And while my son worked there, there was 5 increases in prices. ( and not a just a few pennies.)
            This is a 36% increase in hourly cost. If you don’t believe that increase won’t get passed to the consumers what can I say. . …Ok- I hope your right- But I also hope that I get a social security raise to match it too.


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.