13 states raising the minimum wage for workers, other states soon to follow

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...-wage/4221773/

The retail-worker strikes that swept the nation in 2013 did not move Congress to raise the minimum wage, but a growing number of states are taking action.

The minimum wage will rise in 13 states this week, and as many as 11 states and Washington, D.C., are expected to consider increases in 2014, according to the National Employment Law Project. Approval is likely in more than half of the 11, says NELP policy analyst Jack Temple.

STORY: Tipped workers often face lower minimums

The trend reflects growing concerns about the disproportionate spread of low-wage jobs in the U.S. economy, creating millions of financially strained workers and putting too little money in consumers' pockets to spur faster economic growth.

On Jan. 1, state minimum wages will be higher than the federal requirement of $7.25 an hour in 21 states, up from 18 two years ago. Temple expects another nine states to drift above the federal minimum by the end of 2014, marking the first time minimum pay in most states will be above the federal level.

"2014 is poised to be a turning point," Temple says. "States are seeing the unemployment rate is going down but job growth is disproportionately concentrated in low-wage industries. (They're) frustrated that Congress is dragging its feet."

Connecticut, New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island legislatures voted to raise the minimum hourly wage by as much as $1, to $8 to $8.70, by Wednesday. In California, a $1 increase to $9 is scheduled July 1. Smaller automatic increases tied to inflation will take effect in nine other states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

Meanwhile, states such as Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maryland, Minnesota and South Dakota plan to weigh minimum-wage hikes next year through legislation or ballot initiatives.

In Minnesota, the state House and Senate have each passed bills to raise the minimum wage and plan to iron out their differences early next year after failing to approve similar measures the past two decades.

"You're coming out of a deep recession, and people are landing jobs, but they're low-paid," says state Rep. Ryan Winkler, sponsor of the House bill.

The legislative movement has been partly fueled by walkouts this year in at least 100 cities by fast-food workers who are calling for $15-an-hour pay and the right to form unions. Wal-Mart workers have staged similar protests.

While the demonstrations were not explicitly intended to prompt minimum pay increases, they've made the issue "more urgent," Temple says.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that 3.6 million hourly paid workers received wages at or below the federal minimum in 2012 — almost 5% of all employees on hourly pay schedules.

President Obama recently said he supports legislation in Congress that would lift the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour in three steps over two years and then index it to inflation. But the measure faces an uphill climb in Congress.

Proponents of minimum-wage hikes note that low-wage jobs have dominated payroll growth in the 4-year-old recovery, and increases over the past four decades have not kept pace with inflation.

Opponents say the increases raise employer expenses and will lead to layoffs. "If your costs are going up and you can't raise prices, you have to find a way to produce the same product at a lower cost," says Michael Saltsman, a research fellow at the Employment Policies Institute.

Where minimum wage is going up

On Jan. 1, the minimum wage in 13 states will increase to these amounts.

STATE NEW MINIMUM WAGE
Arizona $7.90
Colorado $8.00
Connecticut $8.70
Florida $7.93
Missouri $7.50
Montana $7.90
New Jersey $8.25
New York $8.00
Ohio $7.95
Oregon $9.10
Rhode Island $8.00
Vermont $8.73
Washington $9.32

On Jan. 1, the minimum wage in 13 states will increase to these amounts.

STATE NEW MINIMUM WAGE
Arizona $7.90
Colorado $8.00
Connecticut $8.70
Florida $7.93
Missouri $7.50
Montana $7.90
New Jersey $8.25
New York $8.00
Ohio $7.95
Oregon $9.10
Rhode Island $8.00
Vermont $8.73
Washington $9.32 Originally Posted by Stan.Dupp

Ain't it GREAT that States can do that all on their own and don't really need a FEDERAL minimum wage to make them all toe the same line?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...-wage/4221773/

The retail-worker strikes that swept the nation in 2013 did not move Congress to raise the minimum wage, but a growing number of states are taking action.

The minimum wage will rise in 13 states this week, and as many as 11 states and Washington, D.C., are expected to consider increases in 2014, according to the National Employment Law Project. Approval is likely in more than half of the 11, says NELP policy analyst Jack Temple.

STORY: Tipped workers often face lower minimums

The trend reflects growing concerns about the disproportionate spread of low-wage jobs in the U.S. economy, creating millions of financially strained workers and putting too little money in consumers' pockets to spur faster economic growth.

On Jan. 1, state minimum wages will be higher than the federal requirement of $7.25 an hour in 21 states, up from 18 two years ago. Temple expects another nine states to drift above the federal minimum by the end of 2014, marking the first time minimum pay in most states will be above the federal level.

"2014 is poised to be a turning point," Temple says. "States are seeing the unemployment rate is going down but job growth is disproportionately concentrated in low-wage industries. (They're) frustrated that Congress is dragging its feet."

Connecticut, New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island legislatures voted to raise the minimum hourly wage by as much as $1, to $8 to $8.70, by Wednesday. In California, a $1 increase to $9 is scheduled July 1. Smaller automatic increases tied to inflation will take effect in nine other states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

Meanwhile, states such as Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maryland, Minnesota and South Dakota plan to weigh minimum-wage hikes next year through legislation or ballot initiatives.

In Minnesota, the state House and Senate have each passed bills to raise the minimum wage and plan to iron out their differences early next year after failing to approve similar measures the past two decades.

"You're coming out of a deep recession, and people are landing jobs, but they're low-paid," says state Rep. Ryan Winkler, sponsor of the House bill.

The legislative movement has been partly fueled by walkouts this year in at least 100 cities by fast-food workers who are calling for $15-an-hour pay and the right to form unions. Wal-Mart workers have staged similar protests.

While the demonstrations were not explicitly intended to prompt minimum pay increases, they've made the issue "more urgent," Temple says.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that 3.6 million hourly paid workers received wages at or below the federal minimum in 2012 — almost 5% of all employees on hourly pay schedules.

President Obama recently said he supports legislation in Congress that would lift the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour in three steps over two years and then index it to inflation. But the measure faces an uphill climb in Congress.

Proponents of minimum-wage hikes note that low-wage jobs have dominated payroll growth in the 4-year-old recovery, and increases over the past four decades have not kept pace with inflation.

Opponents say the increases raise employer expenses and will lead to layoffs. "If your costs are going up and you can't raise prices, you have to find a way to produce the same product at a lower cost," says Michael Saltsman, a research fellow at the Employment Policies Institute.

Where minimum wage is going up

On Jan. 1, the minimum wage in 13 states will increase to these amounts.

STATE NEW MINIMUM WAGE
Arizona $7.90
Colorado $8.00
Connecticut $8.70
Florida $7.93
Missouri $7.50
Montana $7.90
New Jersey $8.25
New York $8.00
Ohio $7.95
Oregon $9.10
Rhode Island $8.00
Vermont $8.73
Washington $9.32 Originally Posted by Stan.Dupp

Kiss your gas ass good bye... LOL

Yes, Stan totally missed that. States can do things like that. They have that right and the taxpayers can take out their anger or happiness at the ballot box. The federal minimum wage is a horse of a different color. You can't compare Wyoming to New York but they try.

How Much Would A Big Mac Cost If McDonald's Workers Were Paid $15 Per Hour?

The cost of a Big Mac–at least to consumers–probably wouldn’t go up at all. Why? In order to remain competitive with rivals on price, the company,as economist Adam Ozimek pointed out earlier this week, would probably find a way to keep overall labor costs in check, most likely by reducing the number of workers and introducing more automation–think ATMs in the banking industry....

Dr. Bittlingmayer described discussions on fast food wages as a symptom of a larger problem: the U.S. school system. “Low wages for adults are a sign that something didn’t go right in terms of education and work experience,” he said. “We’re not addressing the cause.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoco...d-15-per-hour/

Just as Businesses do not pay taxes, they also do not pay wages.

The wages are paid for by those who purchase the product, or service, that the business provides.

Sooner or later it all comes back to the consumer. That's you.

Yes, Stan totally missed that. States can do things like that. They have that right and the taxpayers can take out their anger or happiness at the ballot box. The federal minimum wage is a horse of a different color. You can't compare Wyoming to New York but they try.
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I agree - the individual states should each raise the minimum wage significantly to reflect their cost of living. In New York, I think our man DeBlasio should make it 20 bucks per hour plus benefits.

How Much Would A Big Mac Cost If McDonald's Workers Were Paid $15 Per Hour?

The cost of a Big Mac–at least to consumers–probably wouldn’t go up at all. Why? In order to remain competitive with rivals on price, the company,as economist Adam Ozimek pointed out earlier this week, would probably find a way to keep overall labor costs in check, most likely by reducing the number of workers and introducing more automation–think ATMs in the banking industry....

Dr. Bittlingmayer described discussions on fast food wages as a symptom of a larger problem: the U.S. school system. “Low wages for adults are a sign that something didn’t go right in terms of education and work experience,” he said. “We’re not addressing the cause.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoco...d-15-per-hour/ Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I believe the price would ultimately rise, and they would cut back on service via fewer employees doing the same job. Corporations are greedy and care about their profits more than their workers.

I believe the price would ultimately rise, and they would cut back on service via fewer employees doing the same job. Corporations are greedy and care about their profits more than their workers. Originally Posted by Bert Jones

Ahhh, the fantasy argument, corporations are greedy. Okay, lets roll with that. Corporations are greedy and by laying people off they make money........ why not lay everyone off and they they'll make lots of money.....no? So they can't lay everyone off? What is the point of the corporation? To make money. Is that in itself greedy and evil? Only a fool would think so or someone who doesn't understand the definition of "greedy". When you take a raw material and give value to it you deserve to increase of the price of the product. How much? As much as the market will bear. It is called the supply curve. You increase the price of the product until people stop wanting to buy it. That means you can't charge $1 million dollars for a refrigerator. You can, but you'll never sell one. Here how it works; you lower or raise the price until you sell the optimum amount of the product. That price creates the most profit for the corporation. Strangely enough for the socialist minded people sometimes that is reducing the price. How many DVD players would be sold if they were still selling for $600. The producers (another world for corporations) found that they sold more if they lowered the price. The more they sold, the more profit. Now get this, they found they had to hire more workers to produce more products. So lowering the price increased the profit, increasing the profit required more output, more output required more workers and those workers would go out and buy the product along with food, shelter, healthcare, and everything else that workers want.
Profit is good. Jobs are good. Take the profit away from the corporation and the jobs soon follow. Corporations want to make money and the more product sold, the more workers needed to make the product that creates the profit. Very simple concept but people like Bertie always link some kind of moral imperative to non profit. "I don't make much profit (or no profit) so I am morally superior to others." Of course you don't create jobs with your non-profit and don't support peoples lives. You are actually immoral for withholding happiness for so many voluntarily.

Socialism sucks (the pithy argument) and is immoral and selfish.

JDIdiot makes yet another pronouncement!

anything that he disagrees with is "socialist." and that's selfish.

But in another thread, he's crying because his health care premium went up by 18%. Talk abiut a fucking hypocrite!

Asshole.

Excellent explanation of capitalism, JD. If a person's employer does not make a profit, that person is unemployed.

"Corporations want to make money and the more product sold, the more workers needed to make the product that creates the profit."

Good dissertation up till there. True in 1914. Not true in 2014.

I've been making a pretty good living for the past decade helping firms sell more product/service while employing fewer and fewer people.

Serious question, Sub. How do you do that? Is it primarily automation and technology? Some industries certainly benefit from that, but is it across the board?

This brings up an interesting dilemma. Garrett Hardin posited a number of years ago that at some point, technology would advance to the point where only half the population would be needed to do the jobs required by the economy. The book, excellent if I remember correctly, is The Tragedy of the Commons. What will we do when/if that happens?

Interesting. Would make a good thread on its own. Do you see society heading in this direction, Sub?

It's coming to the kitchen, next... like, this year

username led2far:accod .. already proof state corrupted top level