HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Instead of indexing the m...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 11:23 AM

Instead of indexing the minimum wage, why not.....


Tie it to the same annual wage increase that Congress gets?

8 replies, 714 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
Reply Instead of indexing the minimum wage, why not..... (Original post)
Omaha Steve Feb 2013 OP
jeff47 Feb 2013 #1
AllyCat Feb 2013 #2
Omaha Steve Feb 2013 #3
jeff47 Feb 2013 #4
Omaha Steve Feb 2013 #5
Cleita Feb 2013 #6
JVS Feb 2013 #7
EvolveOrConvolve Feb 2013 #8

Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 11:25 AM

1. Because Congress doesn't get annual wage increases?

Any Congressional wage increases are voted on individually. There are no automatic pay increases.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #1)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 11:37 AM

2. But they have no problem getting them, even if they aren't "annual"

It takes YEARS to get even a modest minimum wage increase approved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #1)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 11:51 AM

3. Congress Votes Itself a Pay Raise...


I'm sure most workers on the minimum wage would take the same as Congress gets as a guaranteed raise! The current minimum rate has stayed the same ($7.25) since 2009.


http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/agencies/a/raise4congress.htm

Salary will jump by $3,400 a year in 2004

By Robert Longley,

Want a raise? Don't beg to your boss. Just vote yourself one. That's what the United States Congress just did. For the fifth year in a row, lawmakers voted not to reject their automatic "cost of living" raise that will increase the annual salary of members by $3,400 to a total of $158,103 per year.

In 1989, Congress passed an amendment allowing for the automatic raises, unless lawmakers specifically voted to reject it. Which Congress did, until 2000.

The fiscal year 2004 Transportation and Treasury Department Appropriations bill included Congress' 2.2 percent pay raise, along with a 4.1 percent raise for federal workers and military personnel.

"Members of Congress have the only job in the country whose occupants can set their own salary without regard to performance, profit, or economic climate," said Tom Schatz, president of the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste in a press release. "Clearly, members must think that money grows on trees. With a $480 billion deficit, the escalating cost of the war in Iraq, and a stagnant economy, Congress should be curbing spending, not lining their pockets at our expense."

FULL info at link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #3)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 12:06 PM

4. I'm not saying they don't vote themselves raises. You were saying they get annual raises

which isn't true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #4)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 06:52 PM

5. Sorry if it sounded that way


Anyway tie it to what Congress gets.

Republicans always say businesses can't afford the raise! Why do they think taxpayers can afford raises for Congress?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 06:55 PM

6. There was a formula used back when I was in college and the

jobs I got were pretty much minimum wage. However this was back in 1958 and you could actually live on minimum wage back then. I think it was tied to going rents and food expenses that the number crunchers were supposed to keep track of. I wish I knew how they did it, but it did work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 07:04 PM

7. That would just bring an end to congressional payraises.

Between the sweet lobbying jobs they line up for after their terms, and the fact that most politicians are already wealthy before seeking office, they really don't need the money. It's kind of how putting a horse in the Kentucky Derby is nearly always more expensive than the stake money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 07:11 PM

8. Why not tie it to CEO salaries?

Make the minimum wage something like 7% of the average CEO salary and the field might actually start to level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread