Catholic Charities USA seeks minimum-wage hike

[Maranatha]

Catholic Charities USA seeks minimum-wage hike

Washington, DC, Jan. 9, 2007 (CWNews.com) - Catholic Charities USA has issued a call for an increase in the minimum wage, arguing that an hourly wage increase for American workers is “vital to addressing the issue of poverty in the United States.”

Reporting “steady double-digit increases each year” in the number of requests for assistance from Catholic Charities, the organization observed that the federal minimum wage for American workers has been stagnant since 1997 at $5.15 per hour. Workers earning that rate “simply cannot earn enough to cover rent, child care, food, utilities, and clothing for their families," said Father Larry Snyder, president of Catholic Charities USA.
Catholic Charities USA is also recommending that minimum-wage legislation include a provision to adjust for inflation. The coalition of Catholic relief agencies will inaugurate a campaign this week to encourage Congress to pay the necessary legislation.

more

 

[Jimi222]

I would guess that most people who want a wage hike don’t understand simple economics. The wages go up, cost to the employer goes up then prices to the consumer goes up. It is not sound economics to increase the wage.

 

[Jared123]

I would guess that most people who want a wage hike don’t understand simple economics. The wages go up, cost to the employer goes up then prices to the consumer goes up. It is not sound economics to increase the wage.

Jim,
You are very much correct. The average citizen thinks the minimum wage hike is good for poor people, when in reality it isn’t. The reasons are quite simple if one looks beneath the surface of the issue. Who truely makes and lives on $5.15 an hour in the U.S. Hardly any adults. The people making this wage are high school or college students working part time. When the minimum wage increase goes into the effect the first thing employers are going to do is first lay off help, so now high school and college students will unemployeed and secondly they will raise the price of goods. So now everyone, including the poor will pay more for goods. Basic economics.

 

[mary_bobo]

Jim,
You are very much correct. The average citizen thinks the minimum wage hike is good for poor people, when in reality it isn’t. The reasons are quite simple if one looks beneath the surface of the issue. Who truely makes and lives on $5.15 an hour in the U.S. Hardly any adults. The people making this wage are high school or college students working part time. When the minimum wage increase goes into the effect the first thing employers are going to do is first lay off help, so now high school and college students will unemployeed and secondly they will raise the price of goods. So now everyone, including the poor will pay more for goods. Basic economics.

And you are correct. One other thing–employers will not hire as many people when wages go up. I don’t know if people realize that when the minimum wage goes up, labor unions wages increase. It hits all kinds of business. It sounds good, it rallies the uninformed, but it harms the economy.

 

[hoosiertoo]

It’s also one reason why Catholic Charities won’t be getting any money from me this year.

 

[hoosiertoo]

The Minimum Wage: A Denial of Freedom and Duty
- by Jordan Bailor

Catholics (or anyone) interested in economics should check out the Acton Institute.

And JP2’s Centessimus Annus.

Fr Sirico, the founder of the Institute had a hand in compiling the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The minimum wage has done wonderful things for us:

1. It has helped fuel inflation.
2. It has abolished some jobs altogether – jobs that simply aren’t economically worth the cost of hiring someone to do them.
3. It has driven many jobs overseas.
4. It has helped fuel the enormous labor Black Market in this country.
5. It has blocked the poorest, least educated people from entering the economic mainstream.

 

[Jared123]

The minimum wage has done wonderful things for us:

1. It has helped fuel inflation.
2. It has abolished some jobs altogether – jobs that simply aren’t economically worth the cost of hiring someone to do them.
3. It has driven many jobs overseas.
4. It has helped fuel the enormous labor Black Market in this country.
5. It has blocked the poorest, least educated people from entering the economic mainstream.

You sound like a Republican.

 

[hoosiertoo]

The problem with the minimum-wage solution is that it leads to negative consequences that are equal to—or sometimes worse than—the problem that the policy sought to remedy. Studies over the past forty years indicate that a legally determined minimum wage leads to fewer available jobs, especially for the very people the legislation wants to help. Labor economists, for example, point out that a 10 percent forced increase in wages would increase unemployment by 1 to 3 percent.

The extra costs produced by an increase in minimum-wage legislation will not be borne by the affected companies. The companies will, of course, pass along the costs to those who buy their products, which will include the employees who have just had their wages raised, thus making those same wages that much less adequate.

And while outsourcing has been demonized by many politicians, an increase in the minimum wage will only serve to encourage businesses to go to other nations, where labor costs are lower.

Failure to think through the assumptions of raising the minimum wage and disregard for the economic effects will not do anyone any good. Legislators ought to think long and hard before they lead with their hearts and ignore what their heads ought to be telling them.

Rev. Gerald Zandstra

 

[vern_humphrey]

You sound like a Republican.

Or like Saint Paul:

3 Honor widows who are truly widows.
4 But if a widow has children or grandchildren, let these first learn to perform their religious duty to their own family and to make recompense to their parents, for this is pleasing to God.
5 The real widow, who is all alone, has set her hope on God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day.
6 But the one who is self-indulgent is dead while she lives.
7 Command this, so that they may be irreproachable.
8 And whoever does not provide for relatives and especially family members has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
9 Let a widow be enrolled if she is not less than sixty years old, married only once,
10 with a reputation for good works, namely, that she has raised children, practiced hospitality, washed the feet of the holy ones, helped those in distress, involved herself in every good work.
11 But exclude younger widows, for when their sensuality estranges them from Christ, they want to marry
12 and will incur condemnation for breaking their first pledge.
13 And furthermore, they learn to be idlers, going about from house to house, and not only idlers but gossips and busybodies as well, talking about things that ought not to be mentioned.
14 So I would like younger widows to marry, have children, and manage a home, so as to give the adversary no pretext for maligning us.
15 For some have already turned away to follow Satan.
16 If any woman believer has widowed relatives, she must assist them; the church is not to be burdened, so that it will be able to help those who are truly widows.
17 Presbyters who preside well deserve double honor, especially those who toil in preaching and teaching.
18 For the scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it is threshing,” and, “A worker deserves his pay.”

1 Timothy, 5, 3-18

Saint Paul makes two important points here:

1. Supporting those who are not entitled to charity hurts the person receiving the charity and drains resources from those who are truly needy.
2. A person should be paid what his work is worth.

From bls.gov/cps/minwage2004.htm

Minimum wage workers tend to be young. About half of all hourly-paid workers earning $5.15 or less were under age 25, and about one-fourth were age 16-19. Among teenagers, about 9 percent earned $5.15 or less. About 2 percent of workers age 25 and over earned the minimum wage or less. Among those age 65 and over, the proportion was 4 percent.

Despite the picture painted by many, minimum wage workers are only a tiny fraction of the wage force. And far from the mythical “exploited-worker-with-an-ionvalid-wife-and-13-starving-children,” the typical minimium-wage worker is either an unskilled person just starting out in life, or a retiree supplementing his income. Most of the remainder are supplementary providers, not the primary provider for a family.

 

[hoosiertoo]

Why just $7.25? Who do you know that can live on $261.00 a week after taxes?

Why not $10.00? Heck, I don’t know anyone who can live on $350.00 a week either. Even a single woman has to pay rent and utilities and a car payment and insurance and do laundry.

Why not $11.00?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Why just $7.25? Who do you know that can live on $261.00 a week after taxes?

Why not $10.00? Heck, I don’t know anyone who can live on $350.00 a week either. Even a single woman has to pay rent and utilities and a car payment and insurance and do laundry.

Why not $11.00?

Why not $500.00 an hour? Everyone who works would be a millionaire!!:whacky:

 

[chicago]

Despite the picture painted by many, minimum wage workers are only a tiny fraction of the wage force. And far from the mythical “exploited-worker-with-an-ionvalid-wife-and-13-starving-children,” the typical minimium-wage worker is either an unskilled person just starting out in life, or a retiree supplementing his income. Most of the remainder are supplementary providers, not the primary provider for a family.

The minimum wage sets a base level upon which higher wages are built. So if one has been working in a service industry job that starts at minimum wage but then progesses to be paid a buck more an hour, they are still at a piss poor earning level. Further, if the employer starts workers off at a higher level (but still one whereby they can not afford family responsibilities), they may not be making “minimum”, but what they do make is in some ways related to what the absolute least an employer is allowed to legally pay happens to be. Sure, a lot of these employees are “supplementary providers” but a lot of them HAVE to work because the “primary provider” might not make enough alone. The additional workers in the job market only serve to drive down wages further. Ultimately, EVERY worker must be respected for their personhood and not merely reduced to an economic means of production and profit. If a business can’t succeed by paying the great bulk of it’s employees a family wage, then perhaps it ought to shut down, anyway.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The minimum wage sets a base level upon which higher wages are built.

No, it doesn’t. What it does is initially contribute to pay compression – the employees on the next to last rungs don’t get raises, since the money for that is diverted to the lowest rung. Later on, it causes inflation, and in dollar terms, wages go up, but with no increase in actual buying power.

So if one has been working in a service industry job that starts at minimum wage but then progesses to be paid a buck more an hour, they are still at a piss poor earning level. Further, if the employer starts workers off at a higher level (but still one whereby they can not afford family responsibilities), they may not be making “minimum”, but what they do make is in some ways related to what the absolute least an employer is allowed to legally pay happens to be. Sure, a lot of these employees are “supplementary providers” but a lot of them HAVE to work because the “primary provider” might not make enough alone.

And the reason they have to work is the higher prices – partially caused by mimimum wage increases – and the higher taxes caused by more people on welfare as more entry-level jobs are lost.

The additional workers in the job market only serve to drive down wages further. Ultimately, EVERY worker must be respected for their personhood and not merely reduced to an economic means of production and profit.

How about we do that by opening more Catholic schools in poverty-stricken areas and giving those poor kids a good education?

If a business can’t succeed by paying the great bulk of it’s employees a family wage, then perhaps it ought to shut down, anyway.

And lay everyone off. That’s a good idea! Let’s put even more unskilled people out of work.

And in fact, that’s how we lost so many entry-level jobs in this country. Minimum wage hurts the poor. It distorts the ecomomy, dries up entry level jobs, exports other jobs overseas, drives the huge labor Black Market, forces people onto welfare and contributes to inflation.

 

[chicago]

How about we do that by opening more Catholic schools in poverty-stricken areas and giving those poor kids a good education?

While, in and of itself, such would be a good thing; the underlying attitude rubs me wrong. For what it really gets at is the idea that if one is not ultimately job trained, er I mean “educated”, to take upon a certain KIND of work which is seen by our Calvinistic culture as having more “worth” (and thus earning potential), they will (and basically should) be “stuck” in jobs that don’t pay a wage which respects their rights as human beings.

 

[vern_humphrey]

While, in and of itself, such would be a good thing; the underlying attitude rubs me wrong.

The attitude that every child in America has a right to a first-class education rugs you wrong? How odd!

For what it really gets at is the idea that if one is not ultimately job trained, er I mean “educated”, to take upon a certain KIND of work which is seen by our Calvinistic culture as having more “worth” (and thus earning potential), they will (and basically should) be “stuck” in jobs that don’t pay a wage which respects their rights as human beings.

So how many businesses have you started?

If someone else is obliged to pay more, why aren’t you under the same obligation to hire people and pay them?

The underlying attitude that someone else is obliged to create jobs – but others are exempt – rubs me wrong.

 

[chicago]

So how many businesses have you started?

Give me the investment dollars and I’ll start plenty, vern! There’s LOTS of opportunity here for growth.

If someone else is obliged to pay more, why aren’t you under the same obligation to hire people and pay them?

Depends upon whether you’re an entrepenuer or a contracted worker. Depends whether you have excess to invest or not.

Sure seems that this is a circular argument according to your own position of “give em more and they ought to spend more,” though.

The underlying attitude that someone else is obliged to create jobs – but others are exempt – rubs me wrong.

I’d be quite content if each person were able to be his own independent contractor. But, the reality being that some people are employers and some employees, I only ask for equity and justice in respect to the dignity of man and his labor.

 

[estesbob]

And you are correct. One other thing–employers will not hire as many people when wages go up. I don’t know if people realize that when the minimum wage goes up, labor unions wages increase. It hits all kinds of business. It sounds good, it rallies the uninformed, but it harms the economy.

When I started my business in 1981 I used to hire High Schoolers to work for me after scholl got out. it was a win win situation-they got valuable experience and I got help with the mundane duties you dont want to pay a full charge bookkeepr to do. After about 5 years the minimum wage increases priced them out of the market. You see with a high school kid they are not very dependable-if its a nice day they may cut school and their job to go on a picninc with their girlfriend/boyfriend(happened a lot) and of course they were nearly worthless on the days leading up to the big game or the prom, etc. But theirr wages were low so you would put up with it. When the wages went up it was more efficient for us to hire a stay at home mom with kids in school to come in a few hours in the morning and do what the High school kids did. Much more dependable .

 

[chicago]

When I started my business in 1981 I used to hire High Schoolers to work for me after scholl got out. it was a win win situation-they got valuable experience and I got help with the mundane duties you dont want to pay a full charge bookkeepr to do. After about 5 years the minimum wage increases priced them out of the market. You see with a high school kid they are not very dependable-if its a nice day they may cut school and their job to go on a picninc with their girlfriend/boyfriend(happened a lot) and of course they were nearly worthless on the days leading up to the big game or the prom, etc. But theirr wages were low so you would put up with it. When the wages went up it was more efficient for us to hire a stay at home mom with kids in school to come in a few hours in the morning and do what the High school kids did. Much more dependable .

If the “kids” knew that they could make what a full charge bookkeeper does, they might have not been so likely to “skip out” and lose that kind of job. They obviously valued the job about as much as they were getting paid to do it.

 

[estesbob]

Sure seems that this is a circular argument according to your own position of “give em more and they ought to spend more,” though.

I’d be quite content if each person were able to be his own independent contractor. But, the reality being that some people are employers and some employees, I only ask for equity and justice in respect to the dignity of man and his labor.

Of course it easy to rhapsodize about the dignity of labor and just wages when someone else pays for it