Miami archbishop: raise the minimum wage [CC]

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Press
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stinkcat_14 said:
The empirical results suggest that in some cases, teenage unemployment may increase slightly. However there are also many studies that also show no significant effect on teenage employment. So I guess the suffering is mostly teenagers have to put off getting the latest iphone.
Click to expand...
It is not unreasonable to argue that I am mistaken. It is uncharitable, however, to suggest that I am indifferent to the plight of the poor. There have been a number of uncharitable comments made on this thread and to a degree I hold the bishop responsible for that. By expressing his opinion on the minimum wage he has implied that one’s position is a moral choice rather than a strictly economic one, and this gives implicit support to those who have accused their opponents of being cafeteria Catholics

Ender
 
Ender said:
It is not unreasonable to argue that I am mistaken. It is uncharitable, however, to suggest that I am indifferent to the plight of the poor.
Click to expand...
I never suggested any such thing. I am actually not a fan of the minimum wage myself, but I do think that both sides tend to overstate their case. It will neither have a major impact on jobs nor will it have much significant impact on the well-being of the poor.
 
Trader said:
Why should they remain poor? Allow them to work and teach them to save and spend what they earn wisely. I had a paper route in 5th grade and was caddy starting after 8th grade. On bad weather days I worked with my father who was a painting contractor. I was way to tired to spend the money I earned. I was still able to work hard enough at school to earn scholarships and buy a car, graduating from a private college with no money left, but no debt either.

I know many other people of my age did the same. Others served in the military and used GI Bill benefits to attend college. Others chose not to work as hard in school or at their jobs. The one thing that has changed over time is that my first job paid more in two months than a whole year of private college tuition. Government “help” had a lot to do with tuition inflation since I graduated in 1971.
Click to expand...
I did the same thing myself, and of course the existence of a minimum wage was no barrier to my getting through college. Also, while I did not serve in the military, I always knew it was an option if I needed another route to get through school.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I did the same thing myself, and of course the existence of a minimum wage was no barrier to my getting through college. Also, while I did not serve in the military, I always knew it was an option if I needed another route to get through school.
Click to expand...
As a caddy, I was never paid the minimum wage. The standard rate for an honor caddy was $3.25 for 4-5 hours, but sometimes I carried two bags and good caddies got tips almost equal to the rate. I think the minimum wage was $1.00-$1.25 per hour. We had 25 cents per round deducted and if we had 50 loops or more for the year, we got 35 cents back at the annual caddy dinner. If we had less than 30 loops for the year, we got nothing back and did not go to the fancy dinner at the country club in October. Honor caddies got to bring their dads. We also had the opportunity for the Evans Scholarships if we were in the top 25% of our high school class and were honor caddies. Evans Scholarships cover full tuition, room, and board at a Big Ten University; or at Marquette University if we were Catholic and they could not talk us into a less expensive state school. They also found part time jobs for scholarship students. One of my good friends got his engineering degree at Michigan State because I had other offers and turned down the Evans Scholarship to attend seminary.

If we had been covered by the minimum wage laws, more members would have used electric carts and there would have been very few opportunities for caddies. That is what has happened at most country clubs. I don’t know what caddies make now, but $40 per round at the minimum wage would not be competitive with splitting a cart with another golfer.

edit: I decided to look it up. The minimum wage was raised in 1966, my last year as a caddy, from $1.25 to $1.40 per hour.
 
Ender said:
James - Why would you believe that those of us who oppose raising the minimum wage believe any differently? You support raising the wage because you believe it will help those who most need it, but suppose you believed raising the minimum would be harmful. Wouldn’t you oppose raising it? Wouldn’t you expect people to oppose something they believe is bad? Where is the justice in supposing the people who oppose raising the minimum wage do so because they actually believe it will work but will harm businesses and care more about businesses than people? In the end, it is better to come down on the side of believing that each of us is doing what the thinks is best, with no ulterior motives.

Ender
Click to expand...
I “know” that raising the minimum wage will help many people immediately. I “theorize” that raising the minimum wage may hurt those very people in the long run, and in some cases in the short run (for example, losing their jobs). I don’t hear wage earners begging us, however, not to raise the minimum wage for fear of losing their jobs. Even if my theory not to raise the wage is right, what is the remedy for the person suffering in the here and now? Theories of trickle down effect may be true, but will that generalized effect reach this or that specific person, and if it does, will it reach them in time? I know that food, shelter, money, or an increase in the minimum wage will help them now. I don’t know that conservative theories will. Also, I do know that raising the minimum wage will not wreck the economy, and I know there are measures that can be taken to prevent some of those negatives from happening when the minimum wage is raised. I have to err on the side of directly doing something to help in the here and now over doing something that may or may not help the specific persons I am trying to help at some future date, and does nothing to help now when the help is sorely needed.

Minimum wage may go counter to conservative ideas of how to best help a poor economy. But it is not the whole ball of wax. Conservative theories can still be applied and can still work (such as lowering taxes, reducing regulation, cutting government spending, etc), even while raising the minimum wage. In this way, I believe we can have it both ways.
 
I look at the minimum wage as a some what misguided attempt to solving a problem.

Raising the minimum wage only does so much good till the hours are not there, no one said an employer has to work a person more than any number of hours who work on an hourly basis.

What good is raising the minimum wage if the hourly worker is only working 10 - 20 hrs a week. or at best 30 hrs a week. An there is the problem, not everyone can nor wants to work 40 plus hours a week.

An more over I would rather see clergy leaving things such as the minimum wage alone and focusing more on Christ and how to bring more people to Christ. Instead of making a generalized plea for change with no suggestions on how to do it. It would be like politicians asking for the Church to be more giving or progressive on issues against basic principals because society in general is accepting things to be the norm.

Too many bosses and not enough workers.
 
Clergy are obliged to consider the corporeal works of mercy, which include:
  • Feed the hungry
  • Give drink to the thirsty
  • Clothe the naked
  • Shelter the homeless
It can be argued that raising the minimum wage is tantamount to giving individuals money by which they can do for themselves all of the above.

I can understand refusing to feed certain persons, or to clothe or shelter them, because they refuse to work in order to do these things for themselves. Other than that, I can see no reason in Christian charity for refusing to help if I have the means to do so. In the case of raising the minimum wage, the persons being helped have already shown their willingness to work, so I find no way to rationalize withholding the means to help them.
 
pnewton said:
As a fellow conservative and former Republican it is the rejection of Republican Catholics to anything that alleviates suffering that has put me off, if it the Government or (God-forbid) the Democrats that are want to act.
Click to expand...
pnewton, what “rejection of anything that alleviates suffering” do you speak of? You criticize Republican Catholics, but do not offer any specifics.

Ishii
 
pnewton said:
I think it would be good if our Catholic bishops were respected for the fact they aren’t a bunch of ignorant buffoons. The very idea that posters here see themselves as wiser and more intelligent than they, when they are doing nothing but re-iterating the teaching of Jesus again again again. Poverty? Are we really serious. It is only covered about a hundred time more than abortion in the Bible. We have lost our balance in America. Prosperity has made us mad, as we have abandoned the wisdom of God for the foolishness of Man.
Click to expand...
On economic matters, quite a large portion of bishops are woefully ignorant. It doesn’t mean they are incapable of learning, but they simply don’t know what they are talking about. They have had almost no education in economic matters, and haven’t studied or read up on economics in their free time. And when one of them makes comments about economics that are ill-formed or based on ignorance, the laity should rightly point out the errors and differing opinions.

And we should REALLY be careful about trying to compare poverty in modern day America and poverty in biblical times. They are not in the same universe.
 
JamesCaruso said:
It can be argued that raising the minimum wage is tantamount to giving individuals money by which they can do for themselves all of the above.

In the case of raising the minimum wage, the persons being helped have already shown their willingness to work, so I find no way to rationalize withholding the means to help them.
Click to expand...
So you admit that raising the min wage is only an argument as to if it really does benefit the workers at or near min wage, and then state there should be no argument against this position. Bizarre.

So anything you THINK might happen means we shouldn’t oppose a position. Even when we have evidence and good arguments contrary to your argument.
 
Catholic_Press said:
Writing in the Fort Lauderdale-based Sun-Sentinel, Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami, who serves as chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Domestic …

More…
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t it be better to have government policies that would create an environment where higher skilled jobs (that would be worth more money) be created?

I think back to Centesimus Annus:48. These general observations also apply to the role of the State in the economic sector. Economic activity, especially the activity of a market economy, cannot be conducted in an institutional, juridical or political vacuum. On the contrary, it presupposes sure guarantees of individual freedom and private property, as well as a stable currency and efficient public services. Hence the principle task of the State is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labours and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly. The absence of stability, together with the corruption of public officials and the spread of improper sources of growing rich and of easy profits deriving from illegal or purely speculative activities, constitutes one of the chief obstacles to development and to the economic order.

Another task of the State is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this area belongs not to the State but to individuals and to the various groups and associations which make up society. The State could not directly ensure the right to work for all its citizens unless it controlled every aspect of economic life and restricted the free initiative of individuals. This does not mean, however, that the State has no competence in this domain, as was claimed by those who argued against any rules in the economic sphere. Rather, the State has a duty to sustain business activities by creating conditions which will ensure job opportunities, by stimulating those activities where they are lacking or by supporting them in moments of crisis.
Have we heard any calls from Archbishop Wenski (or Bishop Blaire before him):
  • For a stable currency? (Seems that our massive deficit spending is mortgaging our children’s future to China)
  • For more efficiency in public spending (i.e., less fraud, waste, and abuse…to include out-and-out public corruption)?
  • For creating conditions that would result in more job opportunities so that unemployment is reduced (by the very laws of the market, when supplies are constricted, prices will rise – that includes labor)
I personally don’t ever recall reading about any of those calls in the past.
 
markomalley said:
ave we heard any calls from Archbishop Wenski (or Bishop Blaire before him):
  • For a stable currency? (Seems that our massive deficit spending is mortgaging our children’s future to China)
  • For more efficiency in public spending (i.e., less fraud, waste, and abuse…to include out-and-out public corruption)?
  • For creating conditions that would result in more job opportunities so that unemployment is reduced (by the very laws of the market, when supplies are constricted, prices will rise – that includes labor)
I personally don’t ever recall reading about any of those calls in the past.
Click to expand...
I have heard some priests talk about the conservative approach of creating a climate of job growth as being a solution to helping the poor. I wish some of the Catholic’s who post in CAF who seem to demonize conservatives would consider this a solution as well.
 
zz912 said:
On economic matters, quite a large portion of bishops are woefully ignorant.
Click to expand...
On economic matters, quite a large fraction of people, both for and against the minimum wage are woefully ignorant.
It doesn’t mean they are incapable of learning, but they simply don’t know what they are talking about.
Click to expand...
That is quite common for the population at large, whether people are for or against the minimum wage.
They have had almost no education in economic matters, and haven’t studied or read up on economics in their free time. And when one of them makes comments about economics that are ill-formed or based on ignorance, the laity should rightly point out the errors and differing opinions.
Click to expand...
That is assuming that the laity are not making their own economic errors. Few of the laity are educated enough in economics to make a fully informed criticism of the bishops.
 
JamesCaruso said:
Clergy are obliged to consider the corporeal works of mercy, which include:
  • Feed the hungry
  • Give drink to the thirsty
  • Clothe the naked
  • Shelter the homeless
It can be argued that raising the minimum wage is tantamount to giving individuals money by which they can do for themselves all of the above.

I can understand refusing to feed certain persons, or to clothe or shelter them, because they refuse to work in order to do these things for themselves. Other than that, I can see no reason in Christian charity for refusing to help if I have the means to do so. In the case of raising the minimum wage, the persons being helped have already shown their willingness to work, so I find no way to rationalize withholding the means to help them.
Click to expand...
I would argue that we already do help them, but not by keeping and raising the minium wage.

For example: We offer many people with limited income subsidized/free/low interest loans/grants to go to College or Trade school. Statistics have shown that the more education one gets, the better their employment prospects are and generally have lower levels of unemployment. Simply raising the miniumum wages does not solve the problem that some people do not have the skills to demand/warrant a higher wage in the first place.

There is a reason why a lot of minimum/low wage positions are staffed by students (or at leas the traditional age group of students). They are developing their skills so that they can move on. No one can really step in and be a brain surgeon with a simple high school education.
 
JamesCaruso said:
Clergy are obliged to consider the corporeal works of mercy, which include:
  • Feed the hungry
  • Give drink to the thirsty
  • Clothe the naked
  • Shelter the homeless
It can be argued that raising the minimum wage is tantamount to giving individuals money by which they can do for themselves all of the above.

I can understand refusing to feed certain persons, or to clothe or shelter them, because they refuse to work in order to do these things for themselves. Other than that, I can see no reason in Christian charity for refusing to help if I have the means to do so. In the case of raising the minimum wage, the persons being helped have already shown their willingness to work, so I find no way to rationalize withholding the means to help them.
Click to expand...
So we fulfill our personal obligation to do the above by having the Govt force someone else to do it for us.?
 
JamesCaruso said:
I can see no reason in Christian charity for refusing to help if I have the means to do so. In the case of raising the minimum wage, the persons being helped have already shown their willingness to work, so I find no way to rationalize withholding the means to help them.
Click to expand...
Why is it so difficult for you to understand that the people who oppose raising the minimum wage do so because they believe it will hurt more people than it will help? If we all believed as you do that raising the minimum wage would be beneficial to the poor then you would be right to criticize those who oppose it, but that isn’t the case.

We have different opinions about the likely effects raising the minimum wage will have and are both doing what we think is better for the poor. The question of Christian charity has nothing to do with it and I have no more right to question your motives than you have to question mine.

Ender
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top