The Dimishing Value of the Worker

I was reading the article shown here about a new attempt in Congress to eliminate the Federal Minimum Wage laws instead of raising them. We would then revert to state wage minimums. This amended language would have cut the minimum wage in Kansas, for example, from $5.15 to $2.65 per hour. Fortunately, the amendment was rejected. The rhetoric used to support the bill is particularly sickening: "In its current form, the bill attempts to blindly blanket the Nation with a new Federal minimum wage without regard to unique economic conditions of each individual State," said Allard in fighting the proposed $2.10 increase in the federal minimum wage. "Less Government intervention, at all levels, enables the private sector to attract, recruit, and retain the best possible employees and reward increased productivity and responsibility with higher compensation." The normal "economics over all" mentality of the Republican machine would have us believe that the minimum wage is not necessary, and possibly even limiting the compensation of people because of the "unique economic conditions of each individual State." Yeah, right. I suppose the the ever-benevolent US economy would, in its infinite wisdom, ensure higher salaries that are currently required, if only we would just remove the LOWER boundary. Perhaps they read wrong, and think this is a maximum wage? I have never heard of any instance where the removal of a hard lower boundary caused the average to go up. The lower bound is there specifically to keep the average where it is. The current $5.15/hour minimum equates to $206/week. This falls well below the poverty line, currently estimated at $13200/year, or $253.85/week for a family of 2. The Senator proposes that $2.65/hour in Kansas, $106/week, is a solution to this problem... In the same time frame, Congress gave itself a chance to help the income disparity situation between workers and executives discussed in my previous post Paying for the Privilege. The basis for a new piece of legislation is discussed in this article. The Income Equity Act of 2005 was introduced to: Amends the Internal Revenue Code to deny employers a tax deduction for payments of excessive compensation (more than 25 times the lowest compensation paid any other employee). 14 Congresspeople sponsored the bill - not suprisingly, 13 Democrats and 1 Independent. I had no idea that such a loophole existed in the IRS code. This means that companies have great incentive to pay executives massive salaries, because the corporate financial liability is capped. The Income Equity Act never made it out of committee. I'm ever so greatful to our elected officials for looking out for the welfare of all Americans, and not just the leaders of our corporations. I sometimes use sarcasm to hide my tears.