The way some business leaders speak and act, they apparently think it was a regressive step when children stopp having to push carts in coal mines a century or so ago.

When I read some of the "independent" advice of rightist "think-tanks" my normal inclination is to believe the polar opposite.

If a person is paid just enough to stay alive is it fair to say that person is a slave?

If a person is paid less than it costs to live, is that person worse off than a slave?

Should slave renters be allowed to pay less than a living wage?

Can anyone actually live on the current minimum wage?

Minumum wage is fine where it is right now, but it still needs to keep up with inflation and what not.

Minimum wage should be evaluated on a yearly basis against factors such as inflation and increase in cost of living,

Minimum wage should be enough to survive on if adults are expected to support themselves on it.

It should be raised to $7.85 per hour. Keep raising it. It could give the workers the incentive to work even harder.

Listen to what big business suggests, then do the exact opposite.

Raised. although minimum wage is a joke. people serving you all should make twice the amount you make. i worked at Taco Bell once and every rich person i thought came in, or some lady with kids, i'd pick my nose or put poop in their food.

How could lowering minimum wage be a good thing? that really makes no sense at all. lol, even if this lance charecter thinks that he can make it seem feasible by typing pages worth of completely irrelavent and meaningless garbage to make it look like he actually knows what he is talking about. If minimum wage is not raised, it should at the very least be maintaned at what it is, and companies should give people with minimum wage more benefits. lol you mention jobs going overseas, you know why, THE TAX LOOP HOLES, it is corrupt polititions and business owners creating loopholes that are responsable for jobs going overseas, not the minimum wage.

UPDATE: ALL raising the minimum wage will do is send our valuable jobs overseas, thereby increasing unemployment. If a person in Thailand will make Nikes for half the cost of somebody in the U.S., then you had better bet the factory will be built in Thailand. Not only can they build it for less, they can run it for less, and staff it for less. All it does is send more of our money overseas. KeepTrying would have you believe that if we raise it there would be more money put into our economy, but, the problem is, fewer people would be putting it in and less of it would be staying in the country. ORIGINAL COMMENT: Yes, Eschew, you are right, but the federal government defines poverty as someone who earns less than $25 (ballpark), whereas the World Bank defines poverty as someone who earns less than the equivalent of $1. This is why our jobs are being outsourced to India. Because, even Americans with no skill whatsoever are demanding 25 times what some people are making in other countries. As long as the U.S. workforce continues to be this selfish, we will continue to see a move towards mechanized labor and outsourcing.

The road to destruction is paved with good intentions the saying goes. The New York State Legislature just over-rode Governor Pataki's veto of the minimum wage increase and nothing worse could have happened for those in lowest income tier. The quixotic notion that politicians looking to champion the image of supporting the working man can impose a cost on any natural commodity from labor, real estate to gasoline is simple folly; And the disatrous effects will be the loss of lower tier jobs. A recent study at Cornell found that increasing the minimum wage could make it 400% less likely for an individual entering the lowest income market to gain employment. As the general manager of a business I am simply going to purchase labor from those exhibiting skills worth the additional $2.00 per hour. I will then layoff those who were making $5.15 per hour. The additional $2.00 per hour will purchase me greater output from less individuals and result in a net job loss at just my business of 5 employees. The greatest avenue to assist low income workers is by expanding the market through increased private capital investments. This creates a higher demand for labor at all levels and increases the rate with which those working move up the income scale. Lastly and most importantly economics is as natural as child birth. A system of government that is predicated on the foolish notion that government only exists to divide goods and power absent the realities of a natural law (that people are capable of vice and virtue) will continually succumb to the disastrous policies that have hindered people from improving their quality of life and promoting human dignity. Legal structures that promote the virtuous ethic of diligent work that freely accords the proper value to that labor allows the individual the greatest chance to sell his accumulating skills at a later date for an greater amount. Fabricated systems that impose fictious costs on labor exclude individuals from the market while others increase their productivity to assume the higher income. *****Why stop at living wage Ralph? Why not rich wage? Upper middle class wage? You are aware that the actual energy exerted (labor) is limited to the natural choices of the individuals correct? That, that energy combined with natural talent and most importantly experience, formulate the manifestion of a material value the free market will pay for ones labor. It cannot be imposed by you or the state any more than you can wish man to have wings. I mean come on... are you living in a box? The idea that you can impose a fictious cost on labor will only reduce employment elsewhere or stymie investment- the mothers milk of future jobs. The pursuit of profit is a virtuous goal as profit is only the materialization of the virtue of fecund diligence successfully applied. That virtue leads to innovative life saving products and quality of life standards for everyone while expanding the job market for all. The reality is that economic mobility is rapid in a capitalist society. This you never dispute. You regurgitate standard income disparities that are absolutely useless. A majority of poor Americans are out of poverty in 3-5 years depending on the growth of the economy because the acumulate skills and wealth. Over 80% of Americans are out of poverty in less than a generation. Over 72% of Americans own their homes. Over 50% of poor people own their own houses. Over 70% of poor Americans own cars. Over 75% of poor Americans have air conditioning. Every poor person in America is ENTITLED to Medicaid. Our system works because it vests its success on the efforts of the people to do what is naturally right and create the greatest possible opportunity for success. (If the world could replicate our model it would be better off) Now, no one said this was easy. Neither is life in the wilderness. The Declaration said the pursuit of happiness NOT the right to happiness. I always find it funny when people discuss economics as though it's all about the materials themselves when in actuality the materials are only the essence of viture materialized. Ralph will defend the traditional institution of matrimony and the morality of sexual relations because those institutions are predicated upon God's Natural Law. Did God not create a natural means by which we improve our lives, feed ourselves and our families? Wow! Could that be work? Can a free society simply create moral legal structures for people to sell their human capital for the price that the market will bear until the that individual gains skills to sell at a higher rate? Is that not the most free society? Why Ralph, when the Natural institutions of sexual reproduction are at issue must we legally defend the institution that promotes the virtue of the action and in the case of economics it is incorrectly reduced to the attainment of earthly goods absent the moral act of dilligent work?

DickDirk UPDATE: We call it working under the table. Many immigrants work domestically as gardeners, maids and cleaners, many bartenders work this way, too. Migrant workers in the fields and barns work this way all over the country, at a reduced rate because they can't command more. There are always many more willing to work for the wages offered. The US government has been cracking down on this in the last 10 years but the problem is rampant. Every large city has an underground economy. 3rd UPDATE: Well, I guess I'm the one who needs to get his head out of the clouds, I'll do some research on the real world and see just how impending this federal legislation is. I'll let you know my prediction on how soon this will become the law of the land, but nobody should be holding their breath on this one. With our track record of deliberative legislation, you're confident this won't reduce the working poor to serfdom and wage slavery? There are a few wealthy republicans in Congress, as you know. 2nd UPDATE: OK, Ralph, you want to talk about something you've dreamed up called a living wage. No such legislation has been proposed, nobody else in the US has any program called this, but you want to change this fundamental economic index which has essentially been tied to nothing since the great depression, tie it TO something and give it a new name. Christian right-wingers don't oppose your concept, it's not even on their radar screen, or anyone else's. I don't oppose the concept but how does it relate to this list? What do part-time high school kids earn? What do you do with illegal aliens? Even if it were passed it would be regarded in practice as a minimum wage and the inflationary pressure would be catastrophic for the American economy. The concept has a long way to go. UPDATE: OK, Ralph, all the greedy religious zealot republican/conservatives just want to keep the little guy down, eh? So that they can squirrel away more for themselves, right? There's no economic theory at work, the experts at Cornell, one of the most activist, liberal education institutions in the US, are also (suddenly) conservatives who want to keep the little guy down in favor of their own pocketbooks. This is a theological/moral discussion to you, everybody who opposes the increase is a demon, the little guy has no responsiblity to improve and hone his working skills, let's just throw more money at him because he's poor. New York has made itself much more business un-competitive by passing this increase and unemployment will surely increase in a state with (already) the highest unemployment rates in the US. Simply brilliant. Noteworthy: republicans control the NY Senate and it passed overwhelmingly. RINO'S. ORIGINAL COMMENT 9/29/04: In a perfect world, it should be abolished because, in a perfect world, employers would pay a fair wage without being coerced to do so by their government. That said, the reality is the MW is here to stay, and it will periodically screw up our economy, and give screechy liberals something to sanctimoniously rail about. Once you establish a minimum wage, you must tie it to something, though the US has never done that. What is it tied to in the US? It is tied to a periodic compromise between the loving, caring liberals and the heartless, greedy conservatives. I would like someone to ask, since the minimum wage will never be abolished in the US, to what should it be tied or indexed? And then, what do you do with the thousands and thousands of illegal immigrants pouring across our borders, gladly working for less than minimum wage? To me, illegal aliens are not taxpayers and should not participate in government-run benefit programs, like welfare, unemployment, etc. The minimum wage should be tied to some percentage (like 110%) of the federal government's poverty index. OK, there's my dart.

Yes. UPDATE: OK, my original answer was Too cute by half as the Brits would say. Instinctively, I feel that the minimum wage should be raised to keep up with the general cost of living, although I think that some of the arguments for abolishing minimum wage (i.e., letting the market set its own wage levels) have merit. More and more, I believe that minimum wage should somehow be linked to welfare payments (i.e., welfare payments should not pay someone more than they could earn at a minimum wage job - otherwise, there is zero incentive for anyone who truly would rather work than sit around and collect checks for doing nothing at all).

minimum wage should be raised and business taxes lowered.

No obvious answer for this one. If you increase it, this is humane and right for minimum-wage workers who actually have to live in the U.S. (e.g. retail and fast-food) but you turn up the pressure on the trend to send jobs offshore, which hurts a lot of others. If you get rid of the minimum wage, you might as well turn back the clock to the horrors of a hundred years ago (read The Jungle, all you Free Market is Heaven propagandists, we have BEEN there before). You have to find a balance. Keep it where it is for now and do incremental raises over time.

It should be raised and adjusted at regular intervals to reflect cost of living.

Raised, with bonuses for law-abiding workers!

The minimum wage should be raised significantly. Observing how little money people get paid in many parts of the U. S., you can see that there is still a long way to go before workers will have proper rights, despite the wonderful work of the workers' unions during and after the Industrial Revolution.

Anyone who knows anything about economics knows it should be abolished or at least lowered; in a way it's the same premise that work unions do more harm than good to the overall economy. Raising the minimum wage only causes firms to want to hire less people, thus those with the lowest skills (the ones that are supposed to be benefitting from minimum wage) are the very ones who are now out of work because firms are only willing to pay the higher wage to those with more skills and experience. Raising the mimimum wage deprives many from being able to start at the bottom and work their way up occupationally.

It should be raised, and immediately ! I don't think we are going to see a raise in minimum wage anytime soon however. At least not while the Republicans are running this great country...

Raised, certainly. Some would claim raising the minimum wage increases unemployment but I see little modern evidence of this. The British government has raised the minimum wage from 3.70 ( roughly $6.6) to 4.50 ( roughly $8.10) and record low unemployment is being experienced. Similarly Clinton raised the minimum wage and his tenure as president was known as one of low unemployment. More money in the hands of the consumer creates more demand for products which increases the quality and quantity of the products produced thus, creates economic growth. Not to mention the fact, people who get paid minimum wage obviously need the money. If you compare the current minimum wages of Britain and America (British: $8.10, American $5.15) it seems that soon, it might be the case that British workers will get TWICE as much as American ones for doing the same job (and likely with shorter hours as well). Given America has a $10,000 higher per capita (per person) GDP isn't this a little unfair?

It should definitely be raised and not abolished. To abolish it would allow businesses to pay their employees ridiculously low wages and with the poor state of the economy, that would be a bad thing.