Does anyone really believe that this was going to help out lower class families? If someone really thought that this was going to make a difference for the better, than they need to go take some business classes. I know of a LOT of people now who are probably make less now because of this new law. We all know that the idea was to give the money from the owners of a company to the hourly employees who are supporting a family on such a low income. HOWEVER, that is not going to happen! Now what is happening is the money is simply going from one hourly employee to another. I can give you a perfect example. I am now working at a restaurant. Of all the employees the ONLY ones who are getting an increase in pay are the who seat the guests to their table. Everyone else is still making above the new minimum wage amount or is a tipped employee who didn't get an increase because of it. First, does anyone really believe that the work that a greet does warrant a decent rate of pay? Next, what gives to these types of employees, just simply gave away from the other employees. Now, since the greeters are making more the restaurant manager decided to give the employees who are working in the back of the house (i.e. the chefs, dishwashers, etc..) less hours. In the case of the dishwashers they now have one closer on some nights that usually would have had two. Furthermore, this restaurant is located in a wealthy part of town and all the employees who work as a greeter are young high school/college kids who are living off of their wealthy parents. These kids are just working at this restaurant live in these areas and are working to just simply make spending money. Their parents do not need the money. Meanwhile, the employees in the back of the house are making less and are the ones who supporting themselves and others. They need the extra few hours that are taken away because they, unlike the greeters, have bills to pay. Therefore, instead of the money going from the owners to the hourly employees. Finally, the restaurant might also run with less greeters at a point in time so as a result, the greeters are going to make less because they will be working less. It is simply going from one hourly employee to another. There are also many different things companies can do to limit the amount of expenses that would have been increased. They could have a longer waiting period for new employees who would need benefits, they could could a number if not all the benefits, increase the cost of their products, have the salaried employees (usually the managers) work a number of hours instead of the hourly employees, and much more.

__________________
Bill Richardson in '08.

Minimum wage, in of itself, is a joke. NO ONE is paid "minimum wage!"

Ok...I'll take that back... NO ONE (other than high schoolers) are paid minimum wage. Sure, waiters and waitresses might (on the surface), but they also make decent money in tips (whom everyone knows, they don't claim 100% of). The freakin' McDonalds, down the street from me, doesn't even pay minimum wage...AND they offer a signing bonus! A signing bonus!

The only think minimum wage does, is force small businesses out of business, because now they're forced to pay hundreds more to their workers, without any sense of reward or accomplishment whatsoever.

Then again...I'm not surprised this passed. Congress has been 110% out of touch with this country for years now. I seriously doubt any congressman knows anyone who's making less than six figures, much less anyone making "minimum wage."

actually 12.5 million Americans or so work for min wage at any given yr. history shows a moderate increase has always benefited the economy.

Yeah...seen the demographics on those "12.5 million Americans?" They're high schoolers, working bottom-of-the-rung retail and fast-food jobs.

The Fair Labor Standards Act sets the federal minimum wage at $5.85 per hour. The Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, signed into law on May 25, 2007[1], will increase the minimum wage over two years:
$6.55 (July 24, 200 $7.25 (July 24, 2009)[2]

The minimum wage should be about 3 times that amount, with wages based on the cost of living increases in America.

Its lame to suggest an owner of a business suffers or people are layed off because of wage increases. Are they to stupid to pass the costs to their customers?? Must be!!! A resturant with ten workers would probably have to raise a meal 3% to cover the .70 cent hour increase ($7.00 an hour or 1 additional employee in the firm). I think owners like to whine, and then hop in their 150,000. sport car to go to their 550,000 home. Stop!! Your breaking mah heart!!!

__________________
One Tin Soldier Walked Away....................

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p...tionkill-1.jpg

I'm okay with minimum wage, but I think it should be localized.
Federal minimum wage is pointless. It can cause a big loss of jobs in one area of the country and cause absolutely nothing to happen in another part of the country.
It makes more sense for states or localities to set minimum wages based on local economies.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Says someone who knows more about interplantetary astro-physics, than he does about economics.

Ok...since we're on the subject of "stupid," here's a scenario...

Mom and Pop open up a convenience store. They hire six teenagers to work for them, and pay them minimum wage. The teenagers accept this wage, and work merrily on their way. Mom & Pop make just enough money to pay the bills and survive (a VERY common practice among private ownerships). They have set their profit margin at a paltry 2% of their costs. This is to entice new customers, and to keep competitive with the larger chains, like Wal-Mart (who usually have profit margins of 6-8%)

But now here comes the Imperial Government, demanding that they pay their employees more than what those employees agreed to be paid for. Now, instead of a 2% profit margin, they're making a 3% loss. Mom & Pop have to either fire half their workforce, or raise their prices another 5% to make up the difference. This makes their prices much more than what Wal-Mart charges. They quickly lose enough customers, that they are forced to go out of business, because socialists like you don't understand business fundamentals.

"One additional employee" costs over $13,000 annually, in wages alone. Do you even know how much of a price increase it would take, to cover that? Stop guessing and do the math (if you know how). Oh, and remember...the higher you charge your products, the less people you'll attract, because they'll just go somewhere else.

I think you talk a lot, but very little comes out of your mouth. Can you find me one, single example? Anywhere? This statement is so totally ludicrous it's not even worth trying to pick apart. The finest restaurants around me, are owned by folks who drive Saturns. Stop padding your arguments with outlandish figures.