It means a minimum of compassion.
2007-01-12 12:44:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Zelda Hunter 7
·
2⤊
5⤋
First, the House passed the minimum wage hike, it has not passed the Senate or the Presidents desk.
Second, it only raised it to $5.85 the first year, $6.55 the second year, and $7.25 the third year.
Third, the increase equals out to be $1456 a year per employee. When you figure in the increase for the employers part of SS, and the increase in workers compensation, that is based on wages, it will figure around $1700 per employee increase for the employer.
Ten emplyees would be an increase of $17,000, 25 employees would be an increase of $42,500. Do you honestly think the employer is going to eat this loss, or pass the cost onto customers in the form of price increases? This is going to happen for the next three years. Sounded good unless you already made more than the minimum wage hikes, then your dollar will buy less! Where is the compassion from the left for those that make more than minimum wage? If they were serious, why raise it over three years instead of one? If there is no negative effect, why not $10 an hour?
2007-01-12 20:48:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
I guess under the pressure he had to sign it. But I know as he knows and all politicians it's just a political tool to get votes from those "who care" but have no sense on how our economy runs. Only 2% of American workers get minimum wage and the average time they are there is 9 months then they either get fired or move on. It is not or never was inted to be a wage to sustain a family. It is an entry level to a job nothing else. If you arn't worth more after a few months then you are either lazy or incapable of learning in that field. Move on. Go back to school it has nothing to do with compasion on either side. It's a joke and a ploy used by the "now" democrats to get votes.
2007-01-12 20:51:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by crusinthru 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
If you stop and look at it, raising the minimum wage didn't help anyone. The first thing I noticed, the fast food places upped their prices and Starbucks did the same. SO, that few more cents an hour, has caused these so called " poor people" who work for minimum wage, to pay more for food, groceries and such. So who won???
2007-01-12 20:46:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by bigmikejones 5
·
3⤊
2⤋
Excuse me, clue time - CONGRESS sets and changes the minimum wage, NOT the President. Whatever he may or may not say, and regardless of what you think of it, the President DOES NOT VOTE in Congress. Please learn what the different divisions of government do before spouting off.
2007-01-12 21:06:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by dukefenton 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Thank you Zelda and True patriot...I agree 100% with both your answers. George Bush doesn't have a compassionate bone in his body. In a documentary I watched the other day, there was a short film clip of W, at some kind of luncheon or dinner or something, and he can right out and admitted on film, that the haves and the have mores are his base. It positively made me want to puke!!!!!
2007-01-12 20:54:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
Nope - its the Democrats in Action
like the major exception is for a corporation whose headquarters
are in Speaker Pelosi's District
how coincidental! in less than 100 hours - Tunagate!
2007-01-12 20:45:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by tom4bucs 7
·
4⤊
4⤋
No, when Bush said compassionate conservative, he meant "have some compassion, give some rich conservatives some huge tax cuts".
2007-01-12 20:48:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Its Hero Dictatorship 5
·
5⤊
3⤋
He couldn't give a crap less about the average American. He's out there for his buddies, the rich sycophants that cowtow to the corporate powers that REALLY run this country.
2007-01-12 20:44:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Cerulean 3
·
3⤊
5⤋