Night Owls, a themed open thread, appears at Daily Kos seven days a week.
At the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Dean Baker writes—This Is What Minimum Wage Would Be If It Kept Pace with Productivity:
Until 1968, the minimum wage not only kept pace with inflation, it rose in step with productivity growth. The logic is straightforward; we expect that wages in general will rise in step with productivity growth. For workers at the bottom to share in the overall improvement in society’s living standards, the minimum wage should also rise with productivity.
The distinction between inflation and productivity is an important one. If the minimum wage rises in step with inflation, we are effectively ensuring that it will allow minimum wage earners to buy the same amount of goods and services through time, protecting them against higher prices. However, if it rises with productivity that means that as workers are able to produce more goods and services per hour, on average, minimum wage earners will be able to buy more goods and services through time.
While the national minimum wage did rise roughly in step with productivity growth from its inception in 1938 until 1968, in the more than five decades since then, it has not even kept pace with inflation. However, if the minimum wage did rise in step with productivity growth since 1968 it would be over $24 an hour today, as shown in the Figure below.
TOP COMMENTS • HIGH IMPACT STORIES
QUOTATION
“In my Inaugural I laid down the simple proposition that nobody is going to starve in this country. It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By ‘business’ I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living.”
~~Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Statement on National Industrial Recovery Act (June 16, 1933)
TWEET OF THE DAY
BLAST FROM THE PAST
At Daily Kos on this date in 2005—Science Saturday: Scrapping the Hubble (Again?)
Sources said that the White House, in consultation with NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe, had decided to eliminate the Hubble funding from the 2006 federal budget because the cost of servicing is expected to exceed $1 billion.
The sources said the administration made the decision despite its intention to ask Congress for a 4.6 percent budget increase for NASA to $17 billion. The request is expected to focus on plans to reorient NASA's priorities toward President Bush's "Vision for Space Exploration" to the moon and Mars.
Stories like this often ignite debates about whether we should spend a billion dollars in outer space when we have so many problems here on Earth to deal with. But I think as the bolded final sentence makes clear, the choice is not between $1 billion for Hubble vs. $1 billion for schools or healthcare.
Rather, the choice is between $1 billion for Hubble vs. $1 billion for Bushco's insane, cockamamie Martian scheme—a scheme which some commentators believe is just a ruse for the Bushies to proceed apace with their desire to militarize space. I wouldn't be surprised if this view is right - I've yet to lose when betting on the Bush Administration's venality.
On today’s Kagro in the Morning show: Day 2 of the trial begins. Greg Dworkin rounds up reactions to Day 1, plus "normal" news from the elections front. Press mistakenly announces a "peaceful" end to the Richmond gun nut protest. Bezos’ phone hacked by... Mr. Bone Saw, himself!
RadioPublic|LibSyn|YouTube|Patreon|Square Cash (Share code: Send $5, get $5!)