Breaking news:
A House of Representatives panel voted Tuesday to raise the U.S. minimum wage in increments to $7.25 an hour by Jan. 1, 2009.
The House Appropriations Committee backed the proposal by a vote of 32-27 during work on a massive fiscal 2007 funding bill for labor and health programs.
But the legislation faces many hurdles, including possible efforts by House Republican leaders to remove this language from the spending bill.
Last I checked, there were more Republicans than Democrats, so why this passed I don't know.
As if there were not enough economic slowdown signals already - slowing growth, rising CPI/PPI, new jobs starting to drift lower, and now Congress (in its oh-so-infinite wisdom) may handicap companies by raising the minimum wage? Gee, that'll help in securing a "soft landing" for the economy so that it won't go into recession.
Wage growth raises the cost of doing business, and will continue to allow for inflation to creep upward, which will give the Fed reason to keep pushing interest rates higher, which if it continues will lead to a nice, big recession. Fears of further rate hikes have already milked 1,000 points out of the DJIA - if tightening does continue, the losses will accelerate.
We don't need to be providing mroe fuel to the fire for a campaign of further Fed tightening, when the slightest story could tip the balance.
Just another example of Congressional Republicans continuing to morph into Ted Kennedy.
For better examples and arguments against government largesse, click on over to Geek Soap Box.
Do yourselves a favor, and stay home in November. I'm 98% sure the Democrats can't do any worse. Let them take the wheel and see if they do better, and if not, well, 2008 may lead to the political earthquake we're looking for.
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Will the last conservative please turn out the lights?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I'm 98% sure the Democrats can't do any worse.
Really?
As to the above, a Democratic Congressman bragging about how he would bring big-time funds back home to his district? Nope. That's something Republicans certainly would never dream of doing.
Bridges to Nowhere, anyone?
Yes, really. How exactly is that different from current officeholders?
It's not.
Umm, I'm not saying it is, but how exactly is this better?
I said, let's if they will do better, not that they definitely would. The former indicates caution that it would be better while the latter indicates an expectation that it would be better.
I have no expectation that it would be better, but if it is, then fine.
My point is that they can't do worse than how a Republican-led Congress is currently acting, as this Congress seems to be borrowing the worst traits of both sides of the aisle.
With that scenario, why should they stay in charge?
Look, you're not going to get a spirited defense of the GOP Congress from me, but if you think the Dems can do better, I'm sorry but no. I have a hard time thinking that Speaker Pelosi et al will bring fiscal discipline to Washington.
But if you think the GOP doesn't deserve to get thrown out of the leadership of Congress simply because they're not Democrats, in this case then that actually is a spirited defense of the Republican Party.
Nobody apart from Bush himself will have the nerve to say this fall, "Look, we're actually doing a great job!" So by saying "We're nothing special but we're better than they are," you're accomplishing precisely what you otherwise say you're not intending to do.
Rove and Mehlman want that very mentality as people walk into voting booths this fall. I'm with Francase and not buying it this time.
Post a Comment