Tuesday February 19, 2013, 7:14 am
The fact is, over half of poor folks in this country who are on food stamps and Medicaid actually do have a job.

Paying a living wage to all workers would increase payments to both Social Security, Medicare and our income tax system while cutting government payments for government assistance.

Paying a LIVING WAGE would actually strengthen the economy. Companies that pay poverty wages actually are receiving a subsidy from the taxpayer when their employees use government programs. Some of the richest people in this country pay poverty wages. They are wealthy because the taxpayer paid their workers for their basic needs.

Paying a living wage gives work dignity. There are many low paid workers who will not apply for food stamps and work two or even three jobs to fill in for the money they lack to feed their families. If we paid them a fair wage, they could be home with their families and their quality of life would improve. Studies show that learning improves when parents are home more. Paying a living wage would be good for our country in so many ways. AND guess what, the wealthy would not have to change their lifestyles one bit!

The principle of "minimum wage", as the President proposes, perpetuates poverty. People paid a minimum wage will always be poor, because when we set it at $9 or even $10.50, prices will rise (think, "cost of living"), keeping them poor and still dependent on government assistance. The concept of a living wage insures that wages are annually adjusted to keep working people off welfare. With a living wage everyone wins, no one loses. The middle class grows; the wealthy will still be rich beyond belief.

This is an issue that is supported by both liberals and conservatives. Less government spending. Lower taxes. Less people on welfare. We can all get behind that!

There are certainly issues to be worked out. We probably cannot jump in a one year period to a living wage or our economy will suffer a shock. Small businesses that employ less than 10 may have to shut down. Should they be excluded or should they quit? Teenagers, living at home, do not need a living wage. I hope this petition will start a national conversation about the living wage. It is a new paradigm as opposed to a minimum wage. We need to start now

What can you do until we have a living wage? You not only vote at the voting booth, you vote when you pull out your wallet. Avoid shopping at places that pay poverty wages. Ask companies you deal with to pay a living wage. We should require that goods made in other countries be made by workers paid a living wage. This could bring manufacturing jobs back home!

Here is a resource that talks more about what a living wage is and why it is important we do this:(site link)

A related petition:
http://signon.org/sign/bring-about-a-living?mailing_id=9255&source=s.icn.em.cr&r_by=491007

Tuesday February 19, 2013, 9:04 am
Thanks

Tuesday February 19, 2013, 12:29 pm
And more people would be able to purchase more items and that would improve the economy. Items cannot sell if people cannot afford to buy them.

Tuesday February 19, 2013, 12:33 pm
You are welcome Tim
So true Barbara! You cannot currently send a star to Barbara because you have done so within the last week.

Tuesday February 19, 2013, 4:36 pm
Real economists know this, have known all along! Keep fighting for it-beat the greedy!

Tuesday February 19, 2013, 4:47 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Angelika because you have done so within the last week.

Tuesday February 19, 2013, 8:16 pm
as wages rise so will prices. when everything gets done 9 bucks an hour will buy what 7.25 does now.
companies will pass the costs of wages onto consumers.

Tuesday February 19, 2013, 8:18 pm
You'd rather have the taxpayer continue to pay it for these employers Billie?

Tuesday February 19, 2013, 10:14 pm
i didn't say that jla i said the costs would just be passed on. it will change nothing

Wednesday February 20, 2013, 7:55 am
The research in the report indicated that the improved productivity from a living wage will increase income to the business in excess of what the increased cost of the wage is so there is nothing to pass on to the consumer, Billie, while not making the change leaves the taxpayer subsidizing the business so you did say it since it is implicit in not doing it.

Wednesday February 20, 2013, 12:44 pm
That's all well and good if those in power wanted that, but the elite don't want that; they want feudalism brought back.

Wednesday February 20, 2013, 2:23 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Robert because you have done so within the last week.