well, let's see, more than one third the households have incomes over half the proverty line, that's really low, I don't think their problem is
related to minimum wage, maybe too many kids, or disability, or maybe even drug or alchohol use.
that leaves two thirds left, most of which have income below the proverty line.....they're working just not earning enough to meet the needs for
or at least that would be my guess......don't hold your breeth waiting for the government to hand you a breakdown of the numbers, they ain't gonna.
I'd recommend writing to some federal and state agencies, or legislatures asking them, but if you have the same luck as me, you will get what are
obviously bogus numbers anyways....
but you say more on topic, so okay....
The house has passed a bill that would raise minimum wage in three 75 cent increments starting in January. So, what's the catch???
The most controversial tax provision would extend reductions in the estate tax indefinitely, but it would not eliminate the tax, as many conservatives
Under current law, estates of up to $2 million are exempt from the tax, and amounts over that are levied at a top rate of 46 percent. The exemption
and top rate are scheduled to reach $3.5 million and 45 percent in 2009; the tax is to disappear in 2010, then revert to an exemption of $1 million
and a top rate of 55 percent in 2011.
The provision before the House would reinstate the tax in 2010 with an exemption of $3.75 million and a top rate of 40 percent.
Further cuts would lift the exemption to $5 million and lower the top rate to 30 percent by 2015, after which the exemption would be indexed to
inflation and the rate would remain 30 percent.
Other tax breaks, all of which expired this year and which the legislation would reinstate through 2007, include:
• Allowing deductions of up to $4,000 for higher education expenses.
• Allowing deductions for state and local sales taxes instead of state and local income taxes.
• Extending the research and development tax credit.
the bill also extends some tax breaks, of course....
don't really see any that would help any businesses out there that might be hurt by having to pay the higher wages, but what do you want, it's
congress, they're more interested in votes and logic!
The senate also seems to have a version. This one should scare ya...
"(B) the wage provided for under clauses (ii) and (iii) of subparagraph (A) shall be automatically increased for the year involved by a
percentage equal to the percentage by which the annual rate of pay for Members of Congress increased for such year as provided for pursuant to the
Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31).'
it's tied to the increases of their wages!!! and I doubt if it would do anything that would reduce their pay increases, regardless of the
consequenses!!! Man, I could be making $20 an hour by retirement time!!!
this one here looks interesting....sounds more in line to what I am thinking...
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Living American Wage (LAW) Act of 2006'.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the Federal minimum wage should, as a minimum , be adjusted every 4 years so that a person working for such a wage may earn an annual
income that is not less than 112 percent of the Federal poverty threshold, as determined by the Census Bureau; and
(2) Congress or any of the several States may establish a higher minimum wage requirement than that established in this Act.
SEC. 3. MINIMUM WAGE .
Section 6 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a)(1) to read as follows:
`(1) except as otherwise provided in this section, not less than $5.15 an hour beginning September 1, 1997, and not less than the amount
determined by the Secretary under subsection (b) beginning January 1, 2007;'; and
(2) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c) and inserting after subsection (a) the following:
`(b)(1) Not later than September 1, 2006, and once every 4 years thereafter, the Secretary shall determine the minimum wage rate applicable
under subsection (a)(1) based on the formula described in paragraph (2). The Secretary shall publish such wage rate in the Federal Register not later
than October 1 of each year. If such determination results in a lower minimum wage than that then in effect, the Secretary shall not adjust the
minimum wage then in effect pursuant to this subsection.
`(2) The minimum wage rate determined by the Secretary under paragraph (1) shall be the minimum hourly wage sufficient for a person working for
such wage 40 hours per week, 52 weeks per year, to earn an annual income in an amount that is 12 percent higher than the Federal poverty threshold for
a two person household, with one person a child under age 18, and living in the 48 contiguous States, as published for each such year by the Census
but their's no tax breaks for the businesses that might be unable to absorb the increase in payroll....
[edit on 30-7-2006 by dawnstar]
a little birdie told me I had to learn how to use the external sourse quote box, so I'm learning......
[edit on 30-7-2006 by dawnstar]