George Will (onenewspage.com photo)
“Liberals say, if you want people to smoke less, raise the price of tobacco. If you want people to drive less, raise the price of gasoline. Raise the price of something, people will buy less of it. Then, they come to the subject of entry level wages and they will say it will have no affect whatever. Clearly, it will have an effect. Not only will people hire fewer, but there will be a huge incentive for places like California Pizza Kitchen and Chili’s to go to automated ordering, cutting down minimum wage workers.” -George Will
A new twist on Obama’s redistribution of wealth
The president got what he wanted when he increased the tax rate on the top income earners to 39.6 percent. It was part of his redistribution of wealth agenda.
Now as the numbers of those below the poverty line grows, the president is talking about income inequality and the necessity to increase the federally mandated minimum wage again, from $7.25 to $10.10. His economy is in the tank and in true liberal form, he continues to apply the wrong measures. Another indication of his lack of business acumen.
Nancy Pelosi and all the others on the left stand before the microphones in support of the hike, saying it would create jobs. But then the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office releases its findings that the $10.10 option when fully implemented “would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers,” a number that could increase to one million.
The president’s proposal gives his redistribution of wealth a new twist. This time he’s recommending taking from low income workers and giving to other low income workers. The CBO found that about 16.5 million workers would get higher wages at $10.10 an hour, while those 500,000 plus workers who were making $7.25 an hour will now be unemployed.
Charles Krauthammer (realclearpolitics.com photo)
“What this is, is a transfer of wealth from some low income earners to other low income earners. It’s just so obvious. It’s not rocket science. Some will be better off; will make more. Others are going to lose everything. They are going to lose all of their income and they’re going to lose the first step on the ladder to employment, which is their hope for the future. It’s a high price. You can make your choice, but there isn’t a free lunch. They are running ads saying, ‘Give America a Raise’ as if it’s no cost. It is a cost and it will be other low income people who will pay it.” -Charles Krauthammer
With most of those drawing minimum wage more than likely in the low information crowd, this message will not be heard. Most of them see the president standing there in front of supporters on MSNBC or CNN, saying they deserve more, and get excited at the prospect.
The president’s proposal puts Republicans between a rock and a hard place. Will it be another “hold your nose and vote yes,” so you’re not accused of being the party of “no” again? Or do you stand on principle, and take a beating in your next campaign?
