Friday, April 07, 2006

John Ewards

Today Former U.S. Senator John Edwards visited the university and gave a 30 minute speech about serving in the public interest. More specifically, he talked about helping those living in poverty. He voiced his concern that America wasn’t doing enough to prevent American poverty. Edwards noted that there is a growing number of “working poor” – people who work minimum wage jobs and still live far below the estimated standard of living.

He suggested that communities develop a “living wage”. By this he means that corporations and/or the American government increase the minimum wage for entry-level jobs to a reasonable amount of money that people can actually live off of. I agree with Edwards on this point. The current American minimum wage is $5.15 per hour and that is not nearly enough to feed a family and provide shelter. Assuming that someone works 40 hours per week making $5.15 per hour, they’re gross weekly income (without taxes) is $206 per week, $824 per month, and $9,888 per year. I don’t know what everyone else’s expenses are, but my budget exceeds that amount, and I’m a student; now image if you also had children.

In 1997, Los Angles passed a living wage law that increased the minimum wage for entry-level workers who work for the city or work for businesses that do business with the city. Studies have shown that employee turnover and absenteeism decreased as a result of the wage increase. The economy in low income neighborhoods increased due residents having more money to spend at the grocer.

Opponents of the living wage argue that increasing wages will hurt entry-level job creation because employers will have to pay more, as opposed to hiring more. Additionally, lower wage workers could be hurt by increased wages because they could lose other forms of government support: Medicaid, special tax breaks, and food stamps. In other words, they’d be making more money but they’d receive less assistance.

For more information on the living wage, please check out the following sites:

  1. NPR
  2. Los Angeles Living Wage Study
  3. Employment Policies Institute

No comments: