On the proposed minimum wage hike

Sigh...okay, so certain parties, who shall remain nameless but whose name rhymes with "Moquee," wondered why I was doing useful work and not posting about the minimum wage. I thought other things were more interesting, partly because it was clearly a cynical election year attempt by Republicans to look like they care about the poor.

But fine. Looky here, then looky here.

Trading a minimum wage hike for elimination of the estate tax is just that: a trade. And it's not even a good one. Ignore for a moment that in a time of "war" with increased military spending and already record deficits, the last thing you should be doing is cutting taxes, let alone taxes on the ultra-wealthy, let alone taxes on the ultra-wealthy _and dead_. Ignore that. The estate tax constitutes about $25 billion in the '07 budget. Republicans will, I guarantee you, immediately after elections start screaming about "runaway spending" (nevermind they're the ones who perpetrated said spending), and will insist on making cuts. And they'll make cuts the same place they always do: social programs. And won't you be surprised when the benefits of the working poor drop further than $2 per hour per person. This is all, of course, assuming that Republicans won't turn around and find a way to undo the wage hike directly.

But okay...maybe the wage hike will make up for those cuts. Except that even if it did (which it won't), there's no guarantee that the minimum wage will keep pace with inflation. Which means the wage increase is, in effect, temporary, while the estate tax repeal is permanent. If you figure about a 4% inflation rate, in less than 9 years low-wage workers will be right back where they are now.

So, like I said, not only is it a trade, it's a bad one. And the first Republican you see claiming a Democrat doesn't care about low-wage workers because he/she didn't vote for the minimum wage hike, punch them.