Are We "Spartacus"?

 

Spartacus. A name which has inspired down through the ages. For some, the inspiration was fear of a possible rebellion, be it of strikers from a specific industry or the working class as a whole who had grown sick and tired of the empty promises and platitudes made by factory owners or party bosses. 

For others, the name of Spartacus inspired hope. It showed that, united, the people could challenge the oppression leveled by the powers that be. The famous French philosopher Voltaire said that the rebellion led by Spartacus, also known as the "Third Servile War" (73 BCE - 71 BCE) was "the only just war in history".  Perhaps it was.

The name of Spartacus has been used repeatedly as a rallying cry against injustice and oppression, be it against working conditions, wages, or discrimination based on everything from age, gender, religion and so forth. It was called upon during the fight for voting rights by the Suffragettes during the first quarter of the 20th Century just as often as it was around by unions as they began taking shape in the latter half of the 19th.

The mythos inspired by the name of Spartacus has been used in pro-democracy revolts opposing authoritarian governments such as the 1848 uprising in Imperial Germany, the Paris "Commune" of 1871, the Russian Revolution of 1917, and the second German Revolution of 1919 as well as the "Color Revolutions" of Eastern Europe  and  the "Arab Spring"  uprisings in the first decade of the 21st Century.  

I bring up the topic of "Spartacus" after having read of short but very informative article by Gavin J. Maziarz of Gettysburg College, published in August 2022 in "The Gettysburg Historical Journal" (Volume 21 Article 1) about the rebel leader on the second anniversary of the January 6th protest in Washington in 2021.

The article, entitled "The Spartacus Rebellion, More than a Slave Revolt" deals with more than with Spartacus as leader of the Third Servile War (along with Crixus, Castus, Gannicus, Oenomaus) and the successful escape of 70 gladiators and ordinary slaves out of an original 200 who attempted to break out from the ludus or gladiatorial school of Lentulus Batiatus. 

The article, which is only about ten pages long, discusses the modern political implications of the revolt, albeit primarily in Marxian terms, within the context of today's political collapse. To be sure, one doesn't need to be a Marxist to understand the implications of a revolt against an oppressive political system by those at or near the bottom of the social ladder. 

As an aside, did you know that globally, the top 1% owns 46% of the world's total wealth? To put it another way, the world's top 1% owns as much wealth globally as the bottom 90%.

In fact, given that CEOs make approximately 324 times that of an average worker or the fact that the top 1% control more wealth than the middle 60%, it's a wonder something hasn't happened already. The implications of a lower and middle class revolt in light of this should be obvious, especially in light of mass looting and arson under the label of "peaceful protests" by Antifa and BLM when Trump was elected and following the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. One could even include the January 6th protest and brief occupation of the House by some of those on the extreme political Right.

Poll after poll has for decades reflected the public's distrust and dislike of Congress, the Presidency, and even the Judicial system. America has morphed from a democratic or Constitutional Republic into a neo-fascist Corporatocracy run by the aforementioned 1%.  Citizens are forced to bear more and more of the tax burden while corporate lobbyists write laws for the benefit of an elite few.  

Corporate interests own both political parties, underwrite their campaigns while ensuring Independents (the nation's largest political bloc) and third parties are kept out of the "People's House" as former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi refers to the House of Representatives. The media serves the ruling oligarchy as their propaganda arm, controlling nearly everything we read, watch, or hear (just five mega corporations own 95+% of all media outlets).

The revolt by Spartacus was about an attempt by a few to reclaim the freedoms taken from them by an all powerful state. Although they shook Rome to the core, defeating two professional legions and several cohorts in the process, the rebels ultimately loss. Of those not killed, around 6000 survivors were crucified along the length of the Appian Way from the city of Capua to the gates of Rome itself. A distance of some 120 miles which serves as a reminder that freedom isn't free and once loss, is difficult at best to obtain again.

You'll find a link to Mr. Maziarz's article below. We hope you will check it out. I think you'll agree that given the political climate of the world in general and the United States in particular, we could use more individuals with the drive and vision of a Spartacus.

The Spartacus Rebellion, More Than a Slave Revolt

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

The top 1% officially have more money than the whole middleclass

Top 1% of U.S. Earners Now Hold More Wealth Than All of theMiddle Class

Global Inequality

Oxfam says wealth of richest 1% equal to other 99%

CEOs Made 324 Times More Than Their Median Workers In 2021,Union Report Finds

CEOs average pay was 324 times higher than employees: report

 

Calling It As It Is: The State of American Politics

Let's just come out and say what we all intuitively know. America is going to hell in a handbasket on roller skates down a greased hill. America has been engaged in a race to the bottom for decades now. The Democrats and the Republics still pretend they're in charge and know what they're doing, but the fact is that they don't have a clue.

The media is not about reporting the facts. It's about entertainment. It's owned by a mere five corporations whose job it is to perpetuate the myth of "fairness" and "balance". It's a farce and we all know it and for some reason we play along.

Our "Republic" is an illusion. We don't have a "Republic" any longer. It's all smoke and broken mirrors. America's great experiment in a constitutional democracy long ago succumbed to the power of money. Just like Ancient Rome which subtly slipped from a representative Republic to a militaristic empire led by an emperor and corrupt senate, America now hides behind a similar facade.

Thanks to partisan gerrymandering, unlimited terms, a "winner-take-all" political system, and Citizens United, politicians are openly and legally bought and sold. Both parties are mere extensions of the  corporate factions which own them. Their lobbyists write the bills that our pretended "representatives" are suppose to do.

They've turned the political system into a vote for the lesser of two evils, which is still not just a vote for evil, but also corrupted the election system to keep out third parties and Independents, who are the nation's largest political bloc.  No wonder the U.S. placed 30th out of 35 of the OECD nations in voter turnout (OECD is the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development which is the world's leading economically developed countries).

America is a neo-fascist Corporatocracy, and like any good corporation, it has a board of directors who are beholden to no one but themselves. It seeks to control through manipulation by the media and manufactured crisis's to keep us confused and frustrated. It's all about control. Be it control of assets, resources, or you and me. They use intimidation to get what they want, be it an individual, a business, or a country. They will use any means at their disposal, often leaving chaos or carnage in their wake. 

When someone comes along and attempts to lift the veil and display the mechanisms of power, they swiftly shut them down using various strategies ranging from "shadow blocking" or "disappearing" them from social media, financially ruining them, discrediting them through innuendos and outright lies to character assignations (such as Trump or the January 6th protests) and even the real thing (ie: a "Jeffery Epstein suicide"). They play for keeps. You and I and our opinions mean absolutely nothing. 

With election season fast approaching, we can expect to hear the same pollster generated and test group approved speeches about how they're going to "stand up" to the status quo or change this and that. With the average American shelling out an average of $3500 more than last year (thanks to inflation) while big corporations are making record profits, these Beltway elites roll up their sleeves, take off their $1000 suit coats, loosen their hundred dollar ties, don blue jean and sneakers or cowboy boots and pretend their "one of the people". We know better. They're not fooling anybody. We are a necessary inconvenience they have to tolerate every two or four or six years. 

A recent Rasmussen poll showed that 3/4 of Americans are unhappy with the direction this country is going.  That's 3 out of every 4 voters. President Biden is viewed a doddering old man totally out of touch with reality. His approval ratings have ranged from the upper twenty percent range to the low thirty's.

To put it another way, 70%+ of Americans, regardless of registration, disapproval of his handling of issues. At his lowest, Trump still polled higher.  On the world stage, opinion of Biden ranges from pity and embarrassment to contempt and fool. Respect, however,  doesn't comes up much.  

Incidentally, the highest approval rating for America's direction was in 1999 with 71% under Bill Clinton and our lowest was 7% in 2008 during the world financial crisis and U.S. recession under George W. Bush's tenure.

Biden's vice president, Kamala Harris doesn't fare any better. In fact, she's viewed as among one of the worse VP's in recent history with a 52% disapproval rating according to a RealClearPolitics' poll. To make matters worse, at least for Democrats, is the fact that with Biden's decreasing cognitive facilities, is the prospect that Kamala could be a lame duck replacement should Biden be forced to resign!

Could you imagine? A Trump redux in 2024 is looking like a good distraction strategy, which may be the reason the corporate media is still trying to keep him in the public eye in order to take the public's mind off the current disaster unfolding in front of them.

As an aside, the above Rasmussen poll also showed that 54% of voters though Kamala Harris was unqualified to be Vice President.  45% of those didn't think she was qualified for high office at all! Additionally, the poll showed a 57% disapproval of Ms. Harris in general, with 47% strongly disliking her.  Among the Harris "hold-their-nose" respondents, 79% were (unsurprisingly) Republican. 17% were Democrat, and 49% were Independent.

Congress, regardless of corporate party ownership, isn't doing any better. Recent numbers show an 18% approval rating (some polls show 20%). Either way, that means roughly 80% of Americans think Congress sucks! Wanna know what's even funnier (a sick twisted sort of way)? Last year, Congress was all giddy when they had a 20 year high approval rating of 36%! That still means that the majority of the nation thinks they're idiots and they're happy about it!

Our opinions of most institutions aren't much better. According to a February 22 Pew Report, just 29% of Americans feel good about doctors and the medical industry while 78% still have a fair amount of confidence. The same holds true for scientists. When it comes to the military, it's not much different. 25% have a moderate amount of confidence while 74% trust the military.

With all the high profile shootings over the past few years along with the "peaceful" Breonna Taylor and George Floyd riots, police officers garnered a 31% "no confidence" rating.  That still leaves a fairly high amount of trust rating. Of course, that figure will vary greatly from place to place.

When it comes to religion, it looks like most don't have a prayer. 45% have no faith in them at all. However, 55% still have at least some confidence in "those of the cloth".  When it comes to school principals, 35% didn't make the grade. 55% got a passed.

In a unrelated Gallup Poll, only 36% of adults had any confidence in the education system in general, which means an overwhelming 64% have little or no trust in our education system. But the "good" news is that the 36% is up from a low of 30% in 2016, which is the highest in eight years.

When it comes to the media, 60% of those surveyed placed no trust in the media regardless of format (including newspapers and television). A pathetic 6% still believed what they were told with the balance having little faith in the media (excluding this blog of course) while the balance was on the fence.  

As for business leaders in general, it wasn't any better.  Only 4% said they had any trust in business (which includes Wall Street) while a whopping 60%  had no confidence in our current business leadership (and presumably our current business model) while the rest express some trust.

As for politicians, only 24% had any faith in them at all. Of that, a sad 2% had a lot of faith in them (I wonder if they were related to someone in office?) while a gobsmacked 76% said no way no how. When it came to wealth inequality, a Hill-HarrisX poll showed that a clear majority of Americans---56%---thought that wealth inequality was a serious problem facing the country.

The poll, which was broken down by political registration, indicated that 77% of Democrats wanted to impose higher taxes on the wealthy while just 35% of Republicans did. America's largest voting bloc, Independents, disagreed with 55% in favor of raising taxes on those who could afford it the most.

As an aside, 3 in 5 voters also favor raising taxes on Big Business and Wall Street, which is some badly needed positive news for Biden's infrastructure plan  (I'm sure the corporate lobbyists who write the bills will be sure to find a way to exempt themselves and their paymasters).

So, where does that leave us? Obviously, we're in deep kimchi as a nation. Economically, we're in decline with China on the cusp of becoming the world's biggest economy with countries like India and Brazil not that far behind. Politically, our influence globally isn't worth much (especially after our 20 year failure in Iraq and Afghanistan), while, like Rome in its Late Republic Period, we still have a powerful but exhausted military. The days of our self-appointed world's policeman and moral arbitrator are over.

Internally, we have some very major issues, and sadly for our allies like Japan, South Korea, and the EU, as well as those dependent on U.S. aid to keep their economies afloat, it's time for us to turn inward if we're to survive as a nation.  

We have an open border to our south which is being flooded by illegal immigrants; most of whom not equipped for a life in America. They don't speak the language. They lack a proper education or job skills, and come with no means to support themselves, leaving grossly overtaxed working class Americans to again foot the bill.

Crime is not only a exponentially growing problem, but our judicial system is in desperate need of reform along with our correctional system. Our infrastructure is crumbling under our feet and tires. Our public transportation system is literally a joke around the world. We're not just years behind most countries, we are decades behind! Our healthcare system is 27th in the world and we're the only developed nation whose life expectancy  is actually declining along with quality of life.

When it comes to education, we don't even make it into the top tier (we typically rank at the bottom of the second tier). Too much emphasis is placed on getting a college education (and with it massive debt), especially for those with unmarketable degrees or with majors like "Women's Studies"  or "African Studies".  Where are the trade schools? We desperately need people proficient in carpentry, machine shop, welding, plumbing, HVAC, auto body, etc. Trade degrees are fast, low cost and high paying.  

Lastly, our entire political system is on life support and history has its cold hand on the plug. Our elections are an illusion. Instead of the U.S. sending monitors to third world country to monitor the validity of elections, monitors are coming here from other countries!

Freedom of speech and expression are in serious trouble. Tolerance of opinion is virtually nonexistent. We talk about "canceling" people who disagree with us.  Social media platforms "fact check" (code for censor) and shadow block us  in order to stifle public discourse.

Corporations literally own and control the political system thanks to judicial mistakes like Citizens United. Political parties pick their voters through gerrymandering instead of us picking our representatives. Third parties and Independents are frozen out of elections through unfair and illegal election laws. Wage inequality and an unfair tax code are eating away at our core.

Unlimited terms ensure virtual lifelong terms, which are often passed down like some royal appointment. How can we have a 98% reelection rate of incumbents with perpetual 80% disapproval rating?  Our "winner-take-all" system ensures that only one segment has a voice. The question is not how much more can we take, but how much longer we will take it?

 

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read A/O. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

Gallup Poll: Three-Quarters of Americans Dissatisfied With Country's Direction

What does America think of Kamala Harris?

Last Trump Job Approval Rating 34%; Average Is Record-Low41%

Biden's job approval falls to lowest level of his presidency amid war and inflation fears

Congressional Approval Sinks to 18% as Democrats SourFurther

 

Confidence in Public Schools Rallies

Americans Trust in Scientists, Other Groups Declines

Poll: 56 percent say wealth tax is part of  solution to inequality

  

Are Hillary and Donald Qualified to Lead?

There are just about 344,000,000 individuals in America at this moment. That means we have the third largest population in the world behind the People's Republic of China and India. That means that 4.5 of the world's population lives in the United States. The majority of these individuals live in major metropolitan centers such as New York City, Los Angles, Chicago, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Washington DC, and Philadelphia, Atlanta, and San Francisco. Not that it matters much, but the majority, 63%, are Whites of European origin. Almost 67% of the population is between 15 and 64 years of age. The average age is 36 for males and 38 for females. About 16.7% are Hispanics while Blacks make up just over 12% with the rest being comprised of Native Americans, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and so forth.

The average household income in America is between $51,000 and $53,000 with Asians having the highest household income by race followed in order by Whites, Hispanics and Blacks (actually, Native Americans have the lowest levels of income based on demographic breakdown with those living on reservations living well below the poverty line). As one might expect, those with professional degrees (doctorate, law, medicine, engineering) tended to earn the most, followed by those with graduate or post graduate degrees, bachelorette degrees, an associate degree and/or professional certification, and high school diploma/GED with those having not completed high school or earning a technical/trade/professional certificate earning the least. Those with technical or trade school degrees such as plumbers or electricians tend to earn on par with those who had obtained a BA or BS degree.

When we break this down by the numbers, just under 88% of the population has a high school diploma or GED. About 59% has some college while 42% has an associate degree. 32% has bachelor degree. 11.77% has a Masters degree or professional certificate. Just over 5% has a doctorate or professional degree (these numbers are based on ages 25 and over). Women tend be graduating at higher levels than males, which is a complete reversal of pre-1995 numbers. In fact, 62% of all associate degrees awarded with go to women, along with 60% of all bachelorettes, 63% of all master degrees, and 55.5% of doctorates! Quite impressive if you ask me, but I'm sure you're wondering where I'm going with all these numbers and percentages.

Well, it's simply this. Given the size of America's population and percentage of individuals who've gone on to college (and beyond), why are we down to a choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump? As these numbers indicate, neither of these two are even remotely close to being the best this country has to offer for President. Hillary Clinton and "The Donald" are the two most disliked presidential candidates America has produced. Why is that? Hillary isn't unique when comes women who've graduated from college, or even women who obtained a doctorate or professional degree. Hillary attended Wellesley College and obtained a BA in Political Science and then obtained a law degree from Yale University. There's also a lot of women who are just as driven as Hillary is (except hopefully more honest). Trump attended Fordham University in New York City before transferring to Wharton's School of Finance and Commerce (University of Pennsylvania) where he earned an undergraduate degree in Economics. Again, great but hardly extraordinary (I earned a BA in International Economics with a minor in Political Science as an example before going on to earn a dual Master's and a Postgraduate certificate among several other professional certificates).

Certainly we would want any president to be well educated, and both Trump and Clinton are as all of the presidential nominees since at least the turn of the 20th Century have been with one exception (Harry Truman had only a high school diploma. A total of 12 presidents never graduated college up to and including George Washington who had earned a surveyor certificate). Most, but not all, were lawyers. John Kennedy for instance briefly attended the famed London School of Economics but transferred to Harvard University where obtained a BA in Government with an emphasis in International Affairs (yes, I note the irony), but professionally he was a writer. Both Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt attended Harvard University as well and while both briefly enrolled in law school, neither graduated. So, what else do they have in common to qualify them for president? Well, they're both filthy rich and being rich seems to be a required to be in Washington and member of the political or ruling class.

In a 2010 survey, the collective wealth of Congress was $2 billion dollars. Yes, you read that right. That was a 25% increase over a previous 2008 survey. The minimum net worth of members of the House was $896,000 dollars while over in the Senate it's $2.7 million dollars. Doesn't sound like a nice cross section of America to me. Does it to you? No wonder these people have no idea about goes on in America. They don't live like us, how can they expect to know what we need or want? You could argue that Congress, as well as the Presidency and Supreme Court, are so far removed from us socially and economically, that they indeed constitute an entirely different class. Among those who ran for president this go around, Ted Cruz was the wealthiest candidate, yet he didn't even break into the top 100 richest members of Congress (the poorest of the GOP nominees was Marco Rubio, but give him time. He's still young yet).

The second richest was Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky (for the record, former Senator and current Secretary of State John Kerry has a net worth of $200 million). On the Democrat side, Hillary was by far the richest, even topping out over the many of the Republicans while Bernie Sanders is among the poorest member of Congress with a net worth of just over $163,000. You might find it interesting to know that the "working class" party as the Democrats are known are collectively wealthier than the so-called "business class" Republicans, but not by much---only around $47,000. As for Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, how do they fit in? Well, according to Celebrity Net Worth, "The Donald" is worth $4.5 billion dollars and takes home a salary of $60 million dollars a year. Hillary Clinton has a net worth of $45 million dollars (Bill Clinton, who keeps his finances separate, has a net worth of between $80 and $100 million dollars while the Clinton Foundation, which is classified as a charity, had assets in 2012 of over $226 million).

The point I'm hoping to make is that there's nothing unique or special about Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump except that are clearly among the top 1%, and it's the 1% which comprises the Oligarchy which rules America. Their wealth, while certainly nice to have, should actually preclude them for government. Why? Because government should represent the American People, not just the wealthy. Their outlandish wealth, almost by definition, means that they have no connection to ordinary Americans. We talk about a "disconnect" between the "Beltway Crowd" and "Flyover Country", well now you see why. They can't relate to what it costs to struggle between paying bills, going to the doctor, or buying groceries. We already face the widest and deepest income divide in our nation's history. They live in gated (and guarded) communities. They have little concept about crime other than what they read about or see on TV. Their education is above average, but not unique and definitely not superior, at least academically. It's not party affiliations since both parties shared near equally in the numbers of millionaires. It is their wealth and social connections which set them apart and gives them their sense of entitlement.

Clearly America can and must do better in not just its choice of Presidential candidates but in its selection of representatives it sends to Washington. Surely neither the likes of Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump (nor any of the others who ran in the primaries) represent the best America has to offer. The same can be said the Congress. There are more than ample potential candidates with closer ties to the average American out there to pick from. Of course, elections have become outrageous expense (on purpose) to keep ordinary individuals out and with gerrymandering near guaranteeing reelection along with unlimited "free speech" donations courtesy of Citizens United and its "Frankencorporations" creations and absence of term limits the only hope of change will have to be grassroots driven. The question is not can we do it, there is no doubt about that. Instead, it should be whether we have the will do it? Are we sick and tired enough yet of being turned from a free people and citizen legislators into economic serfs and political bystanders?


The National Center for Education Statistics: Educational Attainment of Young Adults
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_caa.asp

Educational Attainment in the United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_United_States

And Congress' Rich Get Richer
http://www.rollcall.com/news/And-Congress-Rich-Get-Richer-209907-1.html

The 50 richest members of Congress
http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/21/news/economy/richest-congress-members/index.html

Celebrity Net Worth
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-businessmen/richest-billionaires/donald-trump-net-worth/

What An Increase in Minimum Wage Means

The federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour. That's works out to be $290.00 for a 40 hour week or $15,080.00 a year, excluding any unpaid time off. That's not much, and that's before taxes (in post-Depression 1938, when minimum wage was established under the Roosevelt Administration, the minimum wage was 25 cent an hour). Of course, minimum wage is a bit higher in the District of Columbia and 19 other states while four states have a lower minimum wage and five states (all Southeastern) have no minimum wage laws. President Obama favors an increase of the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. Fast food employees, as many of you know, have been protesting for an increase to $15.00 an hour. 13 states have increased their minimum wage effect January 2014. In Kentucky, State Senator Greg Stumbo (D-Prestonsburg) favors an increase in the minimum wage to around $10.00 an hour while other states are considering similar increases.

Many corporate CEOs are, naturally enough, opposed to an increase in the minimum wage, at least to $15.00. Some cite a statistic by the Bureau of Labor Statistics which states that most individuals earning minimum wage are not working adults supporting a family, but are primarily teenagers still living at home and, at least in part, still being supported by their parents; specifically, 24% of 3.6 million workers earning minimum wage, and another 25% were under 25 years of age. In addition, for those who are attempting to support a family, many if not most are qualified for some form of taxpayer based assistance like food stamps (SNAP---Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) or earned income tax credits for children.

With 3/4 of Americans calling for an increase in the minimum wage, advocates also cite CEO salaries in the US are now 357% over the average company worker; the highest in the world (some estimates put it closer to 495% when their total compensation package is taken in account). The top 20% of the richest people in America now control 89% of all wealth in this country. Now if that doesn't give you pause, consider that the top 1% of the world's richest control 46% of world's total wealth according to a Reuter's report released on October 9, 2013! In America, the top 1% control 40% of the nation's total wealth. Therefore, this excess of wealth needs to spread around proponents claim. Those on the Right argue that the wage gap is justified; it's just a part of the capitalist system. They further claim that it's corporate (and personal) profits that allow them to employ the majority of the nation's workforce.

But, what about from an economic perspective? What happens when there's an increase in minimum wage? Well, obviously a broad based income increase will result in an increase in purchasing power, at least temporarily. That means there will be a sudden demand for products; usually high end products such as cars, houses, as well as appliances and entertainment, but also to groceries, utilities, and even taxes. Typically, very little of the wage differential (the difference between the original wage and the new wage) will go into savings or similar investments, though some may find its way in paying down debt, statistically this tends to be minimum at best. Instead, overall debt tends to rise. As the economy adjusts to the influx of additional income, there is always a slight delayed rise in costs to offset the sudden rise in demand. However, once supply reaches a equilibrium with demand, the newly set increase in price will always adjust itself upward to match the new level of demand.

This generally tends to have two secondary actions. First, with the increase in demand, there will be a resulting delayed increase in retail costs as wholesale costs begin to rise to compensate for the declining level of supply and a rush to acquire raw material at a newer, higher premium prices to match the demand. Secondly, there's a short term increase of cost to the manufactures/producers in terms of wages and other internal costs as companies attempt to catch up with demand. This could be simply increasing work hours through overtime or additional shifts; perhaps even temporary hiring. However, as prices of merchandise rise, the demand will begin to drop until it reaches a price equilibrium. This results in less demand for the product and a corresponding reduction of hours to original levels, or even a drop in hours worked.

To put it another way, there's a short term benefit to the employees but as demand increases, the costs rise to meet the level of supply, so that in the end, most everyone is back where they started from but everything has increased in price and in some case, more than by the percentage of the wage increase. Some companies may find that the demand for whatever it is they do has dropped (especially if it's considered a non-essential item). The result will be a reduction in hours or workforce, or even closure. Therefore, employees may be no better off than before; some could even be far worse off. So, how do we get out of this predicament?

A lot of politicians like to talk about increasing minimum wage since it sounds like they're "giving" the people something for free. The reality, however, is that they're not giving them anything. Companies have to raise prices to offset the increase in wages. The money has to come from somewhere after all doesn't it? And you can sure bet it won't be coming out of profits margins. With increased prices, demand could drop. This may mean layoffs or a cutback in work hours with employees having to pick up the slack. For those not affected by the wage increase, they'll be forced to pay more as prices increase while not bringing home any more money. This is especially true for those who are unemployed or on a fixed income.

Free market advocates (or libertarians for that matter) might call for doing away with the minimum wage and allowing demand compete with supply. Employers offering the best salary (and benefits) would attract the most potential employees while those who don't will be forced to adjust the wages upward to attract workers. Of course, those who, at least initially, offer better wages will attract the most potential employees, thus the supply will obviously exceed the available positions which will, in turn, result in employees willing to work for less money in hopes of getting at least an acceptable wage while the employer would get the most qualifed individuals at the lower wage.

Perhaps, then, the best solution would be mandatory increases in wages tied to the inflation. As prices "naturally" rise due to demand over time, wages would match the increase accordingly. Such an increase would simply keep pace with the change in prices and would have little to no adverse affect since the wage adjustment would apply to everyone. A secondary solution would be the complete overall of the US tax code and the adoption of a national consumption tax in lieu of a federal income tax. People could manage their level of taxation based on their purchases. The rich would obviously pay more since they tend to buy more while the poor would pay less since they buy less. Nevertheless, an increase in the minimum wage comes with a price.




Minimum Wage Laws by States
http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/america.htm


Fast Food Workers Cry Poverty Wages
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/12/03/248567592/fast-food-workers-cry-poverty-wages-as-mcdonalds-buys-luxury-jet


13 states raising pay for minimum wage workers
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/12/29/states-raising-minimum-wage/4221773/


Disclosed: The Pay Gap Between CEOs and Employees
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-05-02/disclosed-the-pay-gap-between-ceos-and-employees