Minimum wage in 1974 was $10/hr .....

Under the Constitution, the president signs off on legislature, and the Congress cannot pass laws over the President if he vetos it, unless there is a 2/3 majority in both parties.

It's in the Constitution. I'm surprised they don't teach it in Texas. Well, not really.

- - - Updated - - -

Congress can write laws till they are blue in the face, like the HOR writing a law to repeal Obamacare, what, 42 times now? And nothing becomes law until the President signs it or there is 2/3 majority in both parties.

Thus, unless they have a 2/3 majority, Congress has to right laws the president will sign, giving him enormous influence on what is written in the law.

This is basic stuff in the Constitution. I guess they don't teach civics any more.

 

If the average mortgage today was $1 million dollars, your logic might form an argument that the typical mortgage was $200k in 1974.

 

Do they not teach reading in FL? you didn't answer my question. If you can not, then your point is, in entirety, moot and just a snipe at Texas.

 

Your question was wholly irrelevant to my post. But the answer is I don't know.

 

If I remember right, the CPI is the inflation adjustment that is most used, and is also the most decried by economists. Here is another graph using the PCE



- - - Updated - - -

So your point is wholly irrelevant.

 

Not at all.

 

Channe said: "In fact, the buying power of minimum wage kept rising from 1930-1983 (who became president then, hmmmmmm)" -insinuating that the minimum wage stopped rising under Reagan because of Reagan

Lone StrSt8 said in response: "What a load of self serving,liberal drek...Congress writes the laws that set the minimum wage,NOT the president......but seing as how Owebama thinks he can amend and write laws without congress,I cam understand your confusion." -saying it's not the president who writes the laws on minimum wage

Iriemon said in response: "Don't they teach in Texas schools that under the Constitution, the president has to sign a bill for it to become law, unless there is a 2/3 majority in both chambers?" -suggesting that Texas schools suck, and that Reagan is to blame because he vetoed legislation.


Troianii said in response: "OK. Please tell me which minimum wage bill Reagan vetoed." -showing that unless you can show that Reagan vetoed a minimum wage bill, your point is 100% moot.

 

There was no intended suggestion in my statement "that Reagan is to blame because he vetoed legislation" as my post was addressed to the assertion about Congress passing legislation.

But even if it had, there fact that Reagan never vetoed a MW increase (I have no idea whether he did or not) in no way invalidates the fact that the president plays a large role in legislation. Presidents often communicate their intent to oppose policy or proposed legislation before a bill is passed by Congress, and so they won't bother to do so.

 

Well since neither of us know of any time that Reagan ever vetoed any bill, it's really odd that you'd question Lone StrSt8's intelligence for something he never even insinuated, which is basically irrelevant, but you make no mention of the obvious error in the op. Just odd, isn't it?

 

In a post where it is asserted: ".Congress writes the laws that set the minimum wage,NOT the president" pointing about that under the Constitution, the president does indeed have a major role in writing laws is odd?

I don't see the oddness at all.

 

You mean we terminate the government mandated benfits/programs that employers have to pay into and instead just mandate that they give the employees $10.30 in cash straight up?

To be honest, I think you might be able to get support for that from the right. Actually because the right generally dislikes Obamacare so much, and because of the paperwork burden placed on employeers with all those programs, you might be able to get support for $11 or $12 an hour.

Have we reached a bipartisan agreement?

 

No, why would you think I mean that?

 

hmmm, because that's basically what he was saying before when he said the minimum wage is effectively $10.30? Just a stab.

- - - Updated - - -

Even under the Constitution, the President has no role in writing odds.

And don't feign ignorance, we both know that you knew what I was talking about.

 

I thought he was talking because of state MW laws.

I assume you mean laws. But he most certainly does, by virtue of his veto power. Unless they have a 2/3 majority, Congress has to be concerned that what is written in the laws is palatable to the president.

Unless they just wasting time putting on a show, like the Tea Party Republicans voting to repeal Obamacare 43 times.

I'm not even sure what you are talking about now.

 

First of all rich people are not simply going to give you their profit unless the MARKET dictates that they have to.

Second, if you think it's SO unfair and that the people would benefit so much from a different business model that you have in mind... then start that business. Create you a business plan and look for investors. If it's that much more effective and you'll just have all of the best workers clamoring to work for your business then you will crush those evil, greedy capitalist profit-takers with your superior business plan.

But liberals don't do that, do they?

 

Didn't look like that to me. Did you really think that he was saying MW is currently $10.30?

Yeah autocorrect. That'd make sense, apart from the fact that Reagan used the veto more than any President since Eisenhower. The Congress clearly wasn't as cautious as you suggest.

"Well since neither of us know of any time that Reagan ever vetoed any bill, it's really odd that you'd question Lone StrSt8's intelligence for something he never even insinuated, which is basically irrelevant, but you make no mention of the obvious error in the op. Just odd, isn't it?"

'the president does indeed have a major role in writing laws is odd?'

I find it hard to believe you don't understand what the "odd" in my statement was referring to. I had you chalked up as one of the bright ones on PF.

 

No, that that was the effective rate.

I am not familiar with what happened to the MW law in the 1980s and don't really care. But the fact that there was no veto is no implication that Congress would not have passed an increase but for Reagan's veto threat.

"Well since neither of us know of any time that Reagan ever vetoed any bill, it's really odd that you'd question Lone StrSt8's intelligence for something he never even insinuated, which is basically irrelevant, but you make no mention of the obvious error in the op. Just odd, isn't it?"

'the president does indeed have a major role in writing laws is odd?'

Thanks. I find it hard to believe you don't understand what is not odd in my challenging a fallacious assertion.

 

I don't think I've ever heard a conservative refer to the 1970s as the "goold ol days"

in fact quite the contrary

 

I'm right wing and support a min wage of 10-12/hr

 

Just to keep the bottom minions happy.

Get your drift.

 

will do more then that

Get your drift

 

That does make a good case for it, I think. Something has clearly gone wrong with our economic system when suddenly no one can seem to make ends meet doing work that used to pay at least adequately. The most obvious problem is our being made to compete directly with cheap foreign labor.

 

There has been book's written about the subject you are refering too.

I read them.

 

Or keep the servants of this country happy.

Ya know the Germans found out the secrete in manufacturing year's ago when combating cheap labor.

They kept it alive with quality well made products.

 

both in support of and against