Looks like Harry Reid caved in to the Republicans on Minimum Wage

[rpgamerd00d]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070130/pl_nm/usa_congress_wages_dc_1

Full Senate approval is now possible because Democrats agreed to Republican demands to include tax cuts for small businesses to help cover the cost of raising the minimum wage over two years to $7.25 per hour from $5.15 per hour.

On an 87-10 vote, the Democratic-led Senate agreed to end more than a week of debate and hold a vote in coming days on the bill to increase the minimum wage and provide about $8.3 billion in tax breaks.

:eyes:

[Bonhomme Richard]

1. LOL, maybe the tax cuts will help my small business.

I'm not holding my breath.

[danalytical]

2. As long as the tax breaks

are for small businesses like they say, meaning a couple employees. Then I don't really mind. If those businesses are more successful and grow to become medium sized businesses then we will all benefit from the eventual extra revenue from taxes and more jobs.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

4. 500 employees

I believe that the breaks involved will affect "small" businesses of up to 500 employees.

[danalytical]

21. 500 employees

is a medium sized business in my book. Then again 500 people is still relatively small compared with where I work. 8000 people here.

[SoCalDem]

3. Define "small business".

Con-Agra/ ADM are considered "farmers", so hold onto your wallet, folks

[BurtWorm]

The Dems can pull a DeLay/Frist and freeze 'pubs out of the conference

:think:

[rpgamerd00d]

7. ?

[BurtWorm]

11. The Senate and House have to confer and get their bills to harmonize.

DeLay and Frist used to go through the motions with Dems present, but the conference bill they would actually send up was one Repubs alone had worked on. I'm saying Dems should give them a taste of their own medicine and send Bush the bill the people wanted them to pass.

[NoAmericanTaliban]

5. So the next time business gets tax breaks the min wage should

increase as well. If they are going to tie the two together then it should be the other way around as well.

[DU9598]

14. You got it

That is the wisest statement I have heard today!

[thereismore]

18. I like your thinking! nt

[AndyA]

6. I don't have a problem with helping SMALL business.

It's the big mega corporations that I dislike.

Small, mom and pop, family-type businesses could use a few breaks these days. Sometimes you have to compromise, I just hope Reid is keeping this in mind for future dealings with the Nazis Republicans.

[partylessinOhio]

8. The repuglicans are still controlling our country and the Dems got the majority.

How is that? Just who is who?

The war continues and more tax cuts are approved putting us further into debt. Why is every action these damn frauds take go for "business" and nothing for the individual?

[jbonkowski]

9. It's not that simple

The bill also closes tax loopholes regarding CEO compensation, etc.

In actuality, the tax loopholes get closed permanently (until opened again by other law), but the tax breaks have a limited lifespan, so in effect, the result is a win over the long term.

Almost all coverage of this misses this fact. The $8.3 billion is not a giveaway, it gets paid for with other tax changes. It's not even a zero sum change. There will be more tax revenue gathered in the long term, not less.

I'm pretty sure this is a win for everyone but big business, once you read the fine print.

Also, Senate R's were using this fight to avoid taking up discussions of Iraq.

I would hardly call it caving.

jim

[GOTV]

10. I heard that...

... the breaks for small businesses have a sunset clause and that they are offset by closing tax loopholes for corporations.

Can anyone verify that?

On edit: Ooops, I guess a previous poster already verified this

[NewJeffCT]

12. Actually, Republics caved later on this

Reid had thrown in the tax breaks, but Republics still refused to break the filibuster...

It wasn't until Reid threatened to drop the minimum wage increase altogether, so they could move onto a vote on Iraq resolutions and also on blocking Senatorial pay raises, that the Republics caved.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/30/13150/5672

[CatWoman]

13. I'm just wild about Harry

:)

[cynatnite]

15. You just explained why I love Harry! n/t

[CatWoman]

16. LOL

Cyn,

look up :)

[rockymountaindem]

17. Talk about a sqeeze play

"ok, we won't talk about the minimum wage... let's talk about Iraq instead!"

[blondeatlast]

23. Damn, I love that rope-a-dope from the former boxer!

He's soft-spoken, but he carries a big, surgically sharp stick and he really knows how to use it!

[sinkingfeeling]

19. I think this means that the increase in minimum wage will be funded 100% by the

American taxpayer. Wouldn't want businesses to have to cover it, now would we?

[dysfunctional press]

20. i have NO problem with tax breaks for SMALL businesses...

it's breaks to the huge and hugely profitable ones that piss me off.

[blondeatlast]

22. Small business=Bagel World, the little deli down the street run by

a family. (Excellent fresh baked bagels if you are ever in my neck of the woods.)

Big business=Halliburton.

It's a pity that distinction was lost on you, but I'm really not at all surprised. :eyes:

[babylonsister]

24. Maybe that was his intention to begin with; have a lil scrap, throw them

a bone, and get it passed. That wouldn't surprise me. The rethugs 'save face' and the minimum wage passes with no more time wasted on it.
Up next, Iraq, and not a moment too soon.

[Zodiak]

25. Just so we know the numbers

Firms with no employees (but occasionally hire) 770,299
Firms with 1 to 4 employees 2,734,133
Firms with 5 to 9 employees 1,025,497
Firms with 10 to 19 employees 620,387
Firms with 20 to 99 employees 515,056
Firms with 100 to 499 employees 84,829


Firms with 500 employees or more 16,926

There are over 16 million businesses with no employees, ever.

It looks to me like the natural cut-off of small businesses is around 100 employees, not 500 employees (5x fewer in 100-500 category). It would seem better to redefine "small business" to cover up to 100 employees. That way, a guy can have, say, three hamburger stands with 30 employees covering all shifts and an extra ten for infrastructure. That would be big "small business", in my opinion.

100-500 is definitely on large side to be called a "small business" or to need a tax break because they have to pay more than the minimum wage. If you have over 100 employees and are pissed the you have to pay more than the minimum wage, shame on you for paying them like crap.

Here is an example of a "small business" I got from a little googling:

WESTMONT, NEW JERSEY, Nov. 17 -/E-Wire/-- EMSL Analytical, Inc., the largest network of indoor air quality testing laboratories in the nation, announced today that in now employs 404 people. The laboratory has become one of the premier providers of laboratory testing services for indoor air quality, asbestos, lead, microbiology, environmental, industrial hygiene, materials, forensic and chemical analysis. Over the past 24 years, the company has built a national network of 25 testing laboratories. The firm will celebrate its 25th Anniversary in 2006 and plans to release information regarding the building of a new corporate laboratory stortly.

A "small business"? I think not. And they just got a tax break for nothing.

The bagel shop I understand....the largest air testing firm in the country.....no.

[rpgamerd00d]

26. Exactly. Good post.