Skip to main content

Politics of the Federal Minimum Wage

In my previous post, I tried to test my theory that democrats care about poor people than republicans by looking at the change in federal minimum wage under democratic and republican presidents. It is somewhat difficult to prove or disprove my theory graphically, so I prepared a little spreadsheet and calculated real numbers. While I was at it, I decided to factor in the role of Congress in determining the federal minimum wage. The results are as follows.

It is important to get a general feel for the extent to which the two parties have controlled the executive (president) and legislative (Senate and House) branches of the government. As the pie chart below shows, Democrats have controlled Congress for a lot longer than the Republicans, while Republican presidents have ruled a little bit longer.
SOURCE: http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm


Next item to look at is government control by president, Senate and House majority. The Democrats have ruled this country either by controlling the presidency or Congress (D-D-D + D-R-R + R-D-D) 78% of the time!! It is safe to say they have played a dominant role in shaping the course of this country since WWII.


All this analysis is intended to shade light on the correlation between the party in charge and increase in federal minimum wage. The bar chart below indicates that federal minimum wage increased by $0.094/year under Democratic Presidents and $0.086/year under Republican presidents in nominal terms. When adjusted for inflation, however, the increase spikes to $0.130/year for Democratic presidents and declines to $-0.045/year for Republican Presidents. This result is fascinating because it demonstrates that Democratic presidents have been much more willing to allow minimum wage increases AND their increases kept up with inflation while their Republican counterparts have been very stingy. Since Republican presidents have failed to increase minimum wage with inflation, they have effectively suppressed the income and purchasing power of poor people. If this is not a proof that Democrats are better for the economic well-being of poor people, I don't know what is.

Now, lets look at how the different party controls of the presidency as well as Congress affect federal minimum wage increases. Once again, we see Democratic presidents and Congress being willing to increase minimum wages and keep those wages up with inflation while Republicans have done neither.
All in all, my hypothesis that Democrats have done more to help poor people by advocating increases in federal minimum wage have been proven to be pretty true. There are many factors that I have not considered, but my theory certainly has credibility.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Distribution of Wealth in the US

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. I heard this statement quite a bit lately particularly in light of the sub-prime mortgage and general housing crisis in the US. The country has enjoyed significant economic prosperity and both Clinton and Bush boasted economic growth under their reign. Unfortunately, the beneficiaries of the economic boom are not people from all economic backgrounds, but rather the top 10%. To make things worse, Bush gave tax cuts mainly targeting the top 10%. Being more of a numbers guy, I always wanted showing the validity of the-rich-get-richer-n-the-poor-get-poorer statement. Thanks to Wikipedia , I have finally found it!! Both the mean and median net worth of families for the bottom 50% of the population has remained absolutely flat while the 75th-90th percentile see a decent growth and the top 10% enjoy the most appreciation on their net worth. So, if you factor in inflation, the-rich-get-richer-n-the-poor-get-poorer probably holds true. The g...

Correlation Between Finger Length and Aggression/Success/Homosexuality

I came across an interesting article on BBC (Finger length 'key to aggression' ) today and The Economist has a similar article ( Neuroeconomics: Digitally enhanced ). They report a positive correlation between the length of mens' ring fingers and their success in high-stress securities trading. Actually, the more correct comparison s between the ratio of the ring to index finger and success/aggression. In women, the ring and index fingers are comparable, however the ring finger is significantly longer than the index finger in men. In this study, the researchers only looked at men's fingers. Apparently the level of testerone in a fetus is exposed to during pregnancy affects length of fingers as well as the level of aggression. More aggressive traders tend to have longer ring fingers and they happen to be more successful, after factoring out the effect of experience. They also reached a similar conclusion when looking at college students. Having a short ring finger...

Online Storage Solutions

Problem: I often need to have some files readily available online so that I can access them from any computer. There are many ways to go about solving this problem and each comes with its set of shortcomings: Yahoo! Briefcase - 30MB limit Online storage services like Box.net, Xdrive, MediaMax - usually cost money; signing up is cumbersome Email to myself as an attachment - enough said there It's time to find a home-made solution. The solution I am about to suggest is intended for -- A *NIX user someone with access to a *NIX web server Solution: I am a linux user and I have user level access to a web server. The web server is configured such that the public does not have access to directory structure. So, I would need to write a script that copies my files to the web server and creates an index listing my files. Password protection of the storage would follow after that. Client Side: Use the following script to transfer file to server, make the file readable by public and execu...