Most important, raising the minimum wage and indexing it to inflation would help lift thousands in Central Massachusetts out of poverty. The purchasing power of the minimum wage has declined 27% since 1968. And it has lost 12% of its present value since 2001 alone. This means that working families â in todayâs real-dollar terms â have $1,900 less per year to try to keep pace with doubling and tripling housing costs, gas prices, health insurance, food and tuition bills. Itâs not hard to see how the American Dream and making ends meet are a virtual impossibility for these workers.
Make no mistake about it, those in minimum-wage jobs are not only teens working during the summer, they are adults living on the very margins of society â single mothers, young workers struggling to put themselves through community college, and victims of downsizing juggling two or three minimum-wage jobs to provide for their families. Four out of every five workers who would benefit from a minimum wage increase are over age 20. And half of these workers work full-time, more than 35 hours a week. Yet the annualized pre-tax salary of a full-time minimum wage worker is a paltry $14,040 â a sum that barely exceeds the federal poverty level for a single parent with one child. Itâs unconscionable that anyone should have to survive on that salary.
At its core, raising the minimum wage is about fundamental fairness. Over the past two decades, the incomes of the highest-income families in Massachusetts have grown almost five times as fast as those of low-income families and nearly twice as fast as middle-income families. The gulf between higher- and lower-income families has grown wider and faster in Massachusetts than in 47 of the 50 states. Itâs not a record we should be proud of.
The measure of a civilized society is demonstrated by the way it treats its most vulnerable citizens. Itâs time Massachusetts put its money where its mouth is. o
Edward Augustus represents the 2nd Worcester District in the Massachusetts Senate. Timothy Murray serves as the mayor of Worcester.
[http://www.worcestermag.com/archives/2006/06-22-06/slants-rants_your_turn.html]
It seems as though Murray is taking stronger public stances on specifics of issues. I know he has had papers discussing his position on cities and towns, education, and extending the commuter rail. Silbert has a four pint plan to grow our economy but that appears to be the only issue she has a strong specific stance on. Goldberg’s web site has more specifics on the issues than Silbert’s. But neither appears to have the depth of Murray’s papers. I think its a shame, I would love to see all the candidates with comprehnsive plans for what they are going to do for our state, as opposed to this ramble of what should be done.
<
p>
This stance on the minimun wage is just another progressive step Murray has taken in this race. And as far as I know Murray has been the first candidate for LG to jump on the issues and come up with a stance. To me that shows he is ready for the challenges of the corner office.
<
p>
As always if anyone happens to know of comprehensive plans of action from the other candidates camps please send them my way, I would love to read them.
<
p>
~John