Minimum Wage Sucks... Too Bad It'll Never Change.

The minimum wage is at least seven times greater than it was in 1956, but it's actually worth slightly less. In fact, the minimum wage was worth the greatest amount back in 1968 at a measly $1.60 an hour. This sounds absolutely absurd, doesn't it? I didn't even believe it until I found five different sources all telling me the same thing. According to this article from the Huffington Post, an individual working full time would need to make $11.06 an hour to remain at or above the poverty line for a family of four. As I know all too well, $7.25 is the minimum wage and individuals under 18 working a seasonal job can make as little as $5 an hour, a laughably small amount for anyone attempting to help support their family or save for college (but that's an entirely different fish to fry). Additionally, the article states that if minimum wage reflected worker productivity, minimum wage could be as much as $21.72. Personally, I wouldn't know what to do with that kind of cashflow.

People that make minimum wage are becoming more and more aware of this and asking congress to do something about it. But are they? No. Obama mentioned it in his state of the union address and has been trying as hard as he can to get them to do something, anything. But they won't. At this point Obama is pleading to Americans, asking them to send letters to their GOP representatives. He wants everyone making at least "ten-ten." It's catchy but not the necessary $11.06. While I respect what Obama is trying to do, will that really help? Sure I'd love a $2 raise, but if everyone got a raise of that much it would have to affect inflation. It certainly wouldn't be a post-war-Germany-playing-with-bundles-of-money-because-it's-cheaper-than-toys level of inflation, but without change at other levels, Americans would certainly lose buying power, if my math is correct. I'm no expert on economics, but it would make so much more sense to put restrictions on the top earners' paychecks, say they can only make x% of what the lowest paid employee makes. As of 2011 that amount was typically 230 times greater. Hmmm 230*7.25=$1667.50 per hour. And who does the real labor? That's disgusting.

Whose Job Description Does This Fall Under?

Ginsburg out on the town

Scalia acting like he's reading
a legal tome

On thursday night Antonin Scalia (R) and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (D), two of our nine supreme court justices, were answering questions at a conference at the National Press Club. Still in the wake of the Edward Snowden leaks, the NSA is fresh in the minds of most Americans. It's very difficult to get any concrete information out of anyone regarding what is to happen next, but Ginsburg and Scalia were willing to add to the speculation.


Even the ever-conservative Scalia said that the constitutionality of the acts committed by the NSA would likely be decided by the Supreme Court. He also stated that "The institution that will decide that is the institution least qualified to decide it...." This lead me to wonder who is qualified to decide it. The NSA themselves clearly can't make this decision, that would be a conflict of interest. The president already expressed his distaste, but that isn't going to move beyond his statement. The Department of Homeland Security could take on the task, since the NSA is under the Department of Defense, but would that be wise? DHS is the lowest executive agency on the totem pole and there is a lot riding on this. Ultimately, I believe that it is smart to have the Court make a decision. They will be more likely to think of the people because they aren't experts; they can't have a bias in this situation.

What was the CIA up to?

In this article from the New York Times, posted last thursday, it was announced that American citizens will finally be able to know what the CIA did under the Bush administration. It has become almost common knowledge that the CIA allowed some morally questionable practices in interrogations, especially in the name of counterterrorism. Additionally, Obama has publicly spoken out in opposition to these practices since 2009, and has advocated for them to be made public, so there is no question about what happens now that there is senate approval.

After Obama approves the publication of the documents, they will have to be edited per the guidelines of the Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts, so as to not give away any trade secrets or military information. Reading this article, I was unclear as to whom will be doing the editing, but it seems like that will be a duty of the CIA. If so, then I would like to point out how horrible of an idea that is; even if most of those who took part in these activities are gone, CIA employees are not going to want to discredit their organization. While I see the dangers in letting non-CIA employees read the documents, there is a very high possibility that things will be removed that should be revealed to the general public. If the CIA is not responsible for editing the 6,200 pages of secrets, it will be more complete, but that would take months to shift through. Releasing this information is a great idea, but the release itself is going to be tricky.