Minimum Wage

Sometimes as a serious leader you have to do something other than offer the people "two chickens in every pot."  
Government meddling in the area of wage guarantees have had little if any net benefit
if we look at jobs and opportunities lost as well as increased income for the few that may benefit.
   I and others hate to break it to you because we will be cast down as not caring for the downtrodden "wage slaves" through the warriors for socialist justice: our major media, but a 100% increase in the federally mandated minimum wage will not mean that everyone will suddenly see a doubling of their paycheck without any increase in the cost of living. I am tempted to ask what sort of products are being consumed in the smoky back rooms of the opposition party.
   I wrote President Bush a letter opposing the invasion of Iraq because it looked to me like he had a fairy tale vision of transforming it from monarchy and despotism to democracy.  Ultimately, he was closer to right than I was because the people of Iraq began the democratic process with glee, and Obama let this opportunity for the spread of democracy wither so he could appear like a peacenik to donors.
   Now we have a donor-driven fairy tale that favors entrenched workers at the expense of those hoping to enter the labor force and climb the ladder of economic success. 
   A simple example:  Assume a manager at a fastfood restaurant earns a salary of $42.5K a year.  Her underlings average $10.12 an hour, with time limitations of 28 hours per week because PPACA (Obama [says '"I Don't] Care [About Real Economic Consequences"]) drives employment costs through the roof above that time limit.  A federally imposed raise for the hourly worker would take them to 20k per year from 13.5k/year.  A wonderful outcome for the fifteen or more hourly workers if they are all able to keep their jobs -- ask any wait staff if they have had more than 28 hours per week since ObamaIDon'tCare passed?
   Since we are in the union-driven fantasyland, what do you think the manager will want when her employees get a 50% raise?  What about the franchise owner?  Will (and should) they be willing to pay this sudden increase out of their own pockets?  Are these owners not God's Children, too?  If you owned the business, how many years of negative return on investment would you suffer?  Would your business be immune from another vote-securing ploy in a few years?
   The minimum wage struggle is driven by unions because the majority of their contracts with government entities tie their wages to the state or federal minimum wage: it is used as a base then multiples are applied by craft.  To compete for skilled workers, generally employers need to negotiate union contracts at or near the government level.  Take a wild guess which party relies heavily on union donations to fund political campaigns. The answer lies here:
   I do not begrudge anyone an increase in pay, but Hillary and her fellows have given us plenty of reasons to "follow the money" when they announce policy.  The problem as I see it is that workers without or with emerging job skills do not economically justify the payment of such a wage.  Whether you disdain the capitalist model or not, the employer seeks to make some profit on each and every worker.  Even the socialist central controllers want to get richer off the duped workers!  Young people need low wage jobs.  Let's protect them first rather than giving the haves a bigger slice of the pie.