What Modern People Think Bush-Cheney Should Follow: Best Political Campaign Tips


There is no one in this world who hasn’t heard about George W. Bush and Dick or Richard Cheney. As highly recognizable, both Bush and Cheney won the White House in the year 2001, and they governed the United States until 2009. Despite of the fact that both politicians received deteriorating issues whereby majority of those question their leadership and have something to do with conspiracy; there are still a lot of Americans who believe that they make a great team.

The fact that this author ignited the interest of some Americans in this political tandem, many are asking, in case they run in the next National Elections, can they still tickle the trust and love of the voters, particularly those people who lost their devotion to them?

What is a Political Campaign?

Political campaign is considered as an organized effort that aims to influence the voters’ decision making process. The political candidates are obliged to plan their campaigns very well to ensure that they’ll captivate the interest, trust, and votes of the majority.

Important Components of Political Campaigns

1. The Political Message

The political message pertains to the message or the ideologies that the election candidates want to impart to the voters, particularly to their supporters. Their political message is among the primary tools of candidates to entice the voters to agree to their ideas, and eventually encourage them to support their advocacies.

The political message is typically comprised of many talking points regarding policy issues. It also embodies the agenda of the election candidates. Until today, many believe that Bush and Cheney are capable of winning the votes of people, as long as they can come up with a properly structured political message, a message that can surely set them apart from the other candidates.

2. Organization

In this modern age, whereby the voters are more aware of the characteristics of what a leader should be, it is important for election candidates to have a structured campaign organization, a group that is well-capable of uplifting the image, the values, and the agenda of the candidates. It is important for the Bush-Cheney tandem to have a strong campaign organization, which can serve as their support system.

3. Campaign Finance

Many would certainly agree that political campaigns won’t be possible without pertinent finance. Thus, election candidates should know the most suitable, LEGAL techniques to raise funds for their campaigns. Bush-Cheney can once again court those who are in the private sectors to help them with their campaigns. Thus, there’s indeed a need for them to lay down a platform that may help them in winning the support of their target donors.

4. Campaign Manager

The title itself is self-explanatory, and it is indeed true that behind successful political campaigns is an efficient and intelligent campaign manager. Bush-Cheney tandem must be able to choose a campaign manager who can effortlessly coordinate the campaigns. Also, Bush and Cheney should choose a campaign manager that can represent them and execute outstanding strategies.

5. Political Consultants

The campaign manager is not the only one that Bush and Cheney should ponder upon. They also have to make sure that they’re able to get the best of the best political consultants. These are the people who are excellent in doing researches, whether opposition research or voter research, and they’re also good in executing field strategy.

6. Activists

The voters are not the only ones that Bush and Cheney should encourage. They need to have solid followers or activists who can do exemplary job on various campaign tasks, for instance, making phone calls or canvassing door-to-door. To entice activists, candidates must make them believe that they’re the right people to follow.

Do’s and Don’ts that Bush and Cheney should Consider

1. They can start their online campaign early

There are several things that can be done today in preparation for their political campaign. They can start utilizing the power of the World Wide Web; put a material about them and then start building the Bush-Cheney online reputation.

2. They should consider having a campaign website

Local election candidates invest in a campaign site because they are aware of the advantages that it can do to their image. Maybe in the past, particularly in 2001, campaign websites are not that rampant. Bush-Cheney tandem should have a striking website that can uplift their reputation and their political campaign.

3. They should not ignore the power of the social media

If Bush and Cheney were able to capture the trust and interest of voters in 2001, the time when online campaign is not yet popular, then these 2 great leaders has higher chances of winning seats in the White House if they use social media today. Take note; 42% of adults who are online use the social media. If Bush and Cheney can entice this 42%, they can assure that they’ll be the top contenders of the competition.

4. They should not forget about the power of ads

Supporters of the Bush-Cheney tandem believe that strong ads are what these 2 political figures need to entice the voters. They should have advertisements that can encourage the people to come to their rallies.

5. They need to prepare for the debate

Majority of politicians believe that preparation for the debate is among the most daunting parts of political campaign. Preparing for a debate is like preparing for a battle; a battle not only for the position, but also a battle of agendas and beliefs.

Today, the famous political team is once again in the limelight, and one of the factors that spark the interest of people in them is Peter Baker’s book about Bush and Cheney, Days of Fire: Bush and Cheney in the White House. As of today, Peter Baker is garnering a lot of positive reviews for his remarkable work in Days of Fire.

The world today is different from it was in the year 2001. America today is different from it was 13 years ago. Many are eager to know, what do Bush and Cheney needs in order to stay on top of the political game.

Issues Surround Dwindling Interest on Obamacare

Four years since the passage into law, Obama’s health care law called ‘Obamacare’ is still dropping slowly but surely in the public interest. Marketing and poll specialists have hinted to Obama’s marketing advisers to change their marketing strategies by changing the name as its popularity in social media was lower than its other name ‘Affordable Care Act’ (ACA).

Last year’s analysis given to Bloomberg Businessweek showed the name ‘Affordable Care Act’ had twice positive mentions than negative. While the name ‘Obamacare’ had its positive mentions just a bit higher than negative.

Some people have inferred that maybe Obama’s name being included on the label may have affected its popularity when Obama’s ratings also went down. Evidently this is only one point of the issues circulating the healthcare law and the office of the President. Another issue is Obama’s inability to pursue and implement his promises not only on healthcare but to all that was mentioned throughout his campaigns, therefore, giving doubt to Obamacare’s ability to deliver proper health services.

Another apparent concern which could have inadvertently been used by Republican oppositions is the natural prejudice of Americans to foreign influences or intrusions. For example, the prejudice of many against all illegal workers and sometimes on immigrants who have taken over some of the working class jobs making it difficult for native-born citizens to compete with low-paid foreign workers.

This type of prejudice is called ‘nativism’ or distrust of foreigners. It was somehow correlated to the conspiracy theory of Obama’s not being a natural-born citizen which, although debatable, supposedly disqualifies him to run or become an American president. Parties interested in pursuing this issue were known as ‘birthers’ or those who sought to know where Obama was born. A senator and a congressman actually pushed this issue before the campaigns for presidential elections and even after the court rulings favoring Obama’s eligibility to run for elections.

The sentiment was somehow carried over to Obamacare making many suspicious of Obama’s intentions. It worsened when Obama’s advisers commissioned a think tank group called Heritage Foundation which created the ‘individual mandate’ in 1989 and incorporated it into Obamacare. The mandate specifies a plan to get everybody into Obamacare. Meaning not only the sick ones but the healthy ones also should be included which will seem to work like social security services but everybody will be obligated to pay for membership and will penalize non-members with a double of the membership fee.

This will ensure funding for Obamacare and assure a health care program for every sick person. However people resent this since they think that the healthy ones will be supporting the sick ones just like what is already happening on social welfare where tax contributions of those who have are supporting the have-nots or welfare riders. Other than that it becomes compulsory for everybody to be in the program.

Despite the widespread negative attitude towards Obamacare, a higher number of Americans do not necessarily want it repealed or delayed. They are still hopeful that Congress will still be able to iron out the kinks and complications within Obamacare. The definite question therefore is ‘How to get funding for Obamacare without burdening the public’.

One possible solution, but this will entail a lot of planning and much backing by banks and multi-million dollar companies, is that Obamacare must create an offspring or even several as corporate entities whose main objective is to generate funding through businesses solely to support Obamacare. This would definitely generate thousands of jobs from numerous entities.

One of its businesses could be fund management or investment portfolio management. Another one could be foreign exchange (FOREX), or investment and acquisition of precious metals and stones. An extremely lucrative business is the entertainment industry where one can come up with shows, sponsored MTVs, concerts and tours like Justin Moore’s concert tour.

With government persuasions, celebrated entertainers may be asked to help on a regular basis in the fund raising shows and tours all over the country or the world. The government will help in the ticket sales to multi-million dollar conglomerates or get them as sponsors. Think Vegas.

The objective is not to burden the working-class public and instead give them free entertainment paid by companies, possibly partially-subsidized health care programs and new jobs for the unemployed.

America’s Attitude towards LGBT Community

America is shifting to more liberal policies concerning controversial social issues. Just look at the recent marijuana legalization in some states. A decade ago that would have been a lunatic’s idea. Seems like the tide is the same with attitudes towards homosexuality. A survey by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) shows that there is an increase in gay and lesbian tolerance among all age and political group, religious sectors, and regions in the country.

From 32% in 2003 to 53% in 2013, the support for same-sex marriage climbed by an impressive 21%.  Also, the last decade saw the legalization of same-sex marriage by 17 states. The Defense of Marriage Act that prohibited the recognition of legally married gay couples was abolished by the US Supreme Court.

It’s Not All Colors

There are still threats to the gay community, however. Take for instance Arizona’s proposed service bill that legally allowed businesses to refuse service for gay people on the grounds of incompatible religious beliefs. Fortunately for the LGBT community, Gov. Jan Brewer scrapped the bill on March 1.

There are also existing “No Promo Homo” laws in 8 states namely: Alabama, Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah. These types of laws prohibit school teachers to discuss topics related to homosexuality such as same sex marriage, threats of sexually transmitted infections to homosexuals, and other LGBT rights.

Alabama State Code mandates the teachers to portray homosexual activities as perilous to health, an unacceptable lifestyle, and against the law. These kinds of laws lead to misinformation and discrimination against LGBT.

Media’s Effect

Modern media certainly has far-reaching effects when it comes to all kinds of social and political issues. Advocates of LGBT rights take advantage of the Internet in spreading the information about the fight for equality.

One of the very vocal supporters of LGBT rights is the singer Katy Perry who made buzz last year when she blasted Tony Abbott on-air. Tony Abbott was running as Australia’s Prime Minister at the time and was openly unsupportive of same-sex marriage. Does Katy’s support for LGBTs somehow drive up sales of Katy Perry concert tickets  or is just really because of the adored Katy Perry boobs ? We’ll never know. What we do know is more and more Americans are beginning to agree with her pro-LGBT stand.

Garbage Disposal Issues are Now Becoming More of a Political Problem

In various parts of the world, garbage disposal has always been a big issue. Every day, tons of waste materials are being disposed. However, according to some researchers, the problem of garbage disposal is no longer just an issue of the lack of disposal technology, but a political issue already.

According to William Rathje, the head of the research project on garbage at the University of Arizona, new technology is already in place to help ease out the problem of garbage disposal. The said technology reduces the huge amount of garbage for disposal. With the right amount of financial incentives, there would be tons of garbage more that will be reduced.

However, without the right political willpower, any of the technology available will be left unused. The people are also not given the right incentives should they follow the right regulations for garbage disposal. Landfills are also not given the right budget for proper maintenance. In fact, in New Jersey, the number of landfills significantly reduced from 331 to just 13. The other waste materials are now being disposed to other states. Other states have started turning to incinerators for garbage disposal even if they have obvious environmental consequences. This is due to the lack of funding as well as proper places for garbage disposal.

There are also no strong laws in various states to control huge companies from producing huge amounts of waste materials. Even if there are some violations, there were no serious consequences on their actions. The reduced area for landfills in exchange of commercial and residential establishments has also become major reasons for the increase in garbage disposal problems.

Do Your Part

If you can’t wait for the government to make necessary actions, then just do your share. Dispose your waste properly at home and in the office. You can also go for dumpster rental MN since they have a better way of garbage disposal at an affordable cost. There are also different dumpster sizes available depending on your needs. Just contact the right company who will deal with the problem without necessarily paying a lot for their services.

Democrats Push Hillary Clinton for 2016

This early, the presidential election in the United States in 2016 is already swamped with many speculations. Of course the predicted presidential candidates from the two camps – GOP and Democratic parties enjoy the attention. Looking at how various politicians try to posture themselves to be noticed by the electorate, one cannot help but laugh at the seeming comedy of it all.

Hillary Clinton as strong bet

Hillary Clinton did not make it to the Democrat Party nomination when she pitted against President Barack Obama in 2008. Nevertheless, Clinton demonstrated gracious acceptance of defeat by lending her full support, along with her husband former President Bill Clinton, to the candidacy of Obama. When Obama took his seat at the Capitol, Clinton was appointed as State Secretary and has remained actively involved in national governance to date, although no longer in public office. Today, she is being branded as the strongest contender for the presidency in 2016. The possibility is very clear, but the question now is – whether or not her fellow Democrats would field her unanimously.

Overdue leader

Most political analysts believe that Hillary Clinton is overdue for the presidential seat. Opinions in political forums speak in unison about how Clinton should have won the nomination in 2008. But that is beside the point now. The real issue here is the figures in the nominations. Granting that surveys are credible enough – the 82% votes that Clinton gained from her party members is a resounding approval for her bid in three years time. Now we can see the streaming of her supporters from every state when the actual campaign begins. Some will even travel to convention venues to see her address the people. It could be expensive for ordinary people to travel just to see Hillary Clinton, but according to some groups, they are ready to jump into Daniel Tosh Tour for cheaper flights. Such loyal support is indeed remarkable.

Too early

At this point it may be too early to predict as to Clinton’s opponent in the 2016 race will be. Yet no matter who it is going to be, the former senator and state secretary will certainly see a lot of action during her campaign trail.

Obama meets Yatsenuk as Ukrainian crisis deepens

The crisis in Ukraine has gotten even deeper by the days. This is why the American government is already stepping in and finding out all possible measures to avoid the problem from escalating even more. The US is doing its best to ensure Russia’s cooperation ahead of the upcoming Crimea referendum. Their vote is very crucial and might trigger more problems in the future.

Last Wednesday, US President Obama met Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenuk. In this meeting, Obama hopes that their last diplomatic efforts would lead to Crimea rethinking its vote regarding the referendum on whether they should be a part of Russia or not. If the vote will be in favor of the referendum, the US vowed not to recognize any other referendum from that point onward. The US has also accused Russia that election in Crimea was done at “the barrel of a gun.”

On the other hand, Ukraine Prime Minister Yatsenuk said that they will never surrender. They will fight for their territory and will remain as a part of the Western world. As of the moment, Obama is trying its best to pressure and court Russia at the same time. In fact, Obama is planning to meet Russia’s foreign minister in London this Friday. The US government believes that they are certain ways that could be done to ensure Russia’s interest in the region. There are right choices available and not just the removal of Crimea from Ukraine. At the same time, the US has already warned Russia that they will not acknowledge the referendum should it push through. The G7 world leaders also have the same stance. They believe that any attempt of Russia to change the mind of the Crimean government would be a violation of international laws and would have no legal bearing. The European Council also expressed the same sentiment.

The decision of Crimean officials this Sunday would define where this issue will be in the next days.

If you are seek of hearing these political problems, you might want to check out Florida Georgia Line Tour and be amused.

Gov. Brewer Vetoes Arizona’s “Anti-gay Bill”

After a long and controversial battle, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has decided to veto the bill, which was branded as “anti-gay.” This bill would have allowed business owners to deny gay customers of services if they insist on invoking their religious freedom. According to Gov. Brewer, the said bill could have had “unintended and negative consequences.”

The Surprising Decision

The decision of Gov. Brewer came out as a surprise since her conservative stance would have led her to sign the bill. The bill also has a strong backing from the Republican party of the state, in which Brewer is a part of. Also, based on her previous decisions, she could have easily signed this conservative bill. In fact, she signed the SB1070, which was aimed at allowing authorities to force immigrants to show their legal documents. She has also become controversial before after wagging a finger at President Barack Obama.

The Repercussions of Approving the Bill

Even before the deadline for Gov. Brewer to sign or veto the bill, there were already tons of calls for her not to sign it. Arizona senators Jeff Blake and John McCain, who are both Republicans, have urged her to veto the bill. The Chamber of Commerce also opposes the idea behind the bill. Even the federal government has already expressed disapproval for this bill. They said that she could face litigation and boycott should she sign the bill. Worse, it could possibly affect the economy and tourism of the state if potential tourists and investors would shun them. Super Bowl is also scheduled next year in Arizona. Though Super Bowl has not released any statement regarding the issue, the possibility of pulling out is high had Brewer signed the bill.

Why Veto?

After vetoing the bill, Brewer said that the bill did not address a specific or present concern regarding Arizona’s religious liberty. She even added, “I have not heard one example in Arizona where a business owner’s religious liberty has been violated.” Her decision came about after realizing that the bill could potentially create more problems than what it was supposed to solve. She was also afraid that the decision could divide the state in ways she could not even imagine.

Protests have also been going on in front of the capitol for days prior to her decision. Upon vetoing the bill, loud cheers burst outside the capitol building. Gay rights groups lauded Gov. Brewer for her courageous stance on the subject.

Analyzing the Decision

Thought Gov. Brewer did not explicitly say something about the economic impact of signing the bill, it obviously had a significant bearing on her decision. Apple which is set to expand in Arizona and bring about 2,000 jobs has already expressed that Brewer should veto the bill. The same opinion was expressed by the American Airlines and Marriott Hotels; both are major sponsors of the Super Bowl next year. Even her allies from the Republican Party have also pointed out that she should just veto the bill.

Though some people expressed their gratitude to Brewer for not allowing a law that could step on the rights of other people to be passed, there are also those who were skeptic. They thought that this move was just for political survival. Signing the unpopular bill would be a political suicide and could possibly hurt all her future political ambitions. There are also a weak number of people who fully support the approval of the bill.

Photos of Gov. Brewer sitting on her office chair while vetoing the bill circulated immediately. Speaking of chairs, you can check out http://www.unfinishedfurnitures.com/ for the best option for your home or in the office.

Women in American Politics

On August 18, 1920, more than four decades after its fundamental concept was introduced by Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was finally ratified. This constitutional amendment stated that no citizen could be denied the right to vote on the basis of sex. Women in America have come a long way since then, and there are now quite a few women icons the whole world can look up to. Here are five women who have blazed a trail in American politics.

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Few American women today wield as much political influence as Hillary Clinton. In the past two decades, Hillary has served as First Lady (from 1993 to 2001), as a United States senator (from 2001 to 2008), and as Secretary of State (from 2009 to 2013). She has broken several glass ceilings in that span of time, being the first First Lady to run for public office after her tenure in the White House, and possibly the first to come within such close range of the presidency. Today Hillary Clinton remains a viable nominee for the highest position in the land, and many await her future plans with anticipation – especially after her call to “get cracking” and be rid of the glass ceiling.

Nancy Pelosi

She is currently serving as the Minority Leader of the United States House of Representatives. Pelosi may not be enjoying the power she once had as the first woman Speaker of the United States House of Representatives (2007 to 2011), but she remains one of the most powerful women in American politics today. Known as an effective fund-raiser for Democratic candidates, Pelosi has made no secret of her support for liberal policies. She was a major player in getting the Affordable Care Act passed, and she is a staunch advocate of civil liberties. Her more controversial stands include her vote against military intervention in Iraq and against reinstating the draft.

Susanna Madora Salter

In 1887, when the state of Kansas gave women the right, some men nominated Susan Madora Salter for the position of mayor simply as a joke. Salter’s only political experience had come from her participation in the Women’s Christian Temperance Union. Much to the surprise of the jokers, Salter won with the support of women, and she became the first woman mayor of the United States. Although women today no longer think twice about having a woman as head of their city, at that time being a woman mayor was a very solid glass ceiling.

Shirley Chisholm

In 1968 the people of the United States elected Shirley Chisholm to Congress. She was the first black woman to be elected as congresswoman, and during her stint she became known as “Fighting Shirley”. She earned this nickname mainly because of her consistent opposition to whatever she deemed was Washington bearing down on legislative processes. Chisholm served for seven terms and even run for her party’s presidential nomination in 1972. Although she was not nominated, she is often referred to as a “Moses” who opened the arena of politics for African American women.

The Exciting Arena of Politics in America

Through the years, politics in America has remained a vital arena where citizens are able to exercise their freedoms as well as their right to participate in governance. This becomes exceedingly evident when elections are near and the diverse opinions of ordinary citizens are made clear. Probably the most unmistakable illustration of this freedom is the passionate and often antagonistic exchange of opinions during the past two presidential elections.

Colorful Personalities All

The presidential and vice-presidential hopefuls created a colorful arena where the most conservative as well as the most radical were regularly aired. President Obama, the first African- American president, joined the campaign using the single-word slogan, “HOPE.” He won the elections but not before being raked through the coals. During the campaign he was labeled many things including a terrorist. He was also accused of not being an American being less than a desirable president because he had grown up outside of the United States. His victory was due in part to young voters and the use of social media.

John McCain, presidential candidate of the Republican Party, was just as thoroughly attacked during elections. His private life was turned inside out and he was faulted for not offering solid alternatives to what his camp was accusing Obama of. Many voters felt that he, and especially his vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, spent all their time talking against Obama rather than presenting their own programs. McCain conceded defeat in such a beautifully moving speech many commented if he had spoken as well during his campaign he probably would have won.

Sarah Palin, vice-presidential candidate of the Republican Party, was possibly the most colorful personality of the lot. Singlehandedly, she attracted the most attention with her fumbles on TV and her extremely strong opinions. She has become an icon for the rightist Tea Party. While she may never set foot in the White House as president, she is said to have earned millions from her own book deal.

Presidential Debates

The debates before presidential elections have been a long-standing tradition for the United States. Most voters will keep a watchful eye on the debates to see how well candidates respond to issues they consider priorities. Most people in the past elections listened keenly for what candidates have to say about foreign policy, abortion, gay marriage, and terrorism. Those who go through all the debates faithfully usually know beforehand what topics will be taken up in each debate; others wait only for the debates that are relevant for their own concerns.

For people in their 50’s and 60’s, one hot item in the last presidential election was the security of retirement benefits. For many young families the deployment of troops became a major point of interest, while for others the outsourcing of jobs was critical. The debates have become a crucial scale because people believe that the candidates’ responses show the direction a candidate will take once elected.

Future Public Participation

While many are amazed at what seems to be vigorous public participation in political discourse in the United States, the sad fact is this discourse does not translate to an equally vigorous voter turnout.

Statistics show that in 2000 there was a turnout rate of 54.2%, in 2004 this was 60.4%, and in 2008 a total of 62.3% cast their ballots. This upward trend has not been sustained; only 57.5% of eligible voters exercised their right to vote in 2012. From these figures it is evident that not enough people appreciate how important their vote is and how it can help transform the political landscape from rhetoric to actual reform.

Top 8 States with the Minimum Wage in the United States

The United States is a centralized statutory nation, wherein the President (the mind or leader of the government and state), Council/Congress, and the courts share powers booked to the national government, and the federal government shares power to the state government. There are major distinctions between the governmental structure of America and that of the majority of other advanced democracies. In the United States employees are normally authorized to be paid not less than the legal minimum wage. From July 2009, the national government assigns a general minimum wage amounting to $7.25 per hour, as some municipalities and states have established minimum wage higher than the national level, with the record state minimum wage amounting to $9.32 per hour since January 1, 2014 in Washington.

States with the Highest Minimum Wage

Washington - Washington has the highest minimum wage of $9.19 per hour. Lately, state officers accredited a poll agreeing to Proposition 1, the vote measure to apply a $15 wage in the municipality of SeaTac. The new directive, if permitted, will affect approximately 6,000 hotel and airport workers in SeaTac, Washington.

OregonRegardless of $8.95 as the second highest minimum wage in the state, take-home earnings in Oregon may be insufficient for many state natives.

VermontIn Vermont, the minimum wage is $8.60 and is the third highest in the state. Although a usual Vermont family income was higher than in nearly all states last year, take-home pay does not go so far. The state’s food and fuel prices are as well as highest in the country.

ConnecticutIn May, the Connecticut government has submitted a bill to raise the state’s minimum wage to $9 per hour in 2015. In spite of this, Connecticut was yet one of the most pricey states in the country to live.

IllinoisIn general, it is economical to live in Illinois than other states. It’s minimum wage is $8.25 and is the highest in the Midwest, same as with Connecticut and Nevada.

NevadaEmployees in Nevada must whichever be paid $8.25 per hour, or the federal minimum wage of $ 7.25 per hour if they obtain health benefits.

California$8 per hour is the minimum wage in California and is the same with Massachusetts as the seventh highest in the state. This should adjust, as Caifornia’s government have lately granted plans to raise the state’s minimum wage to $9 per hour next year and $10 by 2016, greater than any other state.

MassachusettsThe minimum wage in Massachusetts which is $8.00 has not changed since 2008. The cost of living is really low.

Conclusions on Pros and Cons of Minimum Wage

Pro: Gives incentive

The minimum wage makes certain that low-skilled workers will be paid an assured minimum and helps them to look for jobs and provide for themselves.

Con: Decelerates job growth

The assured minimum wage can signify an expense that a little company or business may not be able to provide. In that case, small companies or businesses will try to gain more production from current staff instead of paying minimum wage to new workers.

Pro: Presents job protection and safety

In a weak economy, employees with minimum wage jobs help because they manage to be at the lower end of the pay measure. Part-time employees having minimum wage could be granted full-time work to help save an employer the price of training and hiring new employees.

Con: Minimum wage is applied unpredictably

Unpredictable laws of minimum wage throughout the state can keep some employees live below the poverty line as other employees are able to provide for themselves.