NM Governor Martinez vetoes minumum w...

NM Governor Martinez vetoes minumum wage hike bill

There are 128 comments on the Deming Headlight story from Mar 31, 2013, titled NM Governor Martinez vetoes minumum wage hike bill. In it, Deming Headlight reports that:

Gov. Susana Martinez on Friday vetoed a bill to increase the state's minimum wage by $1 an hour, to $8.50. Martinez, a Republican, blamed majority Democrats in the state Legislature for seeking too large an increase.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Deming Headlight.

“Get over yourself...”

Since: Jan 08

You're not that important

#42 Apr 5, 2013
What about the fact that she was willing to approve a 30 cent increase and the D's said it's all or nothing? Seems they are to blame. We could have had a little raise if they hadn't been so stubborn.

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#43 Apr 5, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
And of course none of those below the poverty level get any assistance form the government - right? Like EBT cards and other subsidies...
Maybe you DumbasCRAPians who despise Reps should start your own businesses, or are you going to remain crybaby little whiney-butt consumers and live off subsidies from the sweat of others all your lives? Start a business and lets see if you change your tune!
They might not need assistance from the government if they had higher pay.

Seems you can't calculate that.

Anyway why is your argument always based on political parties. Have you ever considered that Susana Martinez just might be working for her own interests? She'd sell out her party in a heartbeat to promote her own agenda.

In your other post you complained about the youth in New Mexico. If the minimum wage was raised to $8.50 that would make New Mexico about the 5rd highest in the nation and that would more than likely keep the youth in New Mexico from leaving and just might bring better opportunities and other people in to New Mexico.

Oh wait that's right you're one of those territorial types.

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#44 Apr 5, 2013
Mais au contraire. They are getting help from the government. The government is acting like a Union and guaranteeing everyone a minimum wage, but through dint of law, not bargaining with the business owner. And you really act as if the economy is static. You can just raise wages and everything improves. Seen the stock market today in under one minute with the jobless report? Raise the minimum wage and all those jobs will be created? Raise taxes and more jobs will be created? Seems we will wait and see. Right.

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#45 Apr 5, 2013
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/05/us-...

Some analysts don't seem to agree with you. But then they analyze businesses, not hand-outs in the form of increasing wages for increased income taxes and a rise in goods in the form of increased gross receipts taxes (NM). Some might even worry about inflation.

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#46 Apr 5, 2013
Raising minimum wage is not a hand-out. But if that's the way you see it then no wonder you take the position that you do.

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#47 Apr 5, 2013
It is a hand-out because none of the businesses were on any committee or had anything hand in making the law. It was taken out of their hands. It was an edict from people who have never owned a business in their lives. And from people like you who have this stereotype of businesses that polarize and demonize. Run your own business for 20+ years and then put your two cents in on a thread. You won't get heard among the vote buyers who are our congresscritters.

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#48 Apr 5, 2013
And don't read the headlines about the Dow and the jobless. That is all a conspiracy of the elite businesses who want to enslave the worker. Please, avoid responding to the facts or the cites. Would love to see your cites and their sources.

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#49 Apr 5, 2013
Willothewisp wrote:
It is a hand-out because none of the businesses were on any committee or had anything hand in making the law. It was taken out of their hands. It was an edict from people who have never owned a business in their lives. And from people like you who have this stereotype of businesses that polarize and demonize. Run your own business for 20+ years and then put your two cents in on a thread. You won't get heard among the vote buyers who are our congresscritters.
So then every bill that becomes law is a "hand-out" because the general public had no hand in putting it into law. Your mind works wonders.

Run my own business? You don't know who I am so it's easy for you to assume such ridiculousness because the fact is I've been operating my business since 1993 and was involved in a similar operation for about a decade before that.

Lastly what in the world are you talking about? I don't have any stereotypical view of business. The point of this thread is that the governor of New Mexico vetoed the minimum wage raise. This same person promised jobs, but did she mean bringing in or forcing low pay jobs on the citizens.

By the way the cost of living increases, so doesn't it makes sense to you that a person making minimum wage should make enough to survive above the poverty line? Or do you even care?

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#50 Apr 5, 2013
Seriously...

http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-news/ci_...

Doesn't that qualify as increased government spending?

So the private citizen can't earn more, but she'll throw millions of dollars into government jobs. Ah the supporters will defend her to the teeth.

Where's your state's ethics commission? Oh that's right she vetoed it!

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#51 Apr 6, 2013
Government always takes care of its own. That is why they are so efficient. And they pay scale. No minimum wage there. And the term "private citizen" is what it means. Not subject to the government. But then you seem to be a government type man and like many other rely on them to do the fair and just thing. Make laws to your liking. I think Private means private. Government need not apply. Separation of Private and Public. You want it all regulated by the Public. Justice for all. Right.

And the 15 trillion dollar government program on poverty is a great success. 50 million below the poverty line. 2.8 million on Food Stamps in 1969. 47 million today. Quite a growth industry.

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#52 Apr 6, 2013
Willothewisp wrote:
Government always takes care of its own. That is why they are so efficient. And they pay scale. No minimum wage there. And the term "private citizen" is what it means. Not subject to the government. But then you seem to be a government type man and like many other rely on them to do the fair and just thing. Make laws to your liking. I think Private means private. Government need not apply. Separation of Private and Public. You want it all regulated by the Public. Justice for all. Right.
And the 15 trillion dollar government program on poverty is a great success. 50 million below the poverty line. 2.8 million on Food Stamps in 1969. 47 million today. Quite a growth industry.
Exactly what is your stance? Do you even have a position?

You speak of government and yet fail to remember that the actual government is the sovereign, the people. However the problem lies with the politicians who often seek personal gain instead of promoting "the people" so it seems you support politicians and not the people.

However let's stick to the issue of this thread. She vetoed minimum wage which would've placed New Mexico in a higher tier in the job market. Outside of that as I have noted the cost of living increases and yet minimum wage stays stagnant? Is that what you support? Because your argument of costs going up is a tad ridiculous. Will a company raise prices to meet the wage scale, probably so, but it won't cripple the economy.

And to argue that it's okay for the government to get a raise, but the private citizen cannot and you actually defend that is insane, but you are entitled to your 2 cents because you've successfully operated a business for over 20 years. LOL

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#53 Apr 6, 2013
Government gets a raise, so government should tell the private sector to give their employees a raise. Good thinking and logic. The common denominator is government, which you seem to think holds the keys to our economy. Glad you support government and its good works, as long as it does what you want it to do.

Government should tell the private sector what you think it should do when it comes to wages. Have it both ways. No separation of Public and Private for you. Seems you want it both ways. I am sure your idea of government will triumph, so no worry. You have obviously thought this out very well.

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#54 Apr 6, 2013
Willothewisp wrote:
Government gets a raise, so government should tell the private sector to give their employees a raise. Good thinking and logic. The common denominator is government, which you seem to think holds the keys to our economy. Glad you support government and its good works, as long as it does what you want it to do.
Government should tell the private sector what you think it should do when it comes to wages. Have it both ways. No separation of Public and Private for you. Seems you want it both ways. I am sure your idea of government will triumph, so no worry. You have obviously thought this out very well.
I didn't even say that. I said government is the people. The politicians are supposed to SERVE the people. It's the law. It's the Constitution. Maybe you should read it.

"as long as it does what you want it to do."

The politicians are supposed to do what WE want them to do. That's why they get elected.

"Government gets a raise, so government should tell the private sector to give their employees a raise. Good thinking and logic."

I didn't say that. I said it's a contradiction that she vetoed raising minimum wage, but then gives state employees a raise without approval of the voters. If you're going to question what I said at least get what I said right.

"No separation of Public and Private for you."

You do know that "government" is responsible for the regulation of commerce? Read the Constitution. Our politicians set and enforce laws that regulate commerce and then on top of that tax the snot out of every person, place and thing. So exactly where is this separation you dream about?

"The common denominator is government, which you seem to think holds the keys to our economy."

Really? Do you really think that? So you believe government has nothing to do with the economy? Really? YOU MIGHT WANT TO REFRESH YOURSELF WITH SUSANA MARTINEZ'S CAMPAIGN PROMISES.

Matter of fact here's a quote from her:

"This tax reform is critical to growing our economy."

So you really think government has no part in the economy?

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#55 Apr 6, 2013
Here's another Martinez quote:

" It was a bipartisan effort and I am proud that we were able to work together to strengthen New Mexico's economy."

Seems she thinks government holds the key to the economy.

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#56 Apr 6, 2013
"You do know that "government" is responsible for the regulation of commerce? Read the Constitution. Our politicians set and enforce laws that regulate commerce and then on top of that tax the snot out of every person, place and thing. So exactly where is this separation you dream about?" Quote from JIJAC

And the Commerce Clause as you well know is across
borders.

Intrastate, or domestic, commerce is trade that occurs solely within the geographic borders of one state. As it does not move across state lines, intrastate commerce is subject to the exclusive control of the state.

And so, I thank you for your attempts to post on something you are not well acquainted with...get acquainted and then you can play with the big dogs.

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#57 Apr 7, 2013
Willothewisp wrote:
"You do know that "government" is responsible for the regulation of commerce? Read the Constitution. Our politicians set and enforce laws that regulate commerce and then on top of that tax the snot out of every person, place and thing. So exactly where is this separation you dream about?" Quote from JIJAC
And the Commerce Clause as you well know is across
borders.
Intrastate, or domestic, commerce is trade that occurs solely within the geographic borders of one state. As it does not move across state lines, intrastate commerce is subject to the exclusive control of the state.
And so, I thank you for your attempts to post on something you are not well acquainted with...get acquainted and then you can play with the big dogs.
Well then you proved my point. I have the high intelligence of a human being, you're saying you're a dog. So that explains it.

“Freedom is never free”

Since: Jan 09

El Paso, Texas

#58 Apr 7, 2013
Willothewisp wrote:
"You do know that "government" is responsible for the regulation of commerce? Read the Constitution. Our politicians set and enforce laws that regulate commerce and then on top of that tax the snot out of every person, place and thing. So exactly where is this separation you dream about?" Quote from JIJAC
And the Commerce Clause as you well know is across
borders.
Intrastate, or domestic, commerce is trade that occurs solely within the geographic borders of one state. As it does not move across state lines, intrastate commerce is subject to the exclusive control of the state.
And so, I thank you for your attempts to post on something you are not well acquainted with...get acquainted and then you can play with the big dogs.
What's truly funny about this post is that you didn't really post anything.

Let's take the argument as it happened:

You said that I believed government holds the key to the economy.

I then said that government regulates commerce.

You now reply that federal government regulates interstate commerce and state government regulates intrastate commerce.

What's funny is you post that as if I were wrong. you just acknowledged WHAT I SAID! I said government regulates commerce and then you reply saying government regulates commerce.

I'll simplify what just happened.

I say basketballs are orange. You then reply "No, basketballs are orange. Come back when you get your facts straight."

That's exactly what you just did above. LOL.

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#59 Apr 7, 2013
"You do know that "government" is responsible for the regulation of commerce? Read the Constitution." JIJAC

Nice try. Government, like in feds. Or were you going to say you meant both the Constitution and the state's Constitution. You wanted me to read the Constitution. Obviously not the Commerce Clause in our Federal Constitution. You meant "ConstitutionS" I am sure. I missed that. Good dissembling.

Waiting for your cite that "government", as you put it, has the right to regulate all commerce. How many employees one has. Their wages. Benefits. Accounting principles. Profits. According to you there wouldn't be anything they couldn't "regulate" under that broad definition.

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#60 Apr 7, 2013
Waiting for the cite to the New Mexico State Constitution on regulating commerce within the state. PRC? Indian tribes? I am sure you will do so since you spoke of Constitutions.
idgaf

Tewksbury, MA

#61 Apr 7, 2013
Why are we making this such a complex concept to grasp? Person "A" makes 7.50/hr, person "A" can afford so much. Give person "A" a raise to 8.50/hr and that person will have more money. The problem comes in that the companies employing person "A" will have a higher operating cost. A higher operating cost translates into higher products/services cost to the consumer. The consumer, which includes person "A" are all of the sudden paying more per product/service. The operating cost increase is more than just the wage increase, it is the taxes the company must contribut to match the employee's and potential benefits. Not a good thing for a small or large business. On the surface, the perons is making more money, so they should live better. In reality, they can afford less because you've affected everyone's buying power and reduced it. Everyone from 8.50 to the millionaire. The govt is happy cause they are collecting more gross receipts taxes. For how long is the question? Increased operating costs and ultimately increased prices will drive demand for products/services down, negatively impacting the economy. Eventually, the gross receipts will equal the operating costs and you get companies going belly up. Att hat point, even the happy govt is worried cause who will keep paying for all these things we've recently afforded.

This is addition and subtraction at best. It does however require that you understand interdependancies. You cannot just look at the short-term benefit, more money in my pocket. You must see what the impact is to the global economy.

As for NM, businesses will never go to NM. NM's number of undeducated ranks too high. High paying jobs won't go there as there is not a talent pool to draw from. Furthermore, high paying job companies are looking for low paying places to stay in business. Don't go too far, why are businesses attracted to El Paso and not Las Cruces or NM in general? Business operating costs and govt incentives.

Don't look for more than minimum wage in NM. You have nothing to offer high tech companies. You have nothing to attract young people, no beach, no water, no real hiking, nothing but dust. Your schools are ranked almost last in the nation. Once again, nothing to offer. For las cruces, you have wsmr and nasa, both of which are dying by their own hand. No one wants to use wsmr cause it costs too much and is outdated. Nasa doesn't have a mission. What's left nmsu?

Minimumwage is looking attractive.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Las Cruces Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Martinez prefers to stick to issues (Jun '10) Thu Gary J 6,405
affrique (May '12) May 24 gab 230
News The devil is in the application (Apr '09) May 21 Yin Simons 5
News Fred Brito fired again for using a false name (Mar '07) May 21 jacobcasselberry 23
News Las Cruces man charged for biting girlfriend, h... (Mar '11) May 18 juanita 54
News Las Cruces robbery suspected located, charged May 15 King Joe Zarate 2
Gang problems in Las Cruces (Sep '07) May 15 Poser Buster 194
More from around the web

Las Cruces People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]