Pennsylvania Won't Raise Its Minimum Wage In 2025. That's A Big Problem.
...and it will only get worse if nothing gets done.
2025 is about to be upon us. With that comes resolutions, new laws, and...STILL no minimum wage increase in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. It will be 16 years since PA's last minimum wage increase. To put it in perspective, if you were born the last time PA increased their minimum wage, you'd be celebrating your sweet 16 in the new year - that's right, you'd be old enough to DRIVE.
History
1937 - PA adopts the federal minimum wage of 25 cents an hour. (adjusted for inflation, this would be $5.59 as of November 2024)
1968 - PA establishes its first minimum wage at $1.15 an hour. ($10.64 in Nov 2024)
1989 - PA increases the minimum wage to $4.25 an hour ($11.07 in Nov 2024)
1992 - PA increases the minimum wage to $5.15 an hour ($16.56 in Nov 2024)
2007 - PA increases the minimum wage to $7.15 an hour ($11.14 in Nov 2024)
2009 - PA increases the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour ($10.60 as of Nov 2024)
What is happening now
Various administrations have failed several times to raise the minimum wage. However, if any of them had succeeded, this writing would not exist because there would be no need to write it.
One of the biggest reasons that PA's minimum wage has been stuck at $7.25 since 2009 has been because the city of Philadelphia does not have the authority to raise the minimum wage by itself - it has to be statewide. If individual cities and counties had the authority to raise the minimum wage by themselves, this could persuade state officials to finally raise the minimum wage in Pennsylvania. Change starts from the ground up, after all.
Another big reason is just plain ol' political gridlock. Those against the minimum wage argue that it will hurt businesses because they will have to pay their employees higher wages. However, if employees aren't being paid a decent wage, then that will incentivize them to seek higher-paying jobs, thus leaving the low-paying businesses in the dust.
Meanwhile, other states have been raising their minimum wage. Pennsylvania's neighboring states have much higher minimum wage than Pennsylvania's. Nobody can even say this is a blue or red state issue because if Ohio and West Virginia can raise their minimum wages, why can't Pennsylvania?
What will happen in the future if nothing is done?
The minimum wage hasn't increased, but inflation has continued to rise, not just due to covid or price gouging. When prices go up while paychecks remain stagnant, that will lead to a decrease in purchasing power. People will spend more on things like food, shelter, and gas - thus pushing them closer to poverty or deeper into it. If there is no change and there is some economic crisis, it will seriously wreak havoc on the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Pennsylvanians.
Economic crises, and even housing crises, will only be exacerbated by this lack of effort, should this lack of effort continue. People will also put off things like car repairs and necessary medical care because they just don't have the money for such "luxuries."
The fact that PA still has a minimum wage of $7.25 is an unacceptable tragedy. Other states have been raising their minimum wages, so there's no way this can be a blue vs. red state kind of issue. It's almost 2025, so at this point, there is no reason why PA's minimum wage cannot be changed. If Pennsylvania's minimum wage doesn't go up and fast, the lives of countless Pennsylvanians are guaranteed to get worse.
About the Creator
A. Alexis Kreiser
Freelance author. I write about what I want which is mostly stuff about science and politics - or my own life.
Email: [email protected]
Twitter/Instagram/Snapchat: @Lexie_FM
Keep reading
More stories from A. Alexis Kreiser and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
Manchin and Sinema just cost Democrats everything
Source: WEMU-FM (Ypsilanti, MI) Just like every other year, 2021 has an election day. Election day means elections, where people vote on candidates from school board directors to mayors - or if you’re in Virginia or New Jersey, governors. You see, the other 48 states elect their governors during the midterm elections, which will take place in 2022. Virginia and New Jersey elect their governors in the years immediately following the presidential election. These elections mean that for Virginians and New Jerseyans, that means gubernatorial ads nonstop wherever you go.
By A. Alexis Kreiser4 years ago in The Swamp
Trump Renews Threat on Greenland Before Meeting at White House
When it comes to bold headlines, few U.S. presidents rival Donald Trump. In recent days, the former president has once again put Greenland in the spotlight, reigniting debates over international diplomacy, natural resources, and the strategic importance of the Arctic. With a scheduled meeting at the White House on the horizon, Trump’s renewed comments about Greenland have left allies and critics alike scrambling to interpret his intentions. Greenland in the Global Spotlight Greenland, the world’s largest island, has long fascinated global powers due to its strategic location between North America and Europe. Beyond its geopolitical relevance, the island is rich in untapped natural resources, including rare earth minerals, oil, and gas reserves. These factors make Greenland not only a significant strategic interest for the United States but also a sensitive subject for Denmark, which administers the island as part of its kingdom. Trump’s comments have once again drawn attention to this icy territory, sparking questions about what the U.S. might gain from closer engagement—or, as some speculate, potential acquisition efforts. The History Behind Trump’s Greenland Interest This is not the first time Donald Trump has expressed unusual interest in Greenland. In 2019, during his presidency, Trump famously suggested purchasing the island from Denmark—a proposal that Denmark quickly rejected. Critics at the time dismissed the idea as improbable, while supporters argued it was a bold assertion of U.S. influence in the Arctic. Fast forward to today, Trump’s remarks hint at a continuing fascination with the Arctic region. Analysts suggest that this renewed attention is not just political theater; the Arctic is increasingly central to global security, trade, and climate discussions. Strategic Importance of Greenland Greenland’s importance extends far beyond its icy landscapes. The island sits atop key shipping lanes that could become critical as melting ice opens new maritime routes. Moreover, its proximity to the Arctic Circle makes it an essential location for military and intelligence operations. The U.S. already maintains a presence at Thule Air Base, one of the northernmost military installations in the world, highlighting the island’s strategic relevance. Trump’s comments, therefore, resonate within a broader geopolitical context. They underscore the U.S.’s enduring interest in Arctic security, particularly in an era of rising competition with Russia and China. Environmental and Climate Considerations Greenland is also a focal point for climate change discussions. The island’s ice sheet is melting at alarming rates, contributing to rising global sea levels. This environmental transformation has sparked international scientific attention, as well as debates over how to balance strategic interests with the urgent need for climate action. Trump’s rhetoric, however, tends to prioritize strategic and economic opportunities over environmental concerns. Critics argue that this approach risks sidelining urgent climate considerations at a time when Greenland’s ice melt is not just a local issue but a global threat. Denmark’s Reaction Denmark, which governs Greenland, has consistently emphasized that Greenland is not for sale and that the island’s future decisions should be made by its people. Following Trump’s renewed comments, Danish officials have reiterated their stance, stressing the importance of cooperation and respect for Greenland’s autonomy. In response, Greenland’s government has also emphasized self-determination. While U.S. engagement in Arctic research, defense, and trade is welcome, any attempt to influence sovereignty would be met with resistance. Public and Political Reactions in the U.S. Within the United States, Trump’s comments have elicited a range of reactions. Supporters argue that a strong U.S. presence in Greenland is a strategic necessity, particularly given the global competition for Arctic influence. Critics, however, see the remarks as a distraction from pressing domestic issues, framing the Greenland discourse as yet another example of Trump’s unconventional approach to foreign policy. Political analysts note that Trump’s pattern of making provocative statements ahead of key meetings is often a calculated move, designed to dominate headlines and frame the agenda on his terms. The upcoming White House meeting could provide further clarity—or more surprises. The Global Implications Beyond U.S.-Denmark relations, Trump’s Greenland comments reverberate globally. Nations like Russia, Canada, and China are increasingly active in Arctic affairs, making Greenland a potential flashpoint in international diplomacy. How the United States approaches this issue could shape Arctic policy, military positioning, and resource negotiations for years to come. Additionally, the environmental stakes are enormous. As melting ice opens new shipping lanes and exposes valuable minerals, the international community faces the challenge of balancing economic ambitions with sustainability. Trump’s remarks signal a prioritization of strategic and economic opportunities, potentially complicating cooperative efforts on climate action. Looking Ahead: What to Expect As the White House meeting approaches, all eyes will be on Trump’s statements and the reactions they provoke. Will this renewed Greenland focus result in concrete policy proposals, or is it another headline-grabbing maneuver? Observers agree that the Arctic will remain a key geopolitical arena, with Greenland at its center. For Americans and international audiences alike, understanding Greenland’s importance is crucial. This island may seem remote and icy, but its strategic, economic, and environmental significance makes it a place where global interests converge—often contentiously. Trump’s renewed threat or interest, therefore, is not just a political quip; it is a reminder of how central the Arctic is to 21st-century geopolitics. Conclusion Trump’s renewed comments on Greenland have once again thrust the island into international headlines. While the rhetoric may be polarizing, the underlying issues—strategic positioning, natural resources, climate implications, and sovereignty—are profoundly serious. As the world watches the upcoming White House meeting, one thing is clear: Greenland, a vast icy land, is far more than a distant territory. It is a linchpin in global politics, and any U.S. action there will have far-reaching implications. In the end, Trump’s Greenland remarks serve as a reminder that even the most remote parts of the world can capture the attention of the most powerful leaders—and that in today’s interconnected world, no territory is too far away to matter.
By Muhammad Hassanabout 8 hours ago in The Swamp
Bruce Lee and The God of War: Kuan Ti
It starts with love.. The Power to the God Of War and Wealth Walk into a Chinese restaurant (even in Oklahoma, USA), a Chinese police station, a kung fu martial arts studio or even a Chinese temple and you often see a red faced warrior holding a heavy quan-do (spear like weapon).
By WILD WAYNE : The Dragon King7 days ago in Chapters
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.