|
|
#11
07-27-2006, 01:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
Thank god that that's not the reason we have a minimum wage then. The reason for a minimum wage is to make sure that people who work aren't explolited by their employer and that people who work full time don't live in poverty (at least, it was until the Republicans let it stagnate). [/ QUOTE ] The minimum wage in immoral in theory, and *therefore* detrimental in effects. A price control on labor violates the rights of workers (and employers) to freely negotiate a wage. Consensual activities among individuals should not be regulated by the government. If I want to stock Wal-Mart shelves for $1/hour, or even for nothing, that should be my right. Being "exploited" in this case is leftist-speak for not agreeing with my choices. Minimum wage laws actually exploit workers by not allowing them the choice to work for whatever job skill level and wage they desire. This inevitably induces negative economic consequences which hurts workers as well as employers. 
|
|
#12
07-27-2006, 01:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Thank god that that's not the reason we have a minimum wage then. The reason for a minimum wage is to make sure that people who work aren't explolited by their employer and that people who work full time don't live in poverty (at least, it was until the Republicans let it stagnate). [/ QUOTE ] The minimum wage in immoral in theory, and *therefore* detrimental in effects. A price control on labor violates the rights of workers (and employers) to freely negotiate a wage. Consensual activities among individuals should not be regulated by the government. If I want to stock Wal-Mart shelves for $1/hour, or even for nothing, that should be my right. Being "exploited" in this case is leftist-speak for not agreeing with my choices. Minimum wage laws actually exploit workers by not allowing them the choice to work for whatever job skill level and wage they desire. This inevitably induces negative economic consequences which hurts workers as well as employers. [/ QUOTE ] I would add that another averse moral effect is that it denies low skilled workers the chance to learn basic working skills that they might otherwise not get a chance to learn because the minimum wage eliminates job openings.
|
|
#13
07-27-2006, 01:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
The minimum wage in immoral in theory, and *therefore* detrimental in effects. A price control on labor violates the rights of workers (and employers) to freely negotiate a wage. Consensual activities among individuals should not be regulated by the government. If I want to stock Wal-Mart shelves for $1/hour, or even for nothing, that should be my right. Being "exploited" in this case is leftist-speak for not agreeing with my choices. Minimum wage laws actually exploit workers by not allowing them the choice to work for whatever job skill level and wage they desire. This inevitably induces negative economic consequences which hurts workers as well as employers. [/ QUOTE ] Who cares!? A politician is only in office for a limited amount of time, and he/she needs to garner as much votes as possible somehow!
|
|
#14
07-27-2006, 02:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Its not just liberals who support it: 80% of Americans support raising the minium wage. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's mildly interesting but almost entirely irrelevant, considering that we are discussing the merits of the minimum wage, not its popularity. [/ QUOTE ] I see it a bit darker. It suggests that 80% of America is looking for the feel good, no pain, quick fix. That squares with my opinion of tha average American.
|
|
#15
07-27-2006, 02:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
Although I still believe that an increase in the Minimum Wage is long overdue. [/ QUOTE ] Well, we all have to believe in something. I believe I'll have another beer. In your future study of economics, you might want to look up TANSTAAFL. That stands for There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. What that means in this case is that if you raise the minimum wage, you have to get the money someplace. One place to get it is out of obscene corporate profits. Hint: Wal-Mart ain't making obscene profits, and they ain't making enough to cover a major increase in minimum wages. Another place to get it is by increasing prices. If Wal-Mart and similar stores have to increase prices to pay higher minimum wages, who gets hurt the most? People making minimum wages who can only afford to shop at places like Wal-Mart. Be careful what you wish for.
|
|
#16
07-27-2006, 02:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
What that means in this case is that if you raise the minimum wage, you have to get the money someplace. One place to get it is out of obscene corporate profits. Hint: Wal-Mart ain't making obscene profits, and they ain't making enough to cover a major increase in minimum wages. [/ QUOTE ] An awful lot of corporate CEOs are making obscene wages.
|
|
#17
07-27-2006, 02:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What that means in this case is that if you raise the minimum wage, you have to get the money someplace. One place to get it is out of obscene corporate profits. Hint: Wal-Mart ain't making obscene profits, and they ain't making enough to cover a major increase in minimum wages. [/ QUOTE ] An awful lot of corporate CEOs are making obscene wages. [/ QUOTE ] If the CEO of walmart decided to work for free, it might mean a wage increase of about $5 for each employee per year. Why do you feel that it is obscene? The shareholders of Walmart clearly think it is not.
|
|
#18
07-27-2006, 02:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What that means in this case is that if you raise the minimum wage, you have to get the money someplace. One place to get it is out of obscene corporate profits. Hint: Wal-Mart ain't making obscene profits, and they ain't making enough to cover a major increase in minimum wages. [/ QUOTE ] An awful lot of corporate CEOs are making obscene wages. [/ QUOTE ] OMG! Let's pass a law against that too.
|
|
#19
07-27-2006, 02:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
Hint: Wal-Mart ain't making obscene profits, and they ain't making enough to cover a major increase in minimum wages. [/ QUOTE ] While your post was essentially correct, this part is wrong. Wal-Mart pays well more than the minimum wage to their average employee and would hardly be affected by a doubling of the minimum wage. In fact, this is exactly what Wal-Mart itself has been lobbying Congress for, since this would effectively eliminate (or severely disturb) all of its competition (mom+pops all the way to K-mart and Target) who have not yet built a $10/hr wage into their profit margins.
|
|
#20
07-27-2006, 03:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
But it will be interesting to see if the implementation of this in a big city like Chicago will actually cause all these stores to leave, as all the minimum wage doomsayers were predicting on this board a few months ago, or whether, as I predicted, most stores will simply stay and raise prices a little. [/ QUOTE ] But this just hurts everyone that SHOPS at Wal-Mart! The wage increase means that all the poor people shopping at Wal-Mart now have to pay increased prices for their goods, making them all POORER.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
