Bumvertising

[DougShrapnel]

As a conscientious capitalist. I want to pay bums to hold up signs advertising for other conscientious businesses instead of their spare some change signs. It doesn't make business sense to pay them minimum wage. So I want to get an exception from the state to legally hire these persons and not effect thier unmployment status, and whatever benefits that the state affords them. Can I get an exception for my business? Should I be able to?

In addition I would like to create an entire class of jobs that pay below the minimum wage, that still allows people to collect the dole. Are you for or against that?

[Brainwalter]

exploitatiaments

[NeBlis]

two questions.

1: how is giving someone spare crack money to stop harrassing the public explotation?

2: Why on earth would I want to associate my business with a bum?

NeBlis

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
two questions.

1: how is giving someone spare crack money to stop harrassing the public explotation?

2: Why on earth would I want to associate my business with a bum?

NeBlis

[/ QUOTE ]As a special employer I would probably implement some drug testing procedure. And work with the state to provide drug consouling to addicts. Many business would jump at the chance to get a public image as helping the less fortunate. Was McDonalds living on mars when they decided to start the Ronald McDonald house charities? Is every business owner that has a Jerrys Kid's bucket at the cash register stupid?

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
two questions.

1: how is giving someone spare crack money to stop harrassing the public explotation?

2: Why on earth would I want to associate my business with a bum?

NeBlis

[/ QUOTE ]As a special employer I would probably implement some drug testing procedure. And work with the state to provide drug consouling to addicts. Many business would jump at the chance to get a public image as helping the less fortunate. Was McDonalds living on mars when they decided to start the Ronald McDonald house charities? Is every business owner that has a Jerrys Kid's bucket at the cash register stupid?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you should be able to pay a bum whatever you want if he wants to accept your offer. But, I don't think your 'jump at the chance' argument compares very well. Collection buckets and other charitable donations are no-strings-attached forms of gifting. Only the most cynical call this advertising of charitable giving as exploitation of a cause for business PR. When you start 'helping the less fortunate' by making their help contingent on directly advertising your business, it offends more people, and much of your goodwill diminishes.

But, associating your business with bums is the most obvious reason that this is a bad idea.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
exploitatiaments

[/ QUOTE ] How in the world is this explotation?

[QuadsOverQuads]

[ QUOTE ]
As a conscientious capitalist

[/ QUOTE ]

False premise, by definition.


q/q

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As a conscientious capitalist

[/ QUOTE ]

False premise, by definition.


q/q

[/ QUOTE ]Humourous, but not true.

[QuadsOverQuads]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As a conscientious capitalist

[/ QUOTE ]
False premise, by definition.


[/ QUOTE ]Humourous, but not true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Elaborating:

By definition, a rational capitalist pursues profit, not moral edification, so the premise of the poster's argument is, by definition, false.

The upshot is: either the sub-minimum-wage employer *is* pursuing personal profit (in which case his behavior should be addressed as such) or he is behaving as a *charity* (in which case the profitability of the arrangement is not the defining factor).


q/q

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
By definition, a rational capitalist pursues profit, not moral edification, so the premise of the poster's argument is, by definition, false.

[/ QUOTE ] I am pursing profit and moral edification. The terms arn't mutually exclusive. I don't wish to maximize profit at the cost of moral edification, just make a profit, while mantianing my standard of ethics.

[ QUOTE ]
The upshot is: either the sub-minimum-wage employer *is* pursuing personal profit (in which case his behavior should be addressed as such) or he is behaving as a *charity* (in which case the profitability of the arrangement is not the defining factor).


[/ QUOTE ] But in my case it would be. The profitablility of the business would be the deciding factor on if it is part of a workable solution to homelessness and poverty. While maintaining the self respect and dignity of the homeless and impoverished.