February 13, 201313 yr If the Gov't is forcing redistribution of a private companies funds by force that is a government handout. Money doesn't appear out of thin air , if more money goes to one person less goes to someone else or a job is eliminated. By this argument the first ever minimum wage legislation and all subsequent updates are government handouts. Interesting stance.
February 13, 201313 yr By this argument the first ever minimum wage legislation and all subsequent updates are government handouts. Interesting stance. Every raise of minimum wage is a gov't handout? What do you call the government telling a private company how to use funds, but government redistribution? If you are fine with it, that is your right. But call it what it is at least. I just wish people who are for it took a Econ 101 class and understand how the raising of the wage affects jobs in general and the bottom line of the company. Raising the miniumum wage when we are struggling to add jobs to the economy is a comical approach and understanding of the economy.
February 13, 201313 yr Every raise of minimum wage is a gov't handout? What do you call the government telling a private company how to use funds, but government redistribution? If you are fine with it, that is your right. But call it what it is at least. I just wish people who are for it took a Econ 101 class and understand how the raising of the wage affects jobs in general and the bottom line of the company. Raising the miniumum wage when we are struggling to add jobs to the economy is a comical approach and understanding of the economy. I don't think most would agree although by technical definition it could be construed that way. We agree that it's not all roses ie negatives can and often will come with a raise in the minimum wage. My thinking is that if the govt has true social programs set up (ie UE/welfare) then the businesses have to have some skin in the game especially those that employ non-skilled workers.
February 13, 201313 yr I don't think most would agree although by technical definition it could be construed that way. We agree that it's not all roses ie negatives can and often will come with a raise in the minimum wage. My thinking is that if the govt has true social programs set up (ie UE/welfare) then the businesses have to have some skin in the game especially those that employ non-skilled workers. Why not just allow the market to set wage prices. The market sets wages higher for unskilled labor than the minimum wage in almost every industry, save retail sales clerk. Wages are usually higher than the min in that industry as well.
February 13, 201313 yr In 1957 the minimum wage was $1.00, hamburger was $0.29 a pound, gas was $0.25 a gallon, and a loaf of bread was $0.15. Today minimum wage is $7.50, hamburger is $4.00 a pound, gas is $3.75 a gallon, and bread is $2.50 a loaf. You do the math. It's easy to cherry pick a year to make your point. Different years will produce different results, depending on the time of the year, the goods used for comparison, and the region. BTW, I get my bread for a dollar or less a loaf, my gas for 3.49 and my hamburger for much less than $4.
February 13, 201313 yr I don't think most would agree although by technical definition it could be construed that way. We agree that it's not all roses ie negatives can and often will come with a raise in the minimum wage. My thinking is that if the govt has true social programs set up (ie UE/welfare) then the businesses have to have some skin in the game especially those that employ non-skilled workers. If the gov't forces the company to pay a wage they other wise wouldn't how can any reasonable person not call it a gov't handout? We can argue the merits of the minimum wage, that is a seperate issue. But how can you call the gov't forcing a company to increase someone's pay , anything but a gov't handout. If it makes you feel better I'll call it gov't redistribution.
February 13, 201313 yr If the gov't forces the company to pay a wage they other wise wouldn't how can any reasonable person not call it a gov't handout? We can argue the merits of the minimum wage, that is a seperate issue. But how can you call the gov't forcing a company to increase someone's pay , anything but a gov't handout. If it makes you feel better I'll call it gov't redistribution. As I said earlier, your definition is correct although I don't think most of the world thinks of it that way.
February 13, 201313 yr Why not just allow the market to set wage prices. The market sets wages higher for unskilled labor than the minimum wage in almost every industry, save retail sales clerk. Wages are usually higher than the min in that industry as well. Most of my brain says that I agree with you on this issue.
February 13, 201313 yr If the gov't forces the company to pay a wage they other wise wouldn't how can any reasonable person not call it a gov't handout? We can argue the merits of the minimum wage, that is a seperate issue. But how can you call the gov't forcing a company to increase someone's pay , anything but a gov't handout. If it makes you feel better I'll call it gov't redistribution. If someone is working for these wages how can it be considered a handout? Also, what about the workers who are underpaid and companies make billions of dollars off them? What's your definition of this?
February 13, 201313 yr If someone is working for these wages how can it be considered a handout? Also, what about the workers who are underpaid and companies make billions of dollars off them? What's your definition of this? If you are willing to work for the wages you make, you are not underpaid. Companies are supposed to make billions off of their workers. I don't understand why you would think otherwise.
February 13, 201313 yr If someone is working for these wages how can it be considered a handout? Also, what about the workers who are underpaid and companies make billions of dollars off them? What's your definition of this? It's a handout because the gov't influenced the wage being paid. If you don't think you are fairly paid you are free to look for work elsehwere at anytime. Everyone including myself thinks they are worth more than they are paid. It's called the real world and life isn't fair.
February 13, 201313 yr If someone is working for these wages how can it be considered a handout? Also, what about the workers who are underpaid and companies make billions of dollars off them? What's your definition of this? If you are willing to work for the wages you make, you are not underpaid. Companies are supposed to make billions off of their workers. I don't understand why you would think otherwise. Agreed. The worker can quit if he/she doesn't think it's fair. If enough talented people leave for better jobs the company will either have to raise the pay or suffer. That's the beauty of the model.
February 13, 201313 yr It's a handout because the gov't influenced the wage being paid. If you don't think you are fairly paid you are free to look for work elsehwere at anytime. Everyone including myself thinks they are worth more than they are paid. It's called the real world and life isn't fair. I would even go further to give it a name called capitalism. If you don't like your wage, go somewhere else. If they can replace you easily, you weren't worth a higher wage to begin with.
February 13, 201313 yr If you are willing to work for the wages you make, you are not underpaid. Companies are supposed to make billions off of their workers. I don't understand why you would think otherwise. Oh, but workers don't deserve a raise in pay mandated by the government.
February 13, 201313 yr It's a handout because the gov't influenced the wage being paid. If you don't think you are fairly paid you are free to look for work elsehwere at anytime. Everyone including myself thinks they are worth more than they are paid. It's called the real world and life isn't fair. If that's the case, deal with the min. wage and move on life isn't fair.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.