Any owner who pays minimum wage is un-American - here's why

Except, thanks to American companies pushing for sweatshops, they will make only a fraction of what we do, while paying prices that almost match ours.

 

Is there any rich nation that did not have a period of "sweatshops" You guys act like every nation should arrive full blown. "Let them eat cake, we do, and if they can't eat cake, well then back to the fields with them. Let them live in abject poverty until they learn better "

No better example of this then Hong Kong. During our lifetime, they have gone from sweatshop trinket maker, to about as rich as us. From making "only a fraction of what we do", to making as much. One generation of hard work. Meanwhile we worry if we are giving out enough handouts and spending on green companies and Obama friends. Like us, Hong Kong's pollution is dropping too they just didnt waste as much as us on it.

 

I will repeat what i have said in other threads , force companies to pay $14/hour and if they can not afford it cut their taxes, business with a personnel below 10 shouldn't pay in the first place since the state can earn much more if they have cash to grow . You can replace the loss of revenue by really taxing "negative tax" megacorps and stop subsidising any cheat with a lobbyist .

 

Oh, you mean like jobs at Walmart which are heavily subsidized by taxpayers since a large proportion of Walmart workers qualify for food stamps and medicaid.?

 

Or... people who take the time to better themselves don't have to worry about making only $8/hr.

 

Wal mart doesn't receive subsidies. They pay about the same as whole foods pays its cashiers. Why not riot there? Wal mart also pays more career salaries then any other company in the world, promoted from within, and has the smallest CEO compensation compared to any other company. It also makes the wages if hundreds of millions of Americans more valuable on purchasing terms. You can't blame them for your policies, and you would have to steal a lot more to pay for them without those jobs.

 

McDonalds was once a single restaurant. If they had paid their employees such that they broke even then they'd never have expanded. I suggest you try trading on the stock market for a while - earnings drive growth, almost nothing else.

If McDonalds had followed your advice, they'd still have 4 employees instead of 465,000.

[hr][/hr]

In any case, it's their capital. If you think you can do better then go ahead start up a competing business. There's nothing stopping a bunch of workers pooling their capital and creating a Democratically run workplace - the problem is that such a workplace would have to compete with others, and the second you slash management's wages + shareholders' returns they're going to go somewhere else. Your company will stagnate and your workers' run management will be horribly inefficient. Unless you're one of the lucky ones you'll go out of business. That said, go right ahead - I find the idea to be pretty noble. If you can pull it off by all means do so.

Competition is a problem for such businesses in a free society because you cannot force management and investors to remain with you. Once again, feel free to give it a try.

[hr][/hr]

There is, additionally, an upper limit on the amount you can pay a worker. Once you exceed the marginal benefit of his labor you cease to be a business and start to be a charity. Certain roles, sweeping halls for example, would likely fall below your $14/hr lower limit. Setting a wage floor at $14/hr means that these workers will go without a job - something they clearly view to be worse than working for minimum wage, or else they'd choose to not work on their own. By forcing business to pay above the worker's marginal benefit you're taking the choice away from the worker, not the business.

Property rights are property rights. By restricting one component of the exclusive use right of a property owner you're undermining property rights for us all.

[hr][/hr]

And yet! Am I not merciful, I'll allow you to have your worker's utopia and band together with a bunch of like minded social democrats to start a community on your own property wherein you can have whatever conditions you like. All I ask is that you let me have the same on mine.

Every time the liberty-minded society will win. Don't believe me? I'm up for the challenge if you are

 

Way to generalize a group of people. Prove your claim of Hispanics being conservative in nature. Voting in 2012 showed a much different picture than the one you paint. Do you think Hispanics are stupid? Conservatives claim family values while killing families. Explain your family values and I'll counter them with authentic, more values.

And do you expect the Republicans to unfugg themselves? They just continue to do the same thing over and over.

What evidence do you have to support your claim that Hispanics will go right? What evidence do you have for a period of 100 years from now?

Well, to establish whether one is male or female, there's nothing wrong with viewing a bio. You cannot determine gender from reading words and viewing a profile will give you and idea of who you are dealing with. At least you have enough integrity to enter something on your PF bio. There's no shame being in maintenance so reword your bio to say "Maintenance man" instead of "Just a maintenance guy." Your position is important to whatever company you work for. Do not think otherwise... and that comes from a Progressive. I don't think any conservatives would have written that. I was a "hands on man" way back. I worked as a mechanic for a motorcycle dealership and did minor maintenance for a construction company.

My stuff is out in the open and I created a webpage to explain things further. Your use of a cell phone accessing the web is noted.

 

I will disagree in that higher wages will allow a family or individual to spend more within their community, thus helping businesses in that community or their state and country.

I don't think anyone expects to eventually see or create a utopian workers society. I have developed a governmental system that benefits all members of a society. It's being created on a website and not yet finished.

 

Doofus. I asked you where in FL and you never responded. Now you use an ambiguous geographic name which includes 3 counties. Which do you live in? Are you still fearful of saying so? Cowardice. Actually the sun shines in all 50 states so another stupid remark. Do you really think it's possible for every county to have "water" as in coastline?

I really don't want to get into a "battle of counties" with you. You'll end up looking foolish which seems to be your aim.

Do you think that it's because the rail routes were already established? That's stupid. Of course more track was laid because there was no tracks previously. As time went on, railroads only needed to maintain existing track.

So you like China now? You people normally hate China. Here, private companies bid on contracts for road building. When you (Mayo) are using "you" are you referring to Americans or Chinese? I can answer things without error if you write with clarity.

You do know that private industry in China is sometimes in a partnership with the government? Not that what you are referring to. See above. The government contracts out to private companies for road construction. I'd rather not pay a toll to drive on a road.

Answer my school defense where you claimed Leon County had poor public schools.

 

Oh that's such a simplistic statement rooted in ignorance.

 

Yeah I get the routine. I don't have all day for this. Lets keep it simple. Hong Kong has privately built road systems that were financed by bonds that the people could buy into, and they were managed by private companies. It worked so well, that the HK government's cost of running roads in these areas was limited to car counting and pay based on estimated mileage. We can do that here with actual counting and pay with the gasoline tax. But instead it is nationalized, the government picks a road, hires attorneys to fight for a few years, has a bidding process to build it, but has to contract out for maintenance all the time etc.. Roads cannot get financed, when they do from the feds it goes into pork, which means it can be spent inefficiently leading to revenue shortfalls, (bridge to nowhere projects)..China copied Hong Kong, the world's freest market, and now has a booming road building economy- like the one we could have here. But no, to build a road in America first talk your congressman into it, then hope they are in the majority party and can attach it as some pork, then overcome the environmental lobby, comply with state and county officials, try to convince all of them it is a good idea, then when you get the money comply with 50 different federal and local agencies, go through a bidding process that has "prevailing wage" rules and discriminates against men and non minorities. Then hire a team of lawyers to defeat environmental claims you face in the court system from NIMBYists, then hire a contractor and a team of people to build it.

 

trea·son/ˈtrizən/ Show Spelled [tree-zuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

maybe #3 would fit but really it is not treason , it may be greed in some cases , you wrongly think every small busness owner is rolling in dough and large corporations answer to shareholders which are not rich people they are middle income folks who have invest for retirement . Would I like to see people earn more , of course I would be it will not always be possible

 

When large numbers of employees at walmart are eligible for food stamps and medicaid, the taxpayer is subsidizing those jobs.

And what the heck does this mean

Are you trying to claim that the CEO of wallmart is the lowest paid CEO?

 

They don't "push" for sweatshops - sweatshop working conditions always existed in those countries. American companies didn't invent sweatshops.

 

Thanks to NAFTA and free trade and US exports, this is currently creating about $3.8 trillion of GDP which translates to approximately 38 million US jobs!

IMO a priority in the US should be increasing exports. The US economy is wishy-washy at best while the world presents 6.75 billion consumers! For each $1 trillion in increased exports the US creates about 10 million jobs.

I'm guessing we cannot consume ourselves into sustainable prosperity therefore we must consider exports...

 

What wages do you believe are being paid by K-Mart, Target, Ace Hardware, Home Depot, Macy's, Sear's, McDonalds, and by tens of millions of retail and service businesses across the USA? If you are honest your answer will be they pay similar to Wal-Mart. This means your diatribe about Wal-Mart has no foundation...

 

This isn't exactly true. Remember that the "right to work" laws do not and cannot prohibit the workers from forming a union and abuses by employers historically have been the reason for the formation of unions.

Also remember that a union, based upon it's powers as a unified force on behalf of the workers, can obtain higher wages and benefits than the non-union workers at the same company. The union contract only covers union workers in "right to work" states.

 

While some Walmart positions only average about $8.50/hr (e.g. part time greeters that are often retirees) the average wage at Walmart for full time emplyees is surprisingly slightly more than $40,000/yr. Yes, this does include the managers that make more than the hourly workers but its a lot higher than I thought it was.

From the search link tagline:

Actual reported earnings:

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Walmart-Stores-Salaries-E715.htm

 

If you go back a few decades in the USA, at the dawn of industrialization, you'll find average workers earned $1000 per year or $19.25 per week or $3.85 per day. Most of these jobs were held by immigrants, both legal and illegal. And they were considered work...not sweatshops.

All of these 3rd world nations who are in the early stages of industrialization are exactly like the USA was in 1920. If it was acceptable in 1920 in the USA then it is acceptable today all around the world.

Lastly, you cannot have exports if you don't allow imports and since exports are 25% of the US economy and generate maybe 38 million jobs we should be okay with imports...

 

Seems silly to believe the bold above when an employer can terminate an employee anytime and an employee can quit anytime...IMO this pretty much implies zero loyalty from either the employer or employee...

 

Those countries did not have a manufacturing industry until western nations started starting factories there. and it was the call for cheaper products in the west that started the use of sweatshops.

 

Here is the difference. When American wages were that low, so was the cost of living. Ayou could survive on much less money. China, however, has a high cost ov living, but still makes very low wages overall. It would be the equivlent of trying to live in modern day New York while on a wage from 1950.

 

Not even a little bit. I worked for $3.35/hr. when I had a summer job in high school. Then I went to college. Now I have skills that are far more valuable that $8.00/hr.. I bettered myself. I suppose I could have opted out of college and had a couple of kids and then complained about how unfair life is because I only make $8/hr..

 

Well, your numbers are very close enough. http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/13poverty.cfm

Isn't the question really about a living wage? Here is that definition from Wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage

"In public policy, a living wage or subsistence wage is the minimum income necessary for a worker to meet basic needs (for an extended period of time or for a lifetime). These needs include shelter (housing) and other incidentals such as clothing and nutrition. In some nations such as the United Kingdom and Switzerland, this standard generally means that a person working forty hours a week, with no additional income, should be able to afford a specified quality or quantity of housing, food, utilities, transport, health care, and recreation, although in many cases child care, education, saving for retirement, and less commonly legal fees and insurance may cost a family more than food, utilities, transport, or health care. In addition to this definition, living wage activists further define "living wage" as the wage equivalent to the poverty line for a family of four."