Minimum wage should match cost of living!

I say it is very unethical to force workers to work hours that they did not agree to......It may not be illegal, but since when did law mean the same thing as ethics and justice?

 

This is actually the way it used to be, until the Harvard business model was developed that decided they needed a better way to track CEO performance. The Harvard business model decided the best way to track CEO perfromance was on how much a CEO was able to increase shareholder value in any given year. There are several problems with this method, but I will give an example in the following paragraph.

The first problem is that this method doesn't acount for long term growth and only foccuses on short term profits. Many CEO's have done a fabulous job of increase shareholder value by cutting cost and laying off workers. Usually in the first one or two years the companies profits baloon, and shareholder value skyrockets. Usually because of this and the way CEO's are compensated they recieve huge bonuses. After these couple of years though the bubble pops and the company typically either goes out of business or more likely is merged with another company and a significanlty reduced price. These types of mergers were very common in the 90's when a massive number of consolidations were done. For the CEO they were able to keep their huge bonuses; the shareholders were typically able to get out before they stock price fell to sharply. The other stakeholders were not so lucky though. Employees and business's that relied on selling parts and supplies to these companies were hurt massively by this business model.

 

The whole point of overtime is done when both the employer and employee agree on the hours. It is already illegal to work more hours then you are suppose to work.

 

[/QUOTE]

I work customer service in a call center. It pays ok, But the stress of the job is immense. Not only do you have to be really respectful and nice to your customers (Even when they are treating you like dirt), But the center (Or call factory, as my job is quickly becoming) requires you to take as many calls each day as you can WHILE maintaining really high quality standards (In the 90% range or higher). It's the main reason this type of job has such a high turnover rate.

As far as raises, I wouldn't be so grumpy if I got decent raises. The cost of things such as my healthcare, my rent, my grocery bills are definitely going up, But my pay isn't going up to match. Sure, The cost of luxury items like I-Pads goes down, But there will soon be a point where I wouldn't be able to afford ANY luxuries at all. Then it will really be all work and no play, And you know how that saying goes.

As far as going into business for myself, I don't see how I could do that. Other than the skills that make me a good customer service rep (I have a large amount of patience, I'm super polite, And I have a great voice), I don't have the skills or money to start my own business. Also, I'm not a real risk-taker. I would prefer a safer method of making money if I could find one.

I guess I'm more toward the middle in this employer/employee debate. I understand profits and the bottom line, But I also understand people too. I wouldn't want to give my tax dollars or charity money to a deadbeat that could work, But just wants to skate buy without working, But I feel that people that are willing to work for their lives deserve more than what they currently have. How much more is of course open to interpretation and compromise.

Thank you for your time.

 

You have to realize that conservatives don't understand the concept of fair. They think fair is able to grab more for yourself because you had the oppurtunity to do so. It's no use arguing fair with people who don't understand the concept.

 

Not all conservetives are like that.....Only the ones who get elected are.

 

Tell that to the owners of Walmart who force workers to work overtime that they did not agree to and then refuse to pay them overtime wages, instead forcing them to take extra time on lunch breaks every day to make up for the overtime....

Again....this is forced.....the workers do not agree to any of it.....But if they refuse, they are fired.

I went through this alot while working at walmart.

 

You are in the same positions as most Americans. People who start business's are usually said to be the same type that enjoy sky-diving, rock climbing, or other risky adventures. This risky behavior also typically comes with a Type-A personality, not allways, but usually. Also, in todays America there are just too many obstacles to trying to open your own buiness to make the risk with bearing for the average american. If you don't own a home it is virtually impossible. You need some type of collateral to get a loan. I tried to open up my own business but I wasn't able to get financing because there was no credit avaliable for someone who doesn't own a home and have equity. I had $50,000 cash avaliable but wasn't able to find a business that was worth the risk of $50,000 without also getting a loan. If you are making a median income you are barely able to scrape by as it is, so it's almost impossible to save up enough money to start a business in the first place. Add that to the financing requirements and doing so becomes just a dream.

 

And you can't forget the fact that most politicians favor big business over small and usually do their best to screw over new business owners.....

 

You are kind of right, I was using hyperbole in my statement. Conservatives lack the ability to internalize externalities is actually what the science has shown. It's less about fairness and more about empathy, but the point is still valid.

 

You choose your employment... I guess when the Doctor finds himself at the Hospital running Double or Triple shifts because of an Emergency he should storm off because he is over worked? You become an employee to secure wealth for your well being and the employer expects your loyalty and hard work with it... Even if it involves you working overtime because nothing is ever set in stone.

 

No it's not...my point was that you can not generalize an entire group of people.....There are plenty of convservetives, usually the more moderates ones, that are in no way like that.

 

You mean there are rockefeller republicans that still exist. I thought they all dissapeared. The very thing that makes a conservative a conservative is the lack to be able to internalize externalities. That is the core of a conservative. We are talking strictly economics of course. If you are talking about social conservatism, then that's a different subject. Economically however, the core instrument of any conservative is the lack of the ability to internalize externalities. Nothing else can explain the thought process of an economic conservative.

 

How would you like it if someone started comparing you to some far left nutjob who blew up a building and killed hundreds becasue they tested animals, simply because you are a liberal and completely disregarding your individuality

 

There are limits to everything, Or at least there should be.

The doctor working double or triple shifts would likely not be working like that forever, He would get a different job I would imagine. Then again, Doctors make a boatload of money for what they do.

If my employer would pay me more money for increased workload, I wouldn't have as much, or maybe any, problem with working more. But, My employer wants me to work harder and longer without increasing my pay.

It's not illegal. It's borderline unethical. But if all employers began to follow the same policies, There wouldn't be anything employees would be able to do to fight these practices.

Right now in the tug-of-war between employers and employees, Employers have way to much rope. If employees are unable to pull more rope back from the employers, Then maybe the government will have to help the employee more. If they don't, The poor, angry, and desperate will go to greater and greater lengths to get what they want, And the level of violence will rise. Not just the violence of the criminals, robbers, and rioters, But of the people that are trying to stop them.

Is that what you want?

Thank you for your time.

 

Government already stuck their nose in the private sector creating all these regulations making it harder for employers to create jobs. And it seems that you're in favor of making it even more difficult for them to create new jobs for people.

Nobody needs that right now.

 

It's not the same thing. The lack of being able to internalize externalities is nothing like what you described. The inablility of someone to cognitively see things from a specific perspective isn't the same as blowing up a building. You are stretching way to far here. If I were to say all conservatives are facist, then you would have a point. But lets compare apples to apples here. There is allways a unifying part of a group of people. Everyone who is A is A because of B, and that's what defines them. I have spent a lot of time studying the sociology of politics so it's not like I just picked that line up out of no where. If you were to say all liberals are egalitarians, then you would atelast be comparing the two parts from an equal point. Using some far off example which doesn't encompass the whole group isn't exaclty fair here.

 

A point you failed to make is that there are very few job openings for the average worker. Most companies are not hiring now, so the only choices workers have are work their fingers to the bone for very little pay, and very little respect from their employees, or don't work at all and starve to death...

 

Sorry, But in my opinion, I disagree.

Are there some regulations which have no practical benefit? Perhaps, It's a distinct possibility.

But environmental regulations and laws that protect the safety of workers, As well as minimum wage, I feel are a needed thing that should be adopted by the whole world, Not just the USA.

We won't survive as a species if we trash our planet, And I wouldn't want to be an employee in a job that paid .20 an hour in a sweatshop environment working 16 hours plus a day.

If all of these laws were done away with, Yes, Employers would have less of a barrier to creating jobs, But we also have to look at other things as well, Such as the quality of life for the average person. Like I said, Lets not race to the bottom. Let's try to elevate as many to the top as we can.

Thank you for your time.

 

Exactly how does safety and environmental keeps businesses from hiring?

You know who is are big proponents of the minimum wage? Labor Unions. Because it protects their high skilled labor from low skilled competition.

You probably don't remember but the minimum wage was 50 cents an hour before and that was worth about $4 dollars today. Our wages today are barely worth higher than that. It only shows that the minimum wage hasn't helped anyone. If it did, what's keeping anyone from increasing it to $10 dollars an hour or $20 dollars for that matter.

Higher wages come from higher productivity and there are no short cuts.

Higher wages come from higher productivity and there are no short cuts. You can't force a company to higher someone at a higher wage if they're going to lose money in the process.

 

Can you please show where you got this from, thank you

 

Too lazy to look through my saved links. This one doesn't go back that far but yes the minimum wage was that low.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774473.html

The nominal rate was around $4 dollars.

 

There is a limit to how productive a human being can be.

What would you recommend that human do when he has reached that limit and cannot find ways to be more productive?

Should the person up and die? Should they live with the scraps they have left? Or should they try and improve their lot in life?

And if they are going to try and improve their lot in life, Wouldn't it be better to have them do so legally, Through trying to get laws passed that benefit them? Or should they resort to crime and violence?

There is a limit to productivity, but there is no limit to greed except what we, as individuals and as a collective, Place on it.

Thank you for your time.

 

Thanks for supplying that, but I actually found the University of Oregon Study that has the graph. The most important graph in the study though isn't the inflated dollars. It's minimum wage as a percentage of poverty. Unfortunately that graph doesn't go back to 1938 like the other graph does so I'm not able to get the information from the graph that I would like. It does show though that in 1967, minimum wage was 90% of the levle of poverty, and in 2007 it was at 59%. Also very interesting is the mimum wage covered. Only a little more than 2% of all workers, in 2004 were making minimum wage. That's the last year of the graph. I wonder what it is now.

 

Um..yeah..nepotism does not = competition. "Networking" being the name of the game can be attributed to less production. Just like government "assistance". I see no difference. It is all still "assistance", and none of it encourages production.