1) Then the next words out of employers mouths are how they cannot find anyone willing to work for that wage. Please send us some illegal aliens to employ. Thank you very much. Now Americans - shove off in your own country and economy.Originally Posted by Sh0t
Being in the computer field, I have become deeply aware of this argument where the employer wants to set one wage and the skilled want to set another. So then the employer unbalances the market by importing new labor. That is some bullshit.
2) Costs for them to live... good way to shutdown an economic system if it doesn't cover living expenses. In fact, it is a good way to create anarchy.
Individual employers might not be responsible for a workers ability to live, but the system should be. If not, then the system is not working for people, and if it isn't working for people - then there is no reason to be a part of that system. If one is not part of the system, then it is a free-for-all and that has it's own problems.
1) To make it worth the employee's time.If your productivity is only worth 5 bucks an hour to the firm, why should they pay you 10 bucks an hour? That would be ridiculous and that company would quickly be out of business. THe price system in labor is extremely important. It gives a very clear signal: these jobs are NOT that valuable to consumers, so do something else if you want to make more money(and better serve others).
2) If the value of the labor is so diminitive, then perhaps it should be scratched out of the company. Obviously it is not economically important to the company.
In other words, if it is that important to them, they will pay the price for it. I have certainly needed something and came away grumbling as a consumer - well - employers are consumers of skill and labor and sometimes there is a minimum price for something to make it worth while.
I'll ask that of a below minimum wage worker and see if they think it hurts or helps. I'll bet I know what the answer is.The last thing the poor need is to have jobs outlawed due to the above. Instead of minimum wages, those concerned should promote abolishing the Fed, a real step that would help the poor tremendously as they pay the most by taxation via inflation. Minimum wage laws hurt the very people they are obstensible supposed to help: the marginal workers.
As far as the Fed, put down Jekyll Island and read up on Hamilton and why it really went into place.
Partial agreement. I wouldn't say it subsidizes machines.Minimum wage is also a way to subsidize mechanization and automation. If I have a choice between buying a machine that can perform a job, or hire 2-3 peolpe to perform a job, I will weigh what it will cost versus what my profit will be. If the government comes in and says that now i am FORCED to pay those workers more than my projection, I will simply skip them and just get the machine(it has become relatively cheaper compared to the human workers).
Some would say it is a protective law.The purpose of a minimum is VERY clear: all it does is outlaw wage contracts below a certain level, period. That's it. It is a purely prohibitive law.







Bookmarks