Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What does the private sector do to promote increased wages?
It seems to me that it would be in the best interests of the American worker to stop having so many children... which leads to having a glut of workers, and asking congress and the president to greatly lessen the numbers of foreigners wanting to become US citizens.
The main problem now is too many workers, and not enough decent jobs to go around. And employers being able to find people willing to work for lower wages. But if there were a shortage of workers, then the employers would have to pay higher wages in order to have enough employees.
And what is the solution then ? How do you make employers pay you more ?
Communism comes to mind with government taking over business and doling out those "fair wages".
That's the only way I can see it happening..by force.
Do you see any middle ground between 10/90 split and a 50/50 split?
It seems to me that it would be in the best interests of the American worker to stop having so many children... which leads to having a glut of workers, and asking congress and the president to greatly lessen the numbers of foreigners wanting to become US citizens.
The main problem now is too many workers, and not enough decent jobs to go around. And employers being able to find people willing to work for lower wages. But if there were a shortage of workers, then the employers would have to pay higher wages in order to have enough employees.
In theory, you're right. That is a way to put upward pressure on wages. But it's not realistic.
Do you see any middle ground between 10/90 split and a 50/50 split?
Owners and anyone higher up on the business food chain is entitle to make whatever.
I got a salary and yearly raises. If I wasn't happy with it I would have left for greener pastures.
That is the concept of job hopping you know.
But when you're a burger flipper you don't job hop for better money because what you get is what you get.
No skills gets min wage.
Owners and anyone higher up on the business food chain is entitle to make whatever.
I got a salary and yearly raises. If I wasn't happy with it I would have left for greener pastures.
That is the concept of job hopping you know.
But when you're a burger flipper you don't job hop for better money because what you get is what you get.
No skills gets min wage.
How many people do you think are just as qualified as you that would be willing to do your job for less?
Adam Smith spoke on the subject rather eloquently. But then, since he never believed in existence of "free market", he cannot be anything but a socialist, who makes a case for labor unions here as a counter-measure. Relevant excerpts:
What are the common wages of labour, depends everywhere upon the contract usually made between those two parties, whose interests are by no means the same. The workmen desire to get as much, the masters to give as little as possible. The former are disposed to combine in order to raise, the latter in order to lower the wages of labour.
:
The masters, being fewer in number, can combine much more easily; and the law, besides, authorizes, or at least does not prohibit their combinations, while it prohibits those of the workmen. We have no acts of parliament against combining to lower the price of work; but many against combining to raise it.
:
We rarely hear, it has been said, of the combinations of masters, though frequently of those of workmen. But whoever imagines, upon this account, that masters rarely combine, is as ignorant of the world as of the subject.
Practically the essence of why servitude to the masters requires that labor be weakened. And it isn't just business, it is also business using politics. To quote Winston Churchill...
"[Mussolini is a] Roman genius... the greatest lawgiver among men"
Those who want higher wages should bring skills that are high in demand....if someone brings minimal skills to a job, why would their wages go up at a similar rate as someone with a high demand skill or product? Thats crazy, so I should pay an increase in % wages for some one who sweeps floors as someone who develops the next new product that millions want to buy? Sure we need folks who perform manual labor, but the supply of those who can do that is high, but the supply of a braniac engineer is low....so I am sure the wage increase of the engineer will be disproportional to the person in manual labor.
So it sounds like the OP wants it to be "fair" and ask the employer to provide, similar, but equal pay raises...
How many people do you think are just as qualified as you that would be willing to do your job for less?
My job went to India when I retired.
Probably at about $30K(USD) per year.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
