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.
NOt envy.. GREED... I got my monsters confused..LOL and the proof of corporate greed is obvious...
You seem to be rather confused.
The PURPOSE of being in business is to make money. Yes, even the greedy liberals in business are trying to get rich.
I'm guessing you've never run a business, so you really have no idea what it's like to make the decisions on how to stay in business and keep your margins sane, so that your long term prospects stay good.
But you sure do morally condemn others... for what you don't understand.
Here's a clue... I don't decide these things on how I "feel".
I know the market sets the value of labor. And that unskilled labor has very little value today. It's relative value is about the same as it always was. It's just that our cost of living has exploded and the value of what we do has had to increase to match... thus, those without valuable labor are in dire straits.
The real solution is to lower the cost of living, by ending mandates, costly regulation, etc.
That's the big corporations.
You're lumping small business and regional business with the likes of Goldman Sachs.
Not every business owner makes 400% of what they pay their employees.
400% is about correct, and average. That's obviously a ratio of 1:4. Not crazy for someone running the entire operation. I think that poster wanted to, or meant to say, 1:400 ratio which allows them to argue against a straw man.
Having said that, you do not need to agree to work for the minimum wage. You can certainly demand a higher pay but the problem is that there may not be anybody to accept your demand because within your labor market, plenty people are more than willing to do the job at or below the minimum wage.
Going right to the actual point that none of the minimum wage zealots want to address - if a person is worth paying more than $10 an hour, then they'd already be paid more than $10 an hour.
It's not really complicated. We, as a society, value things differently.
The simple fact is that there are lots of job that are only valued at $5-8 an hour. Typically these are either part time jobs that pay that low because it's dumping things off a small business owner's to-do list, usually some form of grunt/rote/repetition thing, or it is high volume, low profit margin business that has a lot of menial tasks that need to be performed, like the grocery store shelf stocker, vegetable/fruit picker, finished good assembly line worker, etc. These jobs have massive pools of available QUALIFIED labor, since all can be learned in under a day, and have a relatively fixed supply based on national or regional consumerism. The employer for these kinds of jobs figures on high turnover and doesn't care because they know the size of the available pool of labor.
Society will always have these kinds of jobs, unless you make it illegal for them to be done profitably, which is exactly what minimum wage laws do. Nobody forces anyone to hold these jobs. Nobody forces them to work for the wage they work for. Nobody forces anyone to never advance their own skills and employability. Etc etc.
If you are worth more than $10 an hour, you are already being paid more than that. Period.
400% is about correct, and average. That's obviously a ratio of 1:4. Not crazy for someone running the entire operation. I think that poster wanted to, or meant to say, 1:400 ratio which allows them to argue against a straw man.
If I can continue to have my job, salary and bonus, I don't care if my CEO makes 100,000 times of my salary. It's none of my business. Even if it were for whatever odd reason, the CEO is the one driving the company and I can't do his/her job, why should I even have an opinion about how the CEO should be compensated?
But if I can do the job better than the current CEO, hell yeah, I'll have an opinion and probably propose to take it over.
Here's a clue... I don't decide these things on how I "feel".
I know the market sets the value of labor. And that unskilled labor has very little value today. It's relative value is about the same as it always was. It's just that our cost of living has exploded and the value of what we do has had to increase to match... thus, those without valuable labor are in dire straits.
The real solution is to lower the cost of living, by ending mandates, costly regulation, etc.
That's a very vague "real solution" that you're offering. How does "ending mandates, costly regulations, etc." "lower the cost of living"?
Going right to the actual point that none of the minimum wage zealots want to address - if a person is worth paying more than $10 an hour, then they'd already be paid more than $10 an hour.
It's not really complicated. We, as a society, value things differently.
The simple fact is that there are lots of job that are only valued at $5-8 an hour. Typically these are either part time jobs that pay that low because it's dumping things off a small business owner's to-do list, usually some form of grunt/rote/repetition thing, or it is high volume, low profit margin business that has a lot of menial tasks that need to be performed, like the grocery store shelf stocker, vegetable/fruit picker, finished good assembly line worker, etc. These jobs have massive pools of available QUALIFIED labor, since all can be learned in under a day, and have a relatively fixed supply based on national or regional consumerism. The employer for these kinds of jobs figures on high turnover and doesn't care because they know the size of the available pool of labor.
Society will always have these kinds of jobs, unless you make it illegal for them to be done profitably, which is exactly what minimum wage laws do. Nobody forces anyone to hold these jobs. Nobody forces them to work for the wage they work for. Nobody forces anyone to never advance their own skills and employability. Etc etc.
If you are worth more than $10 an hour, you are already being paid more than that. Period.
But I deserve to be paid more! If you don't pay me more, I am going to vote for the Democrats and they will force you to pay me more!
That's a very vague "real solution" that you're offering. How does "ending mandates, costly regulations, etc." "lower the cost of living"?
For example, removing the minimum wage requirement. By doing that, you would bring a tons of jobs to Americans. Since the labor cost is now much lower, the cost of living will drop significantly.
For example, removing the minimum wage requirement. By doing that, you would bring a tons of jobs to Americans. Since the labor cost is now much lower, the cost of living will drop significantly.
We already tried not having a minimum wage in this country. Go read up on it, then get back to me.
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.
