so you think it is ok to allow people to pay to work, but not to pay them less than whatever. there is an arbitrary window that you have closed. 10$ and up is ok, and zero and down is ok, but not right in the middle. all-knowing red has closed this window. so goddamn arbitrary. meant to make you feel good, not meant to help anyone. that the liberal agenda, make the liberal feel good. good intentions is not enough. the fixes you propse are not fixes, they are problems. things are more complicated than you think they are. so let the people involved make the decisions.
Already asked and answered: 1. Employers have had a history of colluding to exploit entry-level labor.2. It is in the best interests of the nation that unskilled labor be able to earn a living wage. Else the taxpayers must assume the burden of their care.3. Businesses are not lining up to pay less than minimum wage! People can not work for less than a living wage.4. In the real world entry-level copy writers make $42,466 a year on average. That's $21.23 an hour. LINK It's not me, foolish boy. Do you actually think I wrote the law decades before I was born? I'm just explaining it . . . as if to a child.
All true, but not the point. The point is you are an unpaid intern, a minimum wage employee, a salaried professional, or a self-made millionaire by choice. No one can force you to stay in your current situation if you want more and your current employer can't or won't give it to you. Equilibrium wage and poverty level are relative terms. My brother just got offered a $60k job in LA. I could live high on the hog in Morgan City on 60k, but he turned it down, because you can't afford to even look at the housing market in LA on that salary. There's a very fine line between regulate and dictate. Maybe that's where you'd like to go. Why don't we have the government regulate that when I increase my prices by 36%, my customers don't have the right to turn me down? Then I can afford the 36% pay increase you want to force on me.
you mean employers? well employees collude too, they are called unions. why dont you favor restricting the upper limit of salaries to stop the unions? i shouldnt ask they because you probably do. there is nothing you do not want to control.
maybe you cant but many people can. the guys that made your phone do and i know people that work for nothing. stop enforcing you personal views on everyone else. you might not want/need to take a job for experience and low pay, but others do. and they really just want you to stay out of their lives. even if you claim to be protecting them. they dont need or want your protection. you protect people in the same sense that kim jong il or castro protects people.
exactly. the market is protecting us. not you. so you are not necessary. stop trying to save us, we dont need it.
and in the real world, people work all the time as unpaid interns that would prefer 5$ an hour. you have their thanks for making that illegal. they thank you from thier tiny apartments and ramen noodles and long commutes. thanks for keeping them away from the 300 a week or whatever that could have really helped.
Likewise no one can offer a wage so low that a person cannot support himself. Look, we are talking about 3% of the full-time working population that makes minimum wage, mostly in fast food and janitorial services. They are unskilled and have no choice but to work at the lowest rates, not because they are being forced, but by circumstance of having to live. The law says that there is a minimum rate that allows someone to do this, that is all. It is NOT an unreasonable rate. It would be difficult if not impossible to logically argue that it is. Exactly. And I'm saying that the entry-level, unskilled jobs sometimes have to go up just like any other salary because cost of living goes up. I have an uncle who once managed the Wal-Mart in Avon, Colorado. He had to get permission from Wal-Mart to offer $10/hour minimums or he simply couldn't staff the place. All those ski resorts around drove up the price of labor. I'm not sure who you are advocating for because no business that I know of is trying to hire people for less than minimum wage. You get what you pay for and less than $7/hours essentially gets you nobody. It may be fine, but it ain't invisible. Don't try to put words in my mouth. I force nothing on you but some facts you dislike.
If businesses are paying above minimum wage then that is proof of the ineffectiveness of price controls and the effectiveness of free markets. It is proof skillless workers don't need BigBrother55 telling employers what they have to pay.
You advocate the government forcing something on me I can't afford. If the government tells me I have to give those people a 36% raise, the minimum wage earners in my place will not get more green, the will get pink slips, and I'll find a way to get their jobs done without them. My business is losing money right now, we are not some big, greedy corporation trying to maximize profits on the backs of underpaid workers. The best thing that can happen for my business would be for the USSC to strike down Obamacare tomorrow. If that happens, the businesses in this area who are sitting on their cash reserves out of fear might actually start spending money again. Then I will gladly give those people raises, because they work hard and deserve it, because I want to give them raises, and because I will be able to afford to. The Dems won't have to tell me to do it.
