Big Country Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 In today's America, are minimum wage laws needed? Won't the "market" determine what a fair price is for services rendered? Does setting the artificial floor on labor costs inflate the end cost to consumers, thus, any increase in a minimum wage is generally offset by an increase in the price of consumer goods? Just curious what views are on this subject given the wide variety of views on labor unions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Who cares if you think they are "needed", my premise is this: What right does the government have to interfere in a contract between two consenting adults (illegalities excepted, of course)? And if someone does think they're needed, then where does it end? How about everyone gets an annual salary of $100k? Wouldn't that take care of most folks? If $5.75 is good, $100K is better, right? So why not $250K? Where does it end? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Who cares if you think they are "needed", my premise is this: What right does the government have to interfere in a contract between two consenting adults (illegalities excepted, of course)? And if someone does think they're needed, then where does it end? How about everyone gets an annual salary of $100k? Wouldn't that take care of most folks? If $5.75 is good, $100K is better, right? So why not $250K? Where does it end? at 250 K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Who cares if you think they are "needed", my premise is this: What right does the government have to interfere in a contract between two consenting adults (illegalities excepted, of course)? And if someone does think they're needed, then where does it end? How about everyone gets an annual salary of $100k? Wouldn't that take care of most folks? If $5.75 is good, $100K is better, right? So why not $250K? Where does it end? It ends at the absolute base cost of staying alive as befits a society aspiring to be called civilized. Projections to $100k et al are simply fatuous. If the minimum wage increase has affected prices, I'd like to see some evidence. I still see the 99c menu at the fast food joints, I don't see the price of the cleaners contract at my place of work going up......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 The minimum wage is useless. Nobody makes minimum wage unless they are still in high school, or are semi-retired working part time. We have a construction company, and there isn't a single person we employ that makes less than $10.00 per hour. That is where they start, and if they are any good, they get a raise with in six weeks, and if they don't get a raise they get fired because they weren't any good. The only real purpose for raising the minimum wage is that union contracts are tied to the minimum wage, so if the the party that the unions contribute the most to, can raise the minimum wage, it just increase the size of the donation that they get in the next election cycle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffeeman Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 (See my union input on the other 2 threads) I don't know about a minimum wage, but at the risk of sounding like a pinko commie, how about the concept of a maximum wage? One of my former employers (a small, family-owned S-corp) capped the salary of the top officers at 7 times the lowest full-time worker's $. Since he was the Pres/CEO, this meant him too. The excess profits caused by this policy, if any, were to be shared with the whole company - part of the 50% of all profits that was distributed back to all workers. If the officers wanted a decent raise, everyone had to get one (well, at least the receptionist!) Quarterly results were shared in detail in a standing meeting/party, with no questions considered off limits. You'll notice that the other 50% of any 'extra' profits generated by the increased happiness of the employees, of course, went to him and his family, as their rightful portion of the rewards for their initial investment risk. Not to mention he put in twice as many hours as anyone else; and from about age 65 to 75 he 'retired' many times only to come back, over and over, to rescue the company from the incompetence of the newly empowered Pres/CEO. The 2 of them I witnessed during my time there, anyway. I'm biased toward this generous man, (no, not my father but a good friend/mentor,) but I think he is a good example of how to do it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.