A Just Minimum Wage

[dairygirl4u2c]

the two theories that are the basis of my economic disposition are the following from my past threads.
i am aware of the flaws and limits of my arguments, but, i think the following shows there are flaws in justice with simply thinking let economics dictate, given our artificial society.

[quote]it's all about entitlement. what is everyone entitled to. whatever you work for, sure, to an extent. look at the indians. naturally, the indians should be able to roam free and grow things, but we with our artificial laws deprive them of God's bounty. i agree to an extent that God gives a certain amount that is inherently ours, and then some. the land you farm is yours and if you farm a lot it's yours. but with our technology, and fake laws, people start claiming and taking more. the indians can't farm and the poor can't take a basic share.
we've created an artificial society, but we should at least recognize it as such and allow people to have a basic amount. i don't claim to know what that is, but it should be something he can pull himself up from, not peanuts. "pull yourself up from your bootstraps" what if you have no bootstraps to pull yourself up from?

also, take the idea of a giant. he makes the masses fight for a good job. someone will be stuck at the bottom. does that mean they should have less than the minimum? sure evolution theory. but if they are willing to work 40 a week for a year they should at least get a minimum.[/quote]

[quote]we could ensure that everyone got entitled an amount of land. but that would not be good as people would not like it, so monetary is an alternative. plus many people can't farm as our society is artifically not farming. so we have to recognize people are the consequence of our structure and switch from land thinking to other thinking.

i agree you're forcibly taking what's anothers, but you're also forcibly preventing people with laws and technology acccess to God's bounty. you may say... well they have that right, first in line etc. but i don't think they do. i think when it comes down to it, others have a right to take what you're using in excess to an extent. if we prevent them, we should make up for it in our laws. like i won't call that charity giving to them, i also wouldn't call it stealing from the other person. it's "justice"

if a rich man were to be in primitive earth and there was a farm of people, and the giant and the means to take and own everything, he'd argue it's his as he's got the mean and the law (of man). there's land simply sitting there waiting for the family to branch off into, but they an't take it, according to the law of man. the law of God is that they can because the guy's claim is artificial. it's not "stealing". it's taking what God has given everyone.[/quote]


now, i realize that society itself is the perpetrator in my theories, and in a sense i shouldn't focus on the lowly businessman. in a sense, they are some of the last. but, i justify it as they are a part of society and are rich enough for a business, so they should at least be rich enough to pay substantially, and if they cna't then tough.
i'm an advocate of the rich paying more than a flat tax, so the lowly businessman isn't hurt as bad. and, i'm an advocate of giving tax credits to those who pay around minimum wage. while adjusting laws to the effect that they aren't manipluating that system too much.


there are several compoents to sound economic system that you have to build into the system.... freedom to fail, personal responsibility, but also the giant problem of the theories i described, and some other things i had thought of but can't remember.


and if you think the theories are just too complicated, do you agree there is a problem presented? and if so, how would you address the problem?

[dairygirl4u2c]

jobs like mcdonald's can afford to pay it, so they should have to. jobs like picking dandilions can't afford to so they shouldn't have to.
the job from mcdonald's would pay beans if they weren't forced to pay more when justice dictates they should give

now, i also realize in a sense that all employers should have to pay more, but i am conservative in that i don't go there even though i probably could. i just speak out for the minimum as they need the voice. grace for them and not everyone else doesnt mean i'm being unjust necessarily, sitation similar to what Jesus often talked about.

there are many logical conclusions and difficulties given my ideas, but i think that's life. it's better to embrace the complication than not at the expense of justice.

[adt6247]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1367876' date='Aug 22 2007, 12:45 PM']jobs like mcdonald's can afford to pay it, so they should have to. jobs like picking dandilions can't afford to so they shouldn't have to.
the job from mcdonald's would pay beans if they weren't forced to pay more when justice dictates they should give[/quote]
Wrong -- in most states, McDonald's pays above the minimum wage. In my area, you can get like $7.50 an hour starting from McDonald's. In New York City, it's $9.

It costs different amounts of money to live in different places. Very, very few people get the minimum wage. Most people that do, only do so for less than 6 months.

There should be no minimum wage. It interferes with both the operation of business by small business owners, and it makes it harder for people to get jobs to start out in life.

[dairygirl4u2c]

if no one was paid minimum wage, and a law regulated it, then there's be no problem. but, there are people who are paid minimum wage.

other than the fact you've stated your position after pointing out the variation, i don't see your point.

[adt6247]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1367924' date='Aug 22 2007, 01:53 PM']if no one was paid minimum wage, and a law regulated it, then there's be no problem. but, there are people who are paid minimum wage.

other than the fact you've stated your position after pointing out the variation, i don't see your point.[/quote]
The point is, there's no need for a minimum wage. MOST PEOPLE don't get the minimum wage. Some people do for a SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. Why would it not be OK to pay people below this minimum in some industries where they want to hire on a probational or temporary period?

Or, why is it that salaried, or "exempt" employees can make below the minimum wage?

In a free society, a just wage is any wage someone is willing to work for.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]Why would it not be OK to pay people below this minimum in some industries where they want to hire on a probational or temporary period?[/quote]

for the reasons i stated above. they are taking advantage of the fact there are so many people. and then paying less than they should because of that. and the whole time, they are not even necessarily entitled to the freedom to pay whatever. as i've explained above.

i think it'd be more effective for you to show how my ideas are flaw instead of stating the party line and a little party line rhetoric.

[adt6247]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1367934' date='Aug 22 2007, 02:01 PM']for the reasons i stated above. they are taking advantage of the fact there are so many people. and then paying less than they should because of that. and the whole time, they are not even necessarily entitled to the freedom to pay whatever. as i've explained above.

i think it'd be more effective for you to show how my ideas are flaw instead of stating the party line and a little party line rhetoric.[/quote]
What party line? I don't belong to or endorse any political party. I'm a die-hard monarchist.

Your premises are flawed because we are free to reject bad offers. Period. My last job wasn't paying me what I was worth. I took it because I had to prove myself in the industry before getting a better job. Then I got a better job. This is the way it should be.

The government isn't our nanny -- it shouldn't be watching out for us to make sure we don't screw up or do something stupid. It should protect us from force and fraud, and not do much else.

[Roamin Catholic]

from an economic stand point, any restriction on business is a bad thing..The market will dictate what you will be paid.

McDonalds for instance, most the workers are kids, do they really need to be making 10$/hr? They don't have the skill set yet to be making that money. Once they get some experience, they can move on to something better.

A job pays you for your skills, some jobs take no skills to perform, those pay less. A DR requires skill and they get paid accourdingly..

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that there shouldn't be any minimum wage

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]The government isn't our nanny -- it shouldn't be watching out for us to make sure we don't screw up or do something stupid. It should protect us from force and fraud, and not do much else.[/quote]

the argument isn't that they are watching out for our mistakes. the argument is that if you work the job then you derserve the minimum. the argument is that the government is watching out for the circumstances that have developed.... people being denied God's bounty by manmade laws and technology.

[adt6247]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1367945' date='Aug 22 2007, 02:21 PM']the argument isn't that they are watching out for our mistakes. the argument is that if you work the job then you derserve the minimum. the argument is that the government is watching out for the circumstances that have developed.... people being denied God's bounty by manmade laws and technology.[/quote]
How can the government determine how much money a job is worth? Answer: they can't. That price is determined by the market.

The minimum wage is a man-made law that has no basis in the natural law.

If you are frugal, in all but the most expensive areas, the minimum wage can be a living wage. You'll have to do without eating out, without a car, etc. A friend of mine came up with a way that a person can live on a minimum wage job for life AND save for retirement. [url="http://www.hobbitmanor.com/thesoapbox/?p=1179"]Click here[/url] for more info.

The point is, we see things as necessities that aren't necessities -- car, TV, cell phones, air conditioning, etc. Other than medical technology, if it didn't exist 500 years ago, it isn't a necessity. People that fall below the poverty line in this country still have televisions and telephones and the like. I'm sorry, but that isn't poverty. That's whining.

[Era Might]

Not having a minimum wage (and other labor laws) is a recipe for mass exploitation. All work requires something: the ability of someone to do the work. Even if it is manual labor, it still requires them to be able to handle that physical labor, a skill which a doctor may not have (not everyone is physically able to be a furniture mover, for example). If someone is starving they will take fifty cents an hour to do back breaking work for long hours. The government has a duty to prevent that.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]from an economic stand point, any restriction on business is a bad thing..The market will dictate what you will be paid.

McDonalds for instance, most the workers are kids, do they really need to be making 10$/hr? They don't have the skill set yet to be making that money. Once they get some experience, they can move on to something better.

A job pays you for your skills, some jobs take no skills to perform, those pay less. A DR requires skill and they get paid accourdingly..

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that there shouldn't be any minimum wage[/quote]

i don't see you responding to my points. at least in a way that negates them so that i can finally see.
the job is worth what a minimum wage would pay. the only reason they are not being paid that much is because of the masses of people. also, mcdonald's isn't necessarily justified to pay whatever the market dictates given the artificial society we've created that overlooks justice.

[dairygirl4u2c]

thank you era. and for more than just moral reasons alone, but for reasoned justice reasons.

[quote]How can the government determine how much money a job is worth? Answer: they can't. That price is determined by the market.

The minimum wage is a man-made law that has no basis in the natural law.

If you are frugal, in all but the most expensive areas, the minimum wage can be a living wage. You'll have to do without eating out, without a car, etc. A friend of mine came up with a way that a person can live on a minimum wage job for life AND save for retirement. Click here for more info.

The point is, we see things as necessities that aren't necessities -- car, TV, cell phones, air conditioning, etc. Other than medical technology, if it didn't exist 500 years ago, it isn't a necessity. People that fall below the poverty line in this country still have televisions and telephones and the like. I'm sorry, but that isn't poverty. That's whining[/quote].

the government can at least set the wage such that the lowest state can be had at a mcdonalds sort of rate. the states that pay more as you said wont be bothered by it. the very few jobs that exist outside that should be paid less for various reasons can be made exceptions.
the system we have shows all minimums typicaly thought of desreve at least minimum.

i believe you that your friend could have made it on that wage. you're actually making my point more than yours. she got by on that wage, but without the minium she woudnt have ad that opportunity. i'm not necessarily arguing that we should increase the wages, just that they should exist.
there's also the idea of disparity of wealth, such that if you could live off peanuts, to live off peanuts when you could live off the basics very basics of that society, such as basic medical care daily food decent shelter etc. we don't live in africa ya know.

Edited August 22, 2007 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

i would like someone who is against my ideas directly respond ot the hypotheticals of the indians, and of the idea that we are preventing people from access that they would otherwise have.

if you think that's just the way it is, that's okay, but say it.

[Cure of Ars]

If the objective is to help the poor then there are more efficient ways of doing this than increasing the minimum wage. Having an earned income tax credit would be one example. Increasing the minimum wage is not very efficient because it helps those who are not poor along with the poor. High school kids working summer jobs and people who have spouses that make a lot of money would be examples. To help the poor you want them to have jobs. Increasing the minimum wage discourages business from hiring people and this should be avoided. This is my view anyway. In our current economy I don’t even know if an earned income tax credit is needed because there is a high demand for labor in the US. This could change with globalization.