A Just Minimum Wage

[Apotheoun]

To those of us who are "working poor," this is simply an invisible tax increase placed upon us, because the cost of daily necessities will go up.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1368502' date='Aug 22 2007, 10:41 PM']You could say that about any law, though.[/quote]

lol! ya, you're right

[abercius24]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1368505' date='Aug 22 2007, 10:43 PM']To those of us who are "working poor," this is simply an invisible tax increase placed upon us, because the cost of daily necessities will go up.[/quote]

I would suggest to you that the natural course of human greed is the real cause of the inflation problem. And the masters of human greed are the rich and powerful. Gas prices and transportation costs have a stronger relationship with inflation than probably any other statistical indicator today. And as far as I know, the minimum wage has nothing to do with the supply chains of the Oil and Transportation Industries. I know the rich are the cause of the housing inflation in California! Who else can afford to buy a $600,000 3-bedroom home?

Edited August 23, 2007 by abercius24

[Apotheoun]

Steve,

I would suggest to you that a paternalistic and bureaucratic government is itself a form of greed.

God bless,
Todd

P.S. - I enjoyed the discussions we had many years ago on AOL.

[abercius24]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1368536' date='Aug 22 2007, 11:11 PM']I would suggest to you that a paternalistic and bureaucratic government is itself a form of greed.[/quote]

Amen to that! That's where my conservative side would agree with you!


[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1368536' date='Aug 22 2007, 11:11 PM']P.S. - I enjoyed the discussions we had many years ago on AOL.[/quote]

That's so funny! I thought I recognized your name! That was a while back when I first got into evangelization on the internet. I was a lot more reckless and zealous back then! I'm surprised you remember that! That was when XXsaskeXX, Popeye474, Pseudoareopagite, SocratesMG, and JWKing used to hang out with us!

[Apotheoun]

Yes, I was PseudoAreopagite (a.k.a PseudoDionysios), and later became Apotheoun, which is the screen name that I have used since at least 2003.

[kateri05]

just a note for those arguing against a minimum wage and for an unrestricted capitalist system, the Church disagrees. the Church's social teaching is pretty clear about the need for a JUST wage, which must also be enough to live on. also, the Church states that the government needs to help to provide for conditions that make it possible for labor to be protected.

[quote][b]Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family[/b], and of serving the human community.

2430 Economic life brings into play different interests, often opposed to one another. This explains why the conflicts that characterize it arise.216 Efforts should be made to reduce these conflicts by negotiation that respects the rights and duties of each social partner: those responsible for business enterprises, representatives of wage- earners (for example, trade unions), and public authorities when appropriate.

[b]2431 The responsibility of the state.[/b] "Economic activity, especially the activity of a market economy, cannot be conducted in an institutional, juridical, or political vacuum. On the contrary, it presupposes sure guarantees of individual freedom and private property, as well as a stable currency and efficient public services. Hence the principal task of the state is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labors and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly. . . . Another task of the state is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this area belongs not to the state but to individuals and to the various groups and associations which make up society."217

2432 Those responsible for business enterprises are responsible to society for the economic and ecological effects of their operations.218 They have an obligation to consider the good of persons and not only the increase of profits. Profits are necessary, however. They make possible the investments that ensure the future of a business and they guarantee employment.

[b]2434 A just wage is the legitimate fruit of work.[/b] To refuse or withhold it can be a grave injustice.221 In determining fair pay both the needs and the contributions of each person must be taken into account. "[b]Remuneration for work should guarantee man the opportunity to provide a [i]dignified livelihood for himself and his family on the material, social, cultural and spiritual level[/i][u][/u], taking into account the role and the productivity of each, the state of the business, and the common good."[/b]222 Agreement between the parties is not sufficient to justify morally the amount to be received in wages.[/quote]

i think the part about "dignified livelihood" for self and family is significant in light of people's assumption that is indeed possible to live on the minimum wage. and i'm not talking live with ipods, cellphones and cable. i'm talking pay rent, health insurance, car insurance and gas, food, clothes and heat. and not live in gang territory. which by the way, isn't too much to ask. you don't need to live in beverly hills, but i don't think its unfair or unreasonable to not want to live in South Central.

i live in los angeles and we have a HIGHER than federal minimum wage and you STILL couldn't live on it here.

[abercius24]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1368567' date='Aug 22 2007, 11:36 PM']Yes, I was PseudoAreopagite (a.k.a PseudoDionysios), and later became Apotheoun, which is the screen name that I have used since at least 2003.[/quote]

You're multiple screennames would throw me sometimes. That's funny! You helped me setup the Research Page at CatholicQandA.com. It's very popular now!

I'm going to send you a message before we get accused of highjacking the thread! :-)

Edited August 23, 2007 by abercius24

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='kateri05' post='1368570' date='Aug 22 2007, 11:38 PM']just a note for those arguing against a minimum wage and for an unrestricted capitalist system, the Church disagrees.[/quote]

Maybe you should re-read that quote that you posted. # 2431, "The responsibility of the state" reads:
"[b]Economic activity, especially the activity of a market economy, cannot be conducted in an institutional, juridical, or political vacuum. On the contrary, it presupposes sure guarantees of individual freedom and private property, as well as a stable currency and efficient public services. Hence the principal task of the state is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labors and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly. . . . Another task of the state is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this area belongs not to the state but to individuals and to the various groups and associations which make up society.[/b]"

What is suggested is the opposite of government regulation of private businesses. And that is exactly what government mandated wages are.
Also, note that the areas of the world where the most people are cared for, where the most people are fed and employed happen to be the same areas where the most economic freedom exist. There is something to this thing called freedom.

Businesses are not faceless entities, but people making a living and enabling others to partake in that. Entrepreneurship is a vocation.

Edited August 23, 2007 by Lounge Daddy

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='abercius24' post='1368575' date='Aug 22 2007, 09:44 PM']You're multiple screennames would throw me sometimes. That's funny! You helped me setup the Research Page at CatholicQandA.com. It's very popular now!

I'm going to send you a message before we get accused of highjacking the thread! :-)[/quote]
I still have a link to your webpage on my own little geocities site.

[Lounge Daddy]

btw - it happens that Father Sirico ran an editorial in the Detroit News about government fixed wage laws titled: "Minimum wage laws create victims among the vulnerable"

It's worth reading. Check it out [url="http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070814/OPINION01/708140306/1008"][HERE][/url]

[kateri05]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1368581' date='Aug 22 2007, 09:57 PM']Maybe you should re-read that quote that you posted. # 2431, "The responsibility of the state" reads:
"[b]Economic activity, especially the activity of a market economy, cannot be conducted in an institutional, juridical, or political vacuum. On the contrary, it presupposes sure guarantees of individual freedom and private property, as well as a stable currency and efficient public services. Hence the principal task of the state is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labors and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly. . . . Another task of the state is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this area belongs not to the state but to individuals and to the various groups and associations which make up society.[/b]"

What is suggested is the opposite of government regulation of private businesses. And that is exactly what government mandated wages are.
Also, note that the areas of the world where the most people are cared for, where the most people are fed and employed happen to be the same areas where the most economic freedom exist. There is something to this thing called freedom.

Businesses are not faceless entities, but people making a living and enabling others to partake in that. Entrepreneurship is a vocation.[/quote]

it does say that the private responsbility belongs to the businesses, and i wasn't disagreeing with that. however, it also says that the government is to ensure that they do what they're supposed to.

i'm not advocating socialism or anything of the kind, but in case you've forgotten, america already tried unrestricted capitalism and the children factories and monopolies that resulted weren't exactly positive outcomes. i actually am a proponent of LESS government, but i think a legitimate government function is to make sure that labor is protected, because frankly, concupiscence and original sin ensures that lots of businesses and individuals will NOT do the right thing. look at the outsourcing going on (which i'm not opposed to, i'm just using it as an example), simply because companies look at the bottom line before anything else.

i think the best proof of original sin affected how employers treat their employees is that i've experienced, at more than one job, unjust treatment of labor, and i have ONLY EVER WORKED FOR THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. i won't even get into unjust wages, because frankly, noone is working for MOther Church for the dough , but i'm talking about individuals treating other individuals poorly and unjustly because the bottom line mattered more. this happend in a parish setting, for the archdiocese herself, and at a private catholic school.

forgot minimum wage and government regs, i'd be satisfied if the local Church, as an employer, upheld her own rich, beautiful social teachings!

[abercius24]

[quote name='kateri05' post='1368598' date='Aug 23 2007, 12:16 AM']it does say that the private responsbility belongs to the businesses, and i wasn't disagreeing with that. however, it also says that the government is to ensure that they do what they're supposed to.

i'm not advocating socialism or anything of the kind, but in case you've forgotten, america already tried unrestricted capitalism and the children factories and monopolies that resulted weren't exactly positive outcomes. i actually am a proponent of LESS government, but i think a legitimate government function is to make sure that labor is protected, because frankly, concupiscence and original sin ensures that lots of businesses and individuals will NOT do the right thing. look at the outsourcing going on (which i'm not opposed to, i'm just using it as an example), simply because companies look at the bottom line before anything else.

i think the best proof of original sin affected how employers treat their employees is that i've experienced, at more than one job, unjust treatment of labor, and i have ONLY EVER WORKED FOR THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. i won't even get into unjust wages, because frankly, noone is working for MOther Church for the dough , but i'm talking about individuals treating other individuals poorly and unjustly because the bottom line mattered more. this happend in a parish setting, for the archdiocese herself, and at a private catholic school.

forgot minimum wage and government regs, i'd be satisfied if the local Church, as an employer, upheld her own rich, beautiful social teachings! [/quote]

Very true. Unless you've been blessed with unequalled skills (which I believe can only account for maybe 5% of the population) or if you're rich, you are subject to the rules of the job market. These rules, I might add, are entirely set by businesses in a manner similar to that of an oligopoly.

Consider that most businesses now require background checks, credit reports and drug tests after at least 2 or 3 interviews. Can you imagine going to a luggage store and having to put up with similar requirements before you could qualify to purchase their luggage? Or how about jumping through the same hoops to buy a house? Why is the job market this way? Because they have ALL the bargaining power. It's not two equal market forces meeting each other in the middle. It's John and Jane Smallville against a highly-networked, well-oiled, well-financed, well-trained Corporate machine that intentionally colludes with other businesses to keep potential job candidates ignorant of all that factors that work within the job market. Your HR interviewer knows the going rate for the job, but he/she will never tell it to you. Nor will any HR group share that information with you unless you pay for it! All the information about the job market on the worker's side is ambiguous and many times misleading. This picture nowhere near meets the requirements for a free-market society. Given this imbalance of power and market knowledge, workers must depend on the government to keep businesses from tipping the scales too far in their favor. Just as the government must use anti-trust laws to keep the abusive nature of monopolies and oligopolies in check, the government must also use labor laws to keep the imbalance of the job market in check.

So I would disagree that labor laws fall into the category of "paternalistic" actions by the government. It would take a great deal of effort by the government before they could get anywhere near pushing employers beyond what would otherwise be market equilibrium.

[Anomaly]

LOL. It's funny that despite evidence to the contrary, some people insist that minimum wage is required by either the Church, or via opinoin without fact, that companies will always take advantage of the worker.

Please provide some sort of evidence that shows the majority of employers take advantage of employees.