Should HUGE companies be forced to pay a living wage?

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

Agree with everyone, you shouldn't legislate how money is dispersed within a company. Perfect case for unionization...

So the union should decide how the money is dispersed in the company?

[tucker6]

If you want a living wage then get educated or trained on your own dime. Quit asking for a handout you lazy SOB. Decisions have consequences. Working at McD at age 30 required many poor decisions, and I shouldn't have to pay for them.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

Agree with everyone, you shouldn't legislate how money is dispersed within a company. Perfect case for unionization...

Oh, so force it but not legislate it?

[davew]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

So the union should decide how the money is dispersed in the company?

no, the union decides what wages and benefits every employee ?deserves? and what cost of living raises they should get

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by davew

Bernie Sanders feels these companies should be charges for their employee 'government assistance'. What do you think?

From an open letter to Tucker Carlson regarding his recent interview with The Bern. The letter is from Don Boudreaux, an economist who really understands markets, both labor and trade markets.

Mr. Tucker Carlson
Fox News
Mr. Carlson:
Yesterday you agreed with Bernie Sanders that corporations that employ workers who receive government welfare benefits are subsidized by taxpayers. You are mistaken. These workers’ wages are low because they produce too little value per hour while on the job to enable them to earn enough to escape eligibility for welfare benefits. Their wages aren’t low because they receive welfare benefits.

To blame Jeff Bezos and other business owners for the low incomes of their low-skilled workers is akin to blaming people who give money to beggars for the low incomes of beggars.

Sen. Sanders is also wrong to believe that, by taxing employers of low-income workers by the full amounts that these workers receive in welfare benefits, government will thereby prompt employers to raise these workers’ pay by enough to allow them to escape welfare eligibility. Adoption of Sen. Sanders’s proposal would lower, not raise, the incomes that these workers get from private employers.

If you doubt me, I ask you this: Do you believe that the incomes that beggars receive from begging would rise if government taxed the activity of giving to beggars? If not – that is, if you understand that taxing the activity of giving to beggars would discourage people from giving to beggars in the first place rather than encourage those who give to give beggars even more – then you should see that taxing the activity of employing low-skilled workers would discourage employers from employing such workers in the first place rather than encourage employers to pay these workers even more.

https://cafehayek.com/

[Actor]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

capitalism is what made the USA, ...

What made the U.S.A. was the genocide of a primitive people.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by Actor

What made the U.S.A. was the genocide of a primitive people.

You’re hysterical......such a comment shows a lack of critical thinking

[Actor]

Originally Posted by davew

Some of the richest people in the world are in charge of HUGE companies that have many employees. Some of these pay so low to most of their workers that these employees are eligible and receive food stamps, housing assistance, medicaide, ....


I am talking about the likes of Amazon, Walmart, Uber, ...



Bernie Sanders feels these companies should be charges for their employee 'government assistance'. What do you think?

The first thing that needs to happen is for corporations to lose their immortality and become mortal. Fifty years from the date of incorporation a corporation should die, all its assets sold at auction and the proceeds turned over to Social Security.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

You’re hysterical......such a comment shows a lack of critical thinking

I missed the part where the native Americans were paid a fair price for their land.

Was the forced removal of the Cherokee from their land, resulting in one third of them dying, not a genocide?

How does recognizing that we do not live in a perfect world show a lack of critical thinking? Is this another religion thread?

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Actor

Fifty years from the date of incorporation a corporation should die, all its assets sold at auction and the proceeds turned over to Social Security.

It wouldn't have any assets at that point. Its plant and equipment, patents, products and production, etc., would have been sold off (probably to a foreign corporation), cash distributed as stockholder dividends, and its stock would be retired.

Nice try, Bernie. Any other bright ideas?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Clocker

From an open letter to Tucker Carlson regarding his recent interview with The Bern. The letter is from Don Boudreaux, an economist who really understands markets, both labor and trade markets.

https://cafehayek.com/

"To blame Jeff Bezos and other business owners for the low incomes of their low-skilled workers is akin to blaming those who give money to beggars for the low incomes of beggars."

How could this be? The beggars provide no service whatsoever to their benefactors, while the "low-skilled workers" are actually employed by those who pay them. I'm not saying that the business owners should be obligated to provide a "living wage" to all their employees...but they shouldn't consider their "low-skilled workers" to be 'beggars' either.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Actor

Is this another religion thread?

It is if you start talking about confiscation and redistribution of private property. Socialism is as much a faith-based concept as any other religion.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

How could this be? The beggars provide no service whatsoever to their benefactors, while the "low-skilled workers" are actually employed by those who pay them. I'm not saying that the business owners should be obligated to provide a "living wage" to all their employees...but they shouldn't consider their "low-skilled workers" to be 'beggars' either.

It is an economic parable.

He is saying that blaming an employer for the gap between what he pays a worker and a "living wage", and making the employer responsible for the difference, makes no more sense than blaming a donor for the gap between what he donates and a "living wage".

[davew]

Originally Posted by Actor

What made the U.S.A. was the genocide of a primitive people.

Are you going back to wherever your ancestors came from and leaving all of your stuff to the indigenous for reparations for your ancestors wrong doing?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Clocker

It is an economic parable.

He is saying that blaming an employer for the gap between what he pays a worker and a "living wage", and making the employer responsible for the difference, makes no more sense than blaming a donor for the gap between what he donates and a "living wage".

I know full well what the economist was trying to say...but he should have used a better "economic parable" in order to make his point...IMO. There is a big difference between an "employer"...and a "donor". But Mr. Boudreaux does do a good job pointing out why I, personally, generally hold economists in low regard.