Minimum Wage Is An Immoral Concept

When corporations no longer control unemployment to force wages down, we can talk about repealing minimum wages.

<b>They do not believe that the market is 'God',</b> <p> " What these mystical mentors of morality miss is the immorality of trying to legislate the value of one's labor, especially since wages are only one form of compensation. " <p> <b> But they do not overlook the immorality of forcing wages downwards while expenses are constantly rising. You must be a cheap labour conservative. </b> <p> "They don't understand the immorality of using government force to tell owners how they can run their businesses." <p> <b> They do understand the immorality of making canadians wages competetive with 3rd world countries. </b> <p> "They don't understand the immorality of telling employees they are incapable of negotiating their own wages." <p> <b>Somehow I am willing to bet you oppose unions? When the attitude is that we should be thankful to the wealthy for a 'job', there is no negotiation. </b> <p> "They don't understand the immorality of destroying jobs or the devastation it caused the blacks in the 1930s." <p> <b> So now you are saying that minimum wage destroys jobs? </b> <p> "They don't understand the immorality of making those whose jobs they've destroyed dependents of a dysfunctional daddy we call government." <p> <b>They do understand the notion of 'corporate welfare' and how that is somehow ok but people on the other hand, that's different. </b> <p> "They don't understand the immorality of a government-managed economy or the poverty it is capable of producing, like Cuba or North Korea." <p> <b>SO the poverty of the USA is because of the state interference in the economy? Is there any country in the world where the state does not regulate and manage the economy? Even one? </b> <p> "They don't understand the free market, devoid of force or fraud, is the most moral of all economic systems, or that it is the only system with its supply and demand features that can produce rational pricing necessary for the proper allocation of scarce resources." <p> <b>When scarcity does not exist, wealthy and powerful people act to make it scarce so they can profit more from it. Your notion of 'proper allocation' .. would that be the disproportionate divisions we have? Large numbers of relatively poor with a very few ultra wealthy owning 95% of everything? The market serves those that have at the expense of those who do not... </b> <p> "They don't understand that wages are a price." <p> <b> They do understand but don't want to see the workers to be the ones paying it. Time is a finite commodity and without fair recompense, there is no reason to trade it since it is really our most valuble asset. When my littly labor has to compete with a huge pile of capital, I am at a slight disadvantage... capital that has been accumulated with the states help, 'serving' the people of the state. </b> <p> "They just don't understand that there should be no minimum wage." <p> <b>You just don't understand that without controls, advantage will be taken of the financially less able, oh, hey, all that is institutionalized, along with the 'taking advantage' part but that is not enough for you or those that benefit from the current system. They want more. Can't you just be happy with all the inflation of the DJI because of the wars? </b>

Canada seems to be doing just fine with a minimum wage. Considering most people would find it hard or impossible to survive on a minimum wage, it's a non-issue anyways. All minimum wage laws do is outlaw those few extreme cases of abuse.

Besides, for determined employers/employees the laws are easy enough to skirt. Have you ever heard of a contract employee?

/wonders if this topic is a well crafted troll.

This guy is most likely a neoclassically brainwashed economist , mouthing Friedman's nonsense about the minimum wage, who in turn learned it from fascist the Austrian School of Menger, Mises, von Hayek, et al.

I don't have the time to copy the references from Milton and Rose Friedman's "Free to Choose", but this garbage is all there, page after page. His basic message is that people should receieve wages the employer decides they should get.

I was an employer of skilled tradesmen for 22 years and made it sure that my guys were happy, with the best wages and working conditions, because happy workers are the best producers and mine were the tops.

The vast majority of employers, especially big business now believe that the more they cheat and oppress their workers, the better the production will be. Bloody fools and idiots, but "Friedman says...." ,or "Adam Smith says...."

But workers don't "negotiate" their own wages in any event.
This is one of those harebrained daydreams invented by the pointed head academics, who have never been in the labour force, or in business, but sat in their ivory towers completely divorced from the realities of life.

What should the minimum wage be? I can't remember what it was 35 years ago, the beggining of the neoclassical era, but as the cost of living has gone up about 1000% in overall terms, the minimum wage and all wages should be about 10 times what they were then. If the economy survived, thrived and businesses were making profits 40 years ago, they could do the same now withe the same levels of income distribution.

But then we didn't have "globalized free trade" designed to exploit, cheat, lie and rob to extort obscene profits for a criminal class of people who least deserve it, sitting by their computers, speculating how to steal more from more.

As long as we permit the stock and money markets to control the economy and the lives of the billions on Earth, we'll be sliding down into an abyss of permanent violence, praised by nutheads, like the author of this article as "the competitive equilibrium of the global marketplace", while millions starve to death, because to help them would be "socialistic".

Ed Deak.

"His basic message is that people should receieve wages the employer decides they should get. "

Or he's saying people should refuse jobs that don't meet their needs. Perhaps employers will get the message that they need to pay more when they can't get people to work for them.

It works here in Alberta. Most places, like Tim Hortons and Superstore (Weston Foods/Loblaws) advertise on big signs outside "Jobs starting at $11/h". In Fort Mac, Tims pays upwards of $15/h. It's hard to find any service related place without a sign begging for people out front.

As for Stoutlimb's contractor thing; Yes, I are one. It is a way to get around employment rules, but it too is not without it's benefits. I don't give an intrest free loan to Revenue Canada, only to get some of it back in May. I can instead put my 'tax' money in a 6 month GIC, and get a few percent back.

I can lease a car, and some office equipment, and it doesn't come out of my income but out of my taxes instead. I can write off a portion of my mortgage and land taxes off against my income. I can credit GST I spend against what I pay, and since it's my startup year, I will probabally get lots of GST back because of me purchasing capital equipment.

My taxes are also lowered because I take a yearly, one time salary, rather than monthly or bi-monthly. But, being a contractor doesn't have the advantages of long-term stability - but then again, show me a job nowadays that does.

---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

"In Fort Mac, Tims pays upwards of $15/h. It's hard to find any service related place without a sign begging for people out front."

I will present the following as an effective counter to the above. It is current from Fort McMurray Today as of the time of this posting:

• 2 bdrm basement suite in family home in Thickwood. Available Feb. 5. Great location, sep. entrance, shared laundry Incl. utilities & satellite. No smoking, pets or partiers. Commuters preferred. $1750/month, $1500 DD

^ Show me ANYONE who has 3250 to drop on Rent&Damage who can afford that even on 15/hr. Also where does the poor SOB live until he can afford housing, a box under an overpass?


* bedroom bachelor suite Downtown. Fully furnished and equipped. Includes kitchen, utilities, cable TV, internet with new computer, phone and long distance, barbecue and deck. No smoking or pets. Single person occupancy. $1800/mo, $1000 DD. Available August 1

2800 on Rent and Damage, first month.

Just to make it easy, lets assume Rev Can decides to take none of your money.

Timmy's @ 15, lets say 40 hrs/week = 600 x 4 = 2400/month. You're looking at 6 weeks before he/she can afford rent at listed at 3250.

The second one is a bit better, 5 weeks roughly.

Not too long to spend in a box or a shelter.

Yeah... those poor sobs are rolling in cash.

Spare me.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

"Minimum wage is an immoral concept"

According to whom exactly?

England during the time of Charles Dickens had no minimum wage, it also had other things going for it that employers today have wet dreams wishing for:

No safety standards.

No workers rights.

No days off.

No limit on hours.

If you find those to be "moral concepts", then it follows that a "minimum wage" would be an "immoral concept".

I mean really...why would anyone in their right mind treat their people like, of all things...PEOPLE?

I mean paying your employees enough to survive on (note: I said survive, not actually enough to live: you know, "live" that state of being that actually allows one to have SOME small degree of hope for a better future.)

Answer me that, if you can.

Or would you prefer they get put onto the street with no shelter, no food, and no other option than crime?

Then again, I wonder what your solution for the ensuing explosion of criminal activity would be.

Then again, as long as you don't bear those costs directly why should you care?

Right?

Remind me to walk past your dying body after you get robbed for a few paltry dollars just so some poor bastard can actually eat that day.

After all, your world is a dog eat dog one.

You just met a dog far hungrier than you were.

Hope you enjoy being the eaten instead of the eater.


---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

"Also where does the poor SOB live until he can afford housing, a box under an overpass?"

Campgrounds, I've even seen people living in tents in the bush who make over $50 an hour.

How much you make has nothing to do where you live in Fort Mac. Availability does.

The person who would normally work at Timmies would be the spouse who wants a little extra income, or the kid who still lives at home. Anyone who has any sort of other skill already works at one of the plants, or in support of them. The service workers have been there since before the recent 'expansions' and already has a home they only pay $900 a month for.

Fort Mac is a special case. Timmies pay that much to attract the 16-20 year olds because they have to compete with the plants for staff.

---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

Minimum wage laws are like all other social reforms, the price you pay for capitalism. If you want to get rid of them, well get rid of capitalism. If there were no wage slaves and we worked for ourselves either as individuals or in cooperatives there would be no need to set wages. Trouble with these vulgar libertarians is they think there is a free lunch. Well, t'aint so.

<p>Deacon,</p> <blockquote>England during the time of Charles Dickens had no minimum wage </blockquote> <p>did you know that the UK didn’t have a minimum wage until 1999?</p><p>---<br>Shatter your ideals upon the rock of Truth.<br />
<br />
— The Divine Symphony, by Inayat Khan<br />

<p>Ed,</p> <blockquote> this garbage is all there, page after page [in <i>Free to Choose</i>. The Friedmans’] basic message is that people should receive wages the employer decides they should get.<br> <br> I was an employer of skilled tradesmen for 22 years and made sure that my guys were happy, with the best wages and working conditions, because happy workers are the best producers and mine were the tops.</blockquote> <p>so in other words, your guys received the wages that you decided that they should get?</p> <p>;*)</p><p>---<br>Shatter your ideals upon the rock of Truth.<br />
<br />
— The Divine Symphony, by Inayat Khan<br />

>>Besides, for determined employers/employees the laws are easy enough to skirt. Have you ever heard of a contract employee?<<

This is exactly why Stores and other Businesses went to part time employees instead of full time employees. So they didn’t have to pay benefits, higher wages, training etc. etc…

But you still hear employers screaming louder and louder every year they can't find loyal, hard working and dedicated employees!

---
Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.

Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.

Exactly. It's funny that these neo-con turkeys who are always whining about the evils of "state control" are always trying to put people in a position where they are forced to rely on the governnment to protect them from the sleaziest of employers. Fortunately not all employers are quite that bad or stupid ... but some are. Common sense and common decency do not automatically die even in this sort of society despite the efforts of predators to remake the universe in their image.

"How much you make has nothing to do where you live in Fort Mac. Availability does."

Very good, you win the Captain Obvious Award. I've done time in Boomtowns, thank you very much, and am fully aware of the economics at work therein.

Now kindly show me a Timmy's employee who

1) can afford a camper or an RV
2) would live in a tent in the middle of a Fort winter.

Btw, if you look closely at the bachelor suite ad, it says in clearly english lettering "Single person occupancy".

Unless you have received a memo concerning a new meaning to the word "single" that I did not, your argument in that case is invalid.

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush