I've never agreed someone flipping burgers should be paid fifteen dollars an hour, it's absurd considering that people doing backbreaking hard labor in a factory aren't making that kind of money. If they raised the rate to that amount no one would want to do the hard jobs. Anyway, like the guy said in the video minimum wage does cost jobs but then on the other hand those who lose their jobs will also find jobs with a better wage eventually. Most states in the US restaurants (usually those not corporate owned) pay about half of what the min. wage is, they are allowed to by law as long as the tips the worker makes equal out to the min. wage. Like I state I live in I think it's three eighty five a hour, if the worker doesn't makes enough tips to make up the rest then the owner has to put in the rest above the three eighty five. Another point people miss and I had this debate with a friend a few weeks ago is that if a wage goes up fifty cents an hour that doesn't mean the cost of a burrito goes up fifty cents. He argued with me over that for quite a while. I just took a simple number like if the owner sold 200 burritos a day the cost would be spread out among that many burritos, which for most products is minuscule compared to what the government is spending to subsidize a substandard cost of living. Sort of like the debate that raged when that large chain pizza company, I think it was Papa Johns, complained about how much it was going to cost him to pay for Obama care, when someone sat down and figured it out cost per pizza sold it came out to adding ten cents to a pizza, it was minuscule and he was left belittled and embarrassed over his comment. That's because all these huge corporations just think about their personal bottom line, how can I not have to pay this, they don't think how people wouldn't even sniffle about paying ten cents more if something was significantly going to improve people's lives. (not that Obama care ended up being that simplistic overall for other reasons) Yes you could argue that means every products a person buys could end up being ten cents more and that adds up but it's a cost most people wouldn't be that alarmed about per se as if it was fifty cents more a product. If a person ends up spending a couple bucks more at the store for their groceries it's still going to be more beneficial to have the raise. The problem in the US is the loss of manufacturing jobs and the US is gearing towards more service oriented jobs that have historically paid less then manufacturing jobs, I'd agree those wages have to go up but no where near to where they are demanding. It's almost laughable if one has ever worked a real labor intensive job. Where the problem lays is in the reflection that these multi-million and billion corporations reaping huge profits by taking their jobs off shores with no accountability to guarantee to improve the standards of living in third world countries, they aren't helping anyone but their own bottom line. Why pay someone fifteen dollars an hour when you can pay fifty cents or less, no benefits, no workers compensation insurance if someone gets injured, no unemployment, no regulatory demands. (which would offset global warming if you happen to believe they are a main contributor, and as a matter of fact the transportation of those products back to their original country of origins adds even more carbon fuels to the debate) This is where the problem is, people taking advantage of other people and even the environment to line their bottom line. When Oreo's went to Mexico the price of Oreo's didn't drop, neither did refrigerators, washers, dryers, cars, etc., and it all minimally had a positive reflection upon the lives of the people working for these firms versus the benefits the companies reeked. This whole tend of keeping people down for the benefit of the few has to stop, I don't care if that's in the USA or a third world country. We have to give people a chance to improve and build upon their own lives not just the lives of a handful of people but they won't do that because then they can't keep people dependent upon them.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I didn't know this. Thanks for the info.
The problem with minimum wage, Obamacare etc is not the immediate cost. The monetary cost is small but the opportunity cost is MASSIVE. You can read a full description on this at That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen By Frédéric Bastiat written during the mid 19th century.
The problem isn't paying few extra bucks. The problem is that most of it is getting wasted. At its peak some BTC Tx cost over $100 USD. If that money wasn't payed in fees, it would have been used for something else. Everything is better on STEEM because of Fee-less Tx. Money is required to enforce regulations. Money is required to distribute the rewards.
Prosperity is never built on consumption. It can only be built on savings. When the workers who got a raise/benefits spend a few extra bucks every time they shop, most of the gains get wiped away. Benefits tend to cost more when they are given by a company. For an example different people needs different kinds of healthcare plans. A healthy person may only need to cover for accidents and other potentially expensive procedures. When a company is giving healthcare benefits, a healthy person would be getting covered for something completely unnecessary. Paying out of pocket is cheaper than insurance as these companies have to pay their employees and make profits. Hundreds of millions of dollars are getting wasted all over the planet simply because companies have their own healthcare plans for employees. The only exception is the hospitals/insurance companies.
It depends. Most manufacturing jobs are not different from what the local companies are providing. So except for some job creations, no benefits for the local economy. But when it comes to services and software jobs, the foreign companies are far better than the local ones. They have better salaries and better benefits and I don't personally know a single person who is willing to say that they'd work for a local company instead of a foreign one. This is due to the cost of living difference. 1st world companies can save 50% expenses while giving much better employment for 3rd world countries when it comes to non-manufacturing jobs.