Quote:
|
Originally Posted by madsenj37
A living wage is a bad idea. It makes everything more expensive. So these people will be paid more, but they will have to pay more for everything they buy. Their higher wages will drive prices up. And/Or less people will be hired, because companies can only afford to pay so much. More people will be jobless and having to work two jobs whenever possible. More people will be on welfare, since unskilled jobs will be harder to get.
|
You missed the rest of the sentence you are responding to:
If companies were farced to pay a living wage we could drastically reduce the cost of social programs
In other words, if companies were forced to pay a living wage, we could cut some of the taxes that pay for social programs. Taxes go down equivalent to the pay increase, prices are not driven up, and/or no less people are hired, because companies will be able to afford what they can afford today. Less people will be jobless because less people will have to work two jobs, opening up positions for others. Less people will be on welfare (which is good, because there would be less of it due to the tax cuts). Unskilled jobs will be easier to get because many of the people working two or more will now only need to work one.
Quote:
|
I do agree that many companies could pay their workers better, but which ones? At what times? As for corparations, their profits only make up 9% of the nations income distribution.
|
The main issue is not how much money corporations make in comparison to the other areas that money goes - the issue is that corporations have been significantly increasing profits for 3+ years now, but there has been NO equivalent increase in payroll. It is the inevitable increase in wealth disparity due to deregulating business.