English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Would you pay more than minimum wage if you owned a business, say a landscaping business or a resturant, or even a construction company.

2006-09-07 03:30:00 · 13 answers · asked by stocketrader24 3 in Politics & Government Immigration

David T: I plan to ask the minimum wage question, but what do you think should be the minimum wage. Iif the minimum wage rises the cost of every think will rise, and who will be affected the most is the people who make minimum wage, so if wages rise 10%, then your lease on your apartment rises 10% what have you done, nothing. Give people an incentive not to make minimum wage, better themselves. And congress is the worst you know that they have a built in cost of living raise they get every year, the only way they dont get it is if they vote not to get it other wise it is a done deal.

2006-09-07 04:26:29 · update #1

13 answers

no i would pay minimum wage as most places like that do.

2006-09-07 03:34:05 · answer #1 · answered by stoke 2 · 1 1

Restaurants never pay minimum wage anyway for wait staff. and it is well known that restaurants never pay anyone well so if the illegals go to work in a restaurant they are getting the same wage the americans get. I was an apartment manager and the pay stubs they brought in were very good money so I know that they aren't all underpaid. If I owned a business I would not hire an illegal because it is against the law. But I do own a business and I cant give the employees more than min. wage because it is a small business and I send all profits to charity to find a cure for cancer.

Oh yeah, I know the question didn't involve the word illegal but since it was in that catergory I assumed that was what the real subject was about.

2006-09-07 03:38:12 · answer #2 · answered by 51ain'tbad 3 · 1 0

I own a small business and I pay far above minimum wage because my business requires experience and ,you must know what you are doing or you will get hurt.My husband owns a much better business and still pays high wages because his business is taking care of other peoples money.My lawn maintenance man is Japanese and his workers are both African Americans ,he is not cheap nor inexpensive and pays his workers very well.I have a housekeeper that is of German heritage and gets paid by the month.I trust them all with not only my prized Arabian horses,but my home and have never had to be sorry for that trust.I don't mind paying for quality workers that do their best work.In fact some of my workers have been with us over 15years.Any work that I have done such as building or driveways etc are done by reputable company's that hire only legals and pay competitive wages.That's my way of being an American..I would not hire anyone that's in this country illegally.No exceptions.

2006-09-07 03:56:13 · answer #3 · answered by Yakuza 7 · 0 0

I owned a small business, now retired. The problem with min. wage is no one can make a living on it. It is good for a high school student just starting off. But for an adult with a family, forget about it.
Large Corporations, like McDonald's, Wendy's, 7-11, etc. are allowed to build a site at just about every corner you look at these days, but are not required to pay employees a wage they can live off. I say that Congress should be ashamed of themselves in this country for not getting a real good pay system down where people working full time can afford the basic housing and food etc. that they deserve. So what if places like McDonald's cannot build as many units as they are used to. If you have a restaurant, where everyone who works full time is compensated well enough for a decent living, then you should be able to open second site. But if you are paying your employees the min. wage and opening up shop all over the country. SHAME ON YOU AND CONGRESS!

2006-09-07 04:01:49 · answer #4 · answered by DAVID T 3 · 2 2

DAVID T- That is absurd. Congress should have nothing to do with wages! This is a capatalist society, and I would not have it any other way. The government should have no say whatsoever in wages. If you want to live in a place like that, move to Cuba.....

2006-09-07 04:58:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It depends on the quality of the employees and the work that's being done. I'm big on giving good workers more money if they perform well. It doesn't take a lot to make an impression... even a 50 cents an hour raise will bring a big smile to someone's face.

2006-09-07 03:37:17 · answer #6 · answered by pvreditor 7 · 1 0

yeah, paying less than minimum wage is against the law. there is a minimum for a reason.

2006-09-07 03:39:21 · answer #7 · answered by Niecy 6 · 1 1

I would pay for the reasonable pay on experience.

I would start out a kid 18 making $8.50.
Restaurant they only make 2.50 + tips
Construction would be basically on experience.

But first of all they must be a legal American citizen.

2006-09-07 04:07:08 · answer #8 · answered by 11:11 3 · 2 0

in the initiating, i'd classify myself as between minarchist libertarian and anarcho-capitalist, although your question is between the justifications why i do no longer make a leap in direction of the anarcho camp. i'd have were given to assert that in an anarcho-capitalist society, privatized safe practices communities (PSA i will use) would finally end up competing in localized parts and areas and customarily what would finally end up to be taking position is that 2 or maybe 3 would come to be surviving after the initial fastened (public businesses abolished) in a undemanding medium populated section. on the topic matter of your party: there would basically should be some criminal regulations fastened to regulate disputes between the PSAs in cases resembling this, that lets you inevitably arise. There would want to be privatized arbitration courts to manage claims adverse to property. So, for representation, what ought to have advanced is a freelance between PSAs "A" and "B: which may have ruled any dispute over claims in direction of property rights are settled by technique of technique of one employer being allowed to bypass looking another's property below the settlement if targeted adequate information is produced to suspect a property crime. in the different case, the hunt in basic terms isn't allowed and if violated, the valuables proprietor can sue for damages in the adventure that they search for his property by technique of way of pressure. Or in case of dispute, there will be a civil case to envision what's to performed in a particular privatized arbitration courtroom docket. The problems with the form of technique are what keeps me in the valley between libertarian miniarchism and anarcho capitalism. this could also word to usa huge safe practices, usa borders and seas, or maybe public roads and highways. no longer that it are literally not in a position to be carried out, yet many topics and confusions get up and it truly is complicated to get to the bottom of many situations with out "state", although the 'state' extra activities than no longer would not do an staggering job.

2016-11-06 19:54:16 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Part of being in business is making good business decisions. If you cannot afford to own your business, if you cannot make the sacrifices, if you cannot afford to pay employees,

May be.....

You should work for someone else.

2006-09-07 04:35:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers