I don't view $7.15 an hour as a "living wage" do you? Don't people need gas and clothing to work in? Hasn't these prices increased over the past ten years? Would you prefer to not give people any incentive to work at all?
2007-02-12 08:53:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by True Grit 2
·
4⤊
3⤋
The problem with your question is the assumption that there is such a thing as a "living wage". There is no such thing.
Well, let me clarify. Everyone that currently is complaining about not making a "living wage" is ALIVE, so technically, they are already paid a LIVING wage. What does not exist (and never can) is some arbitrary wage that will allow somebody to live comfortably.
First of all, everyone's definition of living comfortably is different. Does that mean an apartment by yourself? Sharing a house? A car? What type of car, a Honda, a BMW, a new car, a used car? New clothes from Wal-Mart, new clothes from The Gap, 2 pairs of pants, 4 pair, 6 pair? The ability to eat at home, eat out once a week, eat out every day? Where exectly do you draw the arbitrary line that will make everyone happy and comfortable?
Furthermore, every city and town in every state is different. Making $20,000 per year in New York City is very different than making $20,000 in Hicksville. A livible wage in one city is dirt poor in another.
Furthermore, a head of lettuce costs $1 if you pay employees $5 an hour. It will no longer cost $1 if you now must pay employees $15 an hour. That is the same with EVERY product and service on the market. If you force higher wages to be "livable" that will force higher prices. That means that the "livable" wage you just set is no longer livable because the cost of living just went up. You can not artifically raise cost without raising prices. This means that you will always cause inflation that defeats the purpose of the wage increase.
A "livable" wage is impossible. Believing in it is as dumb as believing in the Easter Bunny.
2007-02-12 09:14:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by Aegis of Freedom 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
There are a bunch of illegals coming to work here for far less than minimum wage. If you want a good paying job, you need to pay attention in school and not be a high school drop out. The difference between a high school education and a college education is at least a million dollars more in income over a lifetime.
Why should a buger flipper get paid a living wage when they have no skills? A monkey can be trained to do that job.
If you want a good job, you need to either join the union and work in a factory, get a skilled position such as an electrician, or get into sales/marketing.
2007-02-12 08:57:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
In an ideal world, jobs would be performed because of people's innate decency and sense of responsibility. However, men and women have lived in a less than ideal world, where they've had to earn their daily bread from the sweat of their brow, since Adam and Eve (Adnan wa Hawa, if I may get a little ecumenical and multi-culti here) were expelled from the Garden of Eden.
That means that, in a capitalist economy, which allocates resources less inefficiently than the alternatives, jobs will pay according to the laws of supply and demand. David Beckham and Alex Rodriguez will make gazillions of dollars each year because they have unique, rare skills and because hundreds of millions (for A-Rod) or billions (for Becks) of people are willing to pay for a glimpse of these skills. It takes a lot less skill to flip burgers than to hit for power and average or bend a free kick on goal.
Admittedly, this isn't fair, but little in life is. We can take consolation, though, that in the US relatively few of the people flipping burgers or in other entry-level jobs are supporting families on that sub-living wage. Most are young part-time workers, being supported in part by their families and working to supplement family incomes.
Moreover, setting a minimum wage that's too high could have perverse effects on employment and equity. Look at the quasi-Socialist countries of Western Europe, such as France (which one wag has called "the Soviet Union that works") or Germany. The costs of hiring someone to flip burgers or do other entry-level work are much higher than in the US or UK, and the result is chronic 10-12 pct unemployment and a deep-seated culture of poverty in distressed areas like the former East Germany and the eastern suburbs of Paris.
If you're concerned about families living with inadequate resources, the best way to address this would be via some type of social welfare payment or voucher scheme.
2007-02-12 09:06:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bethesdan 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
If the job of flipping burgers produces enough income for the employer to justify the wage. If it does not then the job would be eliminated if it were required to pay a high wage.
2007-02-12 08:55:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
If they did, they would go out of business and pay no wages. Burger flipping is a job for a student to make a little extra beer money. Adults trying to support a family need to re-evaluate their lives and make changes if that is the only job they can get.
2007-02-12 08:54:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
I don't know what a living wage means.
The wage for any job should be based on what the applicant will accept in return for their investment in learning the skills needed to do the job, and how difficult it is to fill that job.
In other words, if the job requires almost no skill, and there is a large pool of applicants, then the job won't pay much.
2007-02-12 08:56:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
After reading the question and some of the responses, I have come to the conclusion that there are a lot of people out there that have no respect for burger flipping. Even though in summer they are hunched over a grill everyday in a hot kitchen. I think anyone who comes to work, does his/her job and goes home to his/her family deserves our respect....if not a "living" wage.
P.S. For all of those people who think a fast burger is worth more than a hardworking cook......I hope your industry is safe from commoditization!
2007-02-12 09:12:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by Jeff 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
That all depends on what you mean by living wage.
If you mean that it pays enough for them to continue living, then yes.
But if you mean the more common definition of paying enough for people to live comfortably, then no.
In my opinion, entry level jobs should never pay employees more than the Federal Poverty Line yearly, which is about $10,000.
2007-02-12 09:11:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by STILL standing 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Generally that type of job is filled by high school students who still live with their parents or retired people who are just supplementing income so i don't think that it is a big deal if they are paid lower than a living wage.
2007-02-12 09:00:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by joevette 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
They should pay as little as needed to fill the position with capable personnel....just like any other position. That's a free market in action, and it's a beautiful thing.
2007-02-12 08:55:40
·
answer #11
·
answered by Michael E 5
·
3⤊
2⤋