1935 US supreme court ruled that minimum wage was legal but not smart.
Think how illogical it is that the gov't dictates how much an employer must pay an employee. I agree that a person or family cannot live on a dollar an hour, but the gov't has no business dictating wages and benefits. Gov't does not know how much an employee will produce or what an employer can afford to pay. Example: Lady opened a small restaurant in my town, great food and service, but MW salary consumed all of her limited finances in a short period and she had to close. Get the gov't out of running our business.
Gov't's only role should be at the most to see that an employer provides safe working conditions.
The above is one of the big reasons why unions are disappearing. Who needs unions? Unions role is to ensure that companies pay a fair wage.
And I say government regulation and the minimum wage is an absolute necessity. Otherwise we will be reverting back to the society described by Charles Dicken. Workers and children being paid 5 cents a day and living in abject poverty while the owners live in mansions with immense wealth and no ethics. What you fail to mention is that business owners if given the opportunity are extremely selfish and greedy and will do anything for a buck. When we had no regulations in America we had monopolies like Standard Oil who were ruthless in driving competitors bankrupt and bankers who controlled the economy and manipulated stock prices to make a fortune. We are never going back to that!
((((What you fail to mention is that business owners if given the opportunity are extremely selfish and greedy)))
You don't know every business owner. I know many and they are some of the most generous people I know. You suck;and if there were a button on Yahoo to see you get beaten, good people would be pressing it every day. Of course, moron longs would like a button like that for me, but that is only because they are morons.
Sentiment: Strong Sell
gator ade ------Your thinking is flawed. If Minimum wage is good, today at $7.25/hr, don't you think $20/HOUR would be better? $50/hour would make more sense. Why not just raise it to $1,000/hour then everyone would be rich. Wages and benefits belong to labor and mgt. This is what caused the birth of 'UNIONS" ... The trouble today is unions and gov't are in the same bed to control business. We need to get the gov't out of the bed and let the mkt take care of itself.
Did you know France has one of the highest MWs about $20/hour and their unemployment rate for youth, entry level people is pushing 30%. You no longer hire inexperienced people
It is time we elect reps that have taken ECON 101 and know a little about business..
Are you advocating that a person should have the right to work at any rate agreeable to both him and his employer? Are you really saying that a kid with no skills working after school does not need a wage that could support a family? How DARE you apply common sense to this.
Sentiment: Strong Sell
Only idiots believe that the gov't should dictate wages. Gov't does not know what an employer can pay and what an employee is willing to work for. It is none of the gov't business.
Wages and benefits can and should be the goals of unions, not gov't.
If you do not like what an employer pays, you do not have to work for him. Quit and find another job.
Allowing the gov't to assume the role of care giver, wages and benefits, has caused the great decrease in union membership. Today, who needs unions?
DETROIT (AP) -- Back in 2007, Toyota trumpeted its bulked-up Tundra as a game-changer that would cut into Detroit's dominance of the U.S. pickup truck market.
"The truck that's changing it all," was the tagline from an ad that featured the beefy Tundra pulling a 10,000-pound trailer up a steep ramp.
But after six years on the market, the Tundra hasn't changed much of anything. Instead, Toyota learned that unlike car buyers, American pickup owners are still fiercely loyal to their Fords, Rams and Chevrolets. And that Detroit feverishly guards its lead in the high-margin truck business.
Continued: Her 3 employees would have continued working for her for less but she could not legally allow it. She and the employees both would be violating the law. All could go to jail.