Bush take two.

[AzDon]

If a living wage were established as law, nobody would hold a gun on a businessman and force him to hire "x" number of people or any at all!
What the hell are you talking about, man? Having a living wage law established would exactly be holding a gun on a business man!!! Do you have ANY idea how many small businesses would fold and what that would do to this country??
You don't make sense!
I re-read my post and I think I stated pretty clearly that a businessman's staffing needs would be his business. How is that extortion? The manpower cost is a minimum of "x" per hour....you can hire as many as you want or none at all!
Why can't people just say that they understand where I'm coming from and state that they disagree and believe that it's okay to pay people less than it costs to live in exchange for providing a service that the employer (hopefully) makes a profit on?

[mickeyfinn]

It says what it says! An employer would not be forced to hire ANY help that he thought was economically unjustifiable..... I'm not advocating that any businessman should be forced to employ anybody.... He's still free to make ALL the choices for his business!
Okay so is this what you are saying?
If I own a fleet of tractors and trailers and have someone who manufactures widgets looking for a truck line to haul them calls and tells me "look I can ship these by rail for 30 cents per pound and if you can do better I'll use you" So I go to my calculator and figure that with my fuel and fixed costs that I can't afford to pay the driver but the equivilent of 5.00/hour. The new "living wage" has been established at 6.50/hour. So under your plan the driver that may have been perfectly willing to take the load rather than do nothing will sit at home and have no income due to the fact that I can't offer him a "living wage". Yeah that sounlds good. That is certainly the free enterprise system at work. Now the guy is going to have no income instead of a smaller income. I know the numbers may not reflect reality but the point still comes across. You are not forcing the employer to hire anyone but you would definitely be prohibiting him from hiring people.

[572Daytona]

It would also add a lot of inflationary pressure to our economy, not only would business have to pay their employees more, they would also need to pay more for all of the equipment they use, i.e. computers, etc. Businesses would be forced to either raise prices to be competitive (inflation), relocate oversees (we all lose) or cease doing business altogether. Look what happened with the Steel industry in the 60's and the 70's, what was a vibrant business in the US that was paying very good wages (courtesy of the unions) to all employees whether they were a 30 year vertern or on a summer break duing high school, pretty much was forced into bankruptcy as it became cheaper to buy steel from overseas. The only way to prevent this would be with a very protectionist policy with high tariffs and import duties. Sounds like it would be a very isolationist policy as well, I thought the dems want to get along with the rest of the world, not hole up within our borders.
When I look at people around here where I live it seems to me that anyone willing to work full time and be a responsible dependable worker has a living wage. If you can't make it where you are living perhaps its time to move to somewhere that has better employment and lowers costs of living. I know I had to move my family from Massachusettes when both my wife and I lost our jobs and we are now much better off financially than had we stayed up there and kept our jobs.

[AzDon]

Okay so is this what you are saying?
If I own a fleet of tractors and trailers and have someone who manufactures widgets looking for a truck line to haul them calls and tells me "look I can ship these by rail for 30 cents per pound and if you can do better I'll use you" So I go to my calculator and figure that with my fuel and fixed costs that I can't afford to pay the driver but the equivilent of 5.00/hour. The new "living wage" has been established at 6.50/hour. So under your plan the driver that may have been perfectly willing to take the load rather than do nothing will sit at home and have no income due to the fact that I can't offer him a "living wage". Yeah that sounlds good. That is certainly the free enterprise system at work. Now the guy is going to have no income instead of a smaller income. I know the numbers may not reflect reality but the point still comes across. You are not forcing the employer to hire anyone but you would definitely be prohibiting him from hiring people.
This actually is at the heart of the problem.... Deregulation in transportation opened the floodgates to predatory competition in transportation where "deep pocket" competitors are openly allowed to provide services below cost as an inticement for competitors unwilling to work below cost to leave the industry. Where most of these predatory transport companies try to make their sales practices balance is the cost of labor category. Yet nobody ever questions the rising cost of fuel or insurance when calculating what "cost" is! Why is it always the help that is extorted into sacrafice?
I believe that certain industries (such as transportation) that are classically predatory need some oversight in this area. Unusually low pricing should be proven profitable in order to be allowable. It WAS this way before 1980!
I'm going to answer your question by stating that I HAVE stayed home more days than I've cared to because the company I work for REFUSES TO MUDWRESTLE AND I SUPPORT THEM IN THIS! We actually spent two years loading our cheap-ass competitor's trucks from our rail siding. Funny thing though, all their drivers wanted to work for us, because our pay is better! Eventually that company surrendered and retreated....they were tired of losing money! The customer had a real hard time with the idea of coming back to us at the old pricing, but they had no choice!
If American business would simply promote themselves on quality (refusing to mudwrestle) and petition the government for protection from unfair competition, maybe they could stop feelin the need to make their employees pay the bill for their choices!

[steelcomp]

Hey Don, nobody "makes" an employee do anything. Period.

[Jeanyus]

As an employer, I have never looked at myself as a predator. Give me a break.
I have noticed as an employer, that some employees, are on time, motivated, intelligent, and have a good work ethic. These are the people that get rewarded with more pay. I also have had people that are always a few minutes late,take looong breaks, have a bad attitude, and are unproductive. These are the people that will never get a raise in my company and hopefully, will do me a favor and quit. Under your livung wage plan, I would have to take money away from the empoyee that is working, and give it to the guy, who is drinking coffee, and talking to someone, he has no business talking to. Does not seem fair to me.
Hey moter, its me Z

[Charley]

some employees, are on time, motivated, intelligent, and have a good work ethic. These are the people that get rewarded with more pay. I also have had people that are always a few minutes late,take looong breaks, have a bad attitude, and are unproductive. These are the people that will never get a raise in my company and hopefully, will do me a favor and quit.
Great Points

[Charley]

AZ Don.... I would just love to see you try to run a successful business in todays market and economy.... what a joke that would be! I'm so sure you would hire all single mothers and pay them $22 and hour while trying to compete against all your competitors paying 1/2 that wage!! No, you would fail, but it's easy for you to call business owners "cheap-ass employers" in the process ... Ya I know what yer thinkin... we need to just make the other business owner pay that same $22 hr and it will work out.... Brilliant! you think alot of jobs are goin overseas now?? :hammerhea
You see when it comes to running a small business the owner is the one taking all the chances... we dont have Unions that beat up our competitors because shit aint FAIR... we dont bitch, moan and cry like a pussy liberal might...there isn't time and even if there was we can't change reality. SO... we scrap and claw and innovatively find ways to make it work for a profit. Accountability on an individual basis is whats hurting our society. Wake up Don... if being a business owner is so f- ing ez and so profitable then just realize this country affords that right to anyone willing to give it a try!

[steelcomp]

Zev! Hey dude...thought I recognised the avatar. Man, this guy just dosen't get it.
Don, I don't know you from Adam, but it's clear that you are satisfied with being one of the "huddled masses". If your mentality were law, there would be nothing in this world to ever strive for. It would all be the same. There would be no ambition on anyone's part to excell. There would be no incentive to sacrafice, because there would be no reward. All would be equal. No entreprenurs, no pioneers, no achievers. The gov't would make it so every lazy, non ambitious, blood sucking taker (not giver) would have the same benefits and life style as those who risk, work, take chances, and have vision.
There are countries like that in this world, but not ours. Their economies are in a shambles. Ours is a country that rewards those who choose to stand out, and take risks. Do you realize that more than 94 out of 100 people in this country have a job? And that of the 5 or so that don't, three of them don't want one, because they know big brother will carry their ass? That says that only two out of every hundred people in this country are legitimately out of work. This administration has brought in the best economic figures across the board in TWENTY YEARS! Why? Becauase, for a start, we have a president who recognizes the power of the people in running their own lives, and gave them back some of their money. It worked, and has worked every time it has been tried.
We don't need the gov't sticking it's noses in our daily affairs. We do need them to protect us from things like 911 happening again. That's really the only job the gov't has, is to protect it's people from foreign attack. We can do a pretty damn good job of running things from within.

[steelcomp]

Charlie, Blwn 472, Mickey, 572, Zev, all you guys (and others). You're great Americans.
Don, I think I'm going to back out, here. I find myself wanting to say some pretty harsh things...harsher than I posted on the other threads, and it's clear that you don't get it, nor will you. You haven't addressed a single issue that has been presented to you, at least not by me, and that's typical. You keep this petty arguement going on business and what you think should be. It's not an opinion that you're wrong, it's a fact, but you, being you and where you are in life, doing whatever it is that you do, will never understand that. You wake up in the morning, read the liberal media, take what it says as fact, and that's what you base your arguement on. You sound like a parrot, and obviously have no real life experience on which to base any of what you say, or you wouldn't say it. You sit there in your little comfort zone, taking no risks, making no sacrafices, yet, you sound like you want to tell everyone what's wrong with the way things are. That's not right, man. That's not right.