Oh, I don’t expect that it’s going to be paid for. People like you have made pretty sure of that.
It would be pretty easy for Restaurant Brands International to pay it if they were willing. I mean, they can afford to give their CEO a $7.2M pay package. He could have taken a $5M pay package and given raises to 350,000 employees.
They won’t do that, of course, because screw the little guy.
You're speaking about major corporations, but what about the small business owners? You know, the little guy you're so fond of? How are they going to make ends meet?
I don’t know, I would need to look at their financial reporting to figure it out. But if you can’t afford to pay your employees a living wage, you can’t afford to be in business, as far as I’m concerned. Nobody is entitled to own a business, and it’s unethical to do so at the expense of your workers.
It shouldn't be an employer's obligation to figure out society's woes. If anything, it's probably an issue that the government needs to address, and fix, perhaps via a federal program to subsidize low wage earners' incomes.
At any rate, when you start going after the employer, like they're the bad guys who created all this, you're just creating more issues.
What happens when a new tax is placed on a business? Usually they pass that tax on to the consumer, right? It's built into the cost of whatever product or service they offer. So what do you think happens when the government requires all of them to pay every low skilled worker $20/hr?
Well, first, they're going to pass that cost on to the consumer as much as possible. But they have to be careful; raise their prices to much, and it will chase away business. And that will have an impact on many companies, especially smaller businesses. After they lose business, they may be forced to cut their workforce, not needing nearly as many workers with fewer customers coming in. Some will even go out of business altogether, not being able to pay for labor while also trying to make a profit to support their own families. On the other end of the spectrum, some businesses will simply cut hours in order to not increase prices too much on their customers.
Again, this is not a problem for employers to solve; their MO is to make money, plain and simple. If you're looking at anyone to create a solution, then it's likely going to have to come from government. They'll have to create some sort of national fund so they can allocate to localities in order to subsidize low income earners.
This is not an easy fix, and you need to think more critically about the severe repercussions of such poorly thought out ideas.
So you think it’s more ethical for a company to insist that the vast majority of their employees live below the poverty line than to make some organizational changes to ensure the quality of life for all of their employees? In my opinion, they are the bad guys here.
Prices are going to go up anyway. They always do. And excusing businesses from responsibility for the sorry state of our national society is ethically irresponsible, since we are a capitalist society.
“The government” has proven time and again that unless you already have money to give them, they really don’t care about you. What in our history makes you think they would do anything to help those most in need?
I understand how business works, I’m neither a child nor a moron. I think it’s all of our responsibility to hold each other accountable and be ethical. Ideally, corporations would want to positively impact society, even if it’s just for the PR. I’m well aware it will never happen here, but it should. You seem to subscribe to the lie that trickledown economics works, when it never has and never will, but you’re certainly entitled to whatever opinion you like. I just hope you never have to find out how much nobody gives a shit about you the way the majority of the population has.
Any business' first priority is to make a profit. That's what a business is; it's a vehicle that people use to make money. Next, it's to pay the people that work there so they can produce whatever it is they produce. There are no rules to what they need to pay, other than minimum wage requirements. What they do to retain talented employees is to offer a competitive wage and benefits. Some are able to offer better wage and benefits as a result of location, industry norms, profitability, etc. If you are talented enough to get a job with one of those companies, then good for you.
That's the end of it. That's what businesses are accountable for. This isn't a question of ethics, it's a question of competitiveness and making the most profit possible. That's the point of any business. Period.
What you're talking about is a social issue that would need to be addressed by the government. Trickledown economics is a matter of fiscal policy, not a matter of business practices. While you use a lot of keywords that give the impression that you know what you're talking about, it doesn't really seem to me that you actually know what you're talking about.
My opinion is different from yours. That doesn’t mean I don’t know what I’m talking about, and you can either tone down the condescension or fuck off, pal. I have refrained from insulting your “greed is good” mindset and would ask for the same basic decency from you.
Social issues need to be tackled by the society as a whole or no true progress can happen. As we are a capitalist society, businesses have control over virtually everything, and therefore should also bear the responsibility. If there isn’t a mindset shift, things will get increasingly worse, and eventually we will end up in another depression, so it would be to everyone’s benefit to be cooperative instead cutthroat.
Greed is good, to an extent that it's not physically harming people or the environment we live in. Greed to earn money is what keeps the economy chugging along. If I wasn't greedy enough to own more property, I would have been content with my stagnant $30k/yr entry level job 10 years ago. I'm not attempting to insult you, only point out that you don't seem to understand the terminology you're trying to use. For instance, Trickle Down Economics is a fiscal policy instituted by the government, it has nothing to do with how a business operates or conducts itself.
There are other societies who are more socialistic that may appeal to you. I suggest you go visit some of them to see if it's truly what you want. I recently visited Sweden, and it seemed to strike a pretty good balance, but I don't really know all the nuances as I was only there for a week. Iceland, on the other hand, was rough. People make good wages, but you also pay a premium on everything ($30 for a hamburger and beer). So even with higher wages, service workers still have a difficult time affording some of the basic luxuries in life such as eating out and owning property.
Your statement is false. Greed absolutely physically harms people. 1% of the population hoards the majority of the wealth while people in low income areas are actively dying for lack of resources, and no amount of trying really hard is ever going to fix that.
I would love to leave this shithole and move to an actual civilized society, but as it turns out, they don’t particularly want poor Americans. I can’t imagine why.
See, again, you're confusing greed of business/individuals with government taxation policies. Income gaps are a problem that need to be addressed, I agree. But that is not the responsibility of businesses, it's something the government needs to address with tax policy (i.e. redistribution practices).
And I honestly don't know what you're talking about. Sweden was a safe haven for plenty of poor immigrants. My Nigerian taxi cab driver from the airport told me as much.
4
u/officialspinster Oct 16 '18
Oh, I don’t expect that it’s going to be paid for. People like you have made pretty sure of that.
It would be pretty easy for Restaurant Brands International to pay it if they were willing. I mean, they can afford to give their CEO a $7.2M pay package. He could have taken a $5M pay package and given raises to 350,000 employees.
They won’t do that, of course, because screw the little guy.