To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (641 ) 9/3/2011 2:09:44 PM From: cnyndwllr Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 85487 Jorj, re: "You know, it goes both ways, if a company doesn't pay their workers enough to take care of their needs, the people will move away and find employers who will. And the employer who doesn't pay people enough to survive will either have to change their wage strategy or go out of business." Either you don't understand economics or you're making a very grave mistake with respect to the economic situation that prevails in America. Here's how it works... The basic economic principles of supply and demand mandate that when the supply is greater than the demand prices will fall. That's true for labor and for goods and services. If there are more unskilled and semi-skilled workers than there are jobs for them, wages will fall. If there are far too many more workers than jobs, wages will fall dramatically (subject to artificial floors such as minimum wage laws). Now, what do you think is going on in America? Are there more unskilled and semi-skilled workers than there are jobs? Surely you know the answer to that question. So what are employers going to do. Are they going to fear, as you suggest, that if they don't pay their workers "enough to survive" their workers are going to, as you also suggest, "move away and find employers who will"? No, they're not. Their workers can't move away and find employers who will pay them more because the laws of supply and demand prevail wherever they move. A few might find better jobs but for most workers the step of pulling up roots and moving into the unknown offers little hope in the kind of economy we have today. So what does the employer do? All other things being equal, if he doesn't pay the low wages that his competitors are paying then he risks getting outpriced and having to go out of business. So, contrary to your assertion that he has to pay higher wages or go out of business, in the real world he has to reduce his wages to remain price competitive or lose his market share. What will allow workers to make higher wages in this competitive environment...they'll have to monopolize labor. In other words, they'll have to unionize or get the government to put minimum wages in place that force employers to pay more than they would if the laws of supply and demand set the price. That's how it works in the real world and, as I wrote in a previous post, with mechanisation and outsourcing continuing to displace semi-skilled and unskilled labor, it's going to get worse, not better, because the bell curve of worker talents won't change the percentage of workers who are not able to climb into more skilled positions but the number of jobs for them will continue to fall. "Why do you think that if the people are willing to vote to have the government force us to be charitable that we wouldn't just do it on our own?" I think that for the same reason that I shook my head when the conservatives got so giddy about how we "for the first time gave Iraqi women rights." Such ideas are fantasies that have little connection to reality and, of course, reality always crushes spin. There's simply no way for private entities to create, fund and maintain the tremendous infrastructure necessary in every state, city, county and town in our nation of 300 plus million citizens to assure that children across our nation are not going to bed hungry and that our people have the basics of medicine, dental care, shelter, clothing, etc. It's disingenuous to say that Americans in our city's poverty pockets or our rural mountain hollows can be protected by the good intentions of people who don't know them and don't see them. There's simply no way that those who are of a different ethnicity, speak a different language and are far removed from the lives of most of us can be assured of receiving the minimum support necessary to give them at least a chance for a healthy life. The refrain of "let private charity take care of our poor" must lend some emotional support to those who don't want to appear base by promoting policies that would remove the safety net for the many poor and disadvantaged that live in this country but the truth is that in this great nation where people slip through the cracks all the time, the only way to assure a safety net is for government to step in and step up. So I'd like to live in the world you fantasize where good samaritans take care of the least among us, but we have to live in the world we have, not the world we'd want. "Writing that check with the real intent of giving to someone in need is far more meaningful than a blind deduction from your paycheck. It also takes a little effort. But it's worth it, you should try it ." Really? Now you have some special insight into what I do? Too funny. Ed