RE: Living wage
June 25, 2015 at 1:24 pm
(This post was last modified: June 25, 2015 at 1:25 pm by Whateverist.)
(June 25, 2015 at 10:15 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:(June 24, 2015 at 5:32 pm)whateverist Wrote: Of course if everyone were bringing up the price of labor, competition in the market place would be preserved. If there were any products or service whose viability depended on an indentured working class, fuck em'.
By which you inevitably, if not intentionally, mean: fuck their employees. Let 'em be unemployed. They shouldn't have been so careless as to fail to get the skills that would have found them employment in a company not based on employing the under-educated, under-experienced, or over-incarcerated.
If no consumer would want the service or product at the price resulting from every relavant business being required to pay a living wage, then the business should not exist. This would fuck both the employee and the business assuming neither was able to find a product whose production can support a living wage. We'd all be paying much more for fresh produce, that's for sure. But would every fast food restaurant truly go out of business without the ability to employ the desperate at a sub-living wage? I'd prefer to see that put to the test.
(June 25, 2015 at 10:15 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: And an indentured working class would not be free to quit a low-paying job to go to a better-paying one as soon as they can find it. 'Indentured' means you can't quit because you're under a binding contract.
I've worked for minimum wage and I've been unemployed, and I assure you, I was not better off unemployed.
There are similar expressions in popular use which are likewise not literal in meaning such as "wage slave". I'm not a fan of literalism.