Those who find work are typically downgraded into a much lower standard of living, because most of the jobs created have been low wage positions.
Democrats would like to trade the term "Welfare" for "Transitional Living Fund" which signals to me that I am expected to, as a taxpayer, provide for more of the basics for longer, for a variety of reasons. When it's all said and done my effective tax rate is already something like 45 percent... and I am contributing member of society! I help others make money!
Sorry, I don't intend on supporting anything else that digs into my pocket.
Both sides want to blame the other for the problem. Labor says employers don't pay enough. Employers say the government is strangling them and they don't make enough. Who do I blame? Everyone but me, quite frankly.
The manufacturing base in the United States has all but dried up. Government initiatives intended to create jobs, like Cleantech and green energies, have fallen completely flat, and the rush of American jobs leaving the country hasn't abated much in the last decade.
We've seen workers at Fast Food restaurants strike for higher wages. Why, because they are greedy? Some maybe. Mostly it's because at 7 dollars an hour its hard to buy a tank of gas at $4 a gallon, and have money for food, rent, utilities, and any other basics.
But why should we pay them more? If your only marketable skill is flipping a burger, are you worth more than 7 dollars an hour? The truth is, I don't have that answer.
Here's what I do know...the guy who OWNS the McDonald's probably owns a BUNCH of them. And he doesn't worry too much about buying gas or food or anything else. Should I take from him to give to the burger flipper? After all, the owner creates jobs... shouldn't he keep his reward for all that effort? Anyone who owns or runs a business will be glad to tell you how much work is really involved...
Now you understand the basic question at hand: Do businesses have a duty to provide good paying jobs, or is the minimum enough...? Something else to be considered here? If you DON'T provide for the basics, as a business, do we as a society have the duty to fill the gap? Because we are.
Do you have any idea how many Wal-Mart employees are also on some form of public assistance? Not all of them, but enough to notice and measure. Do you think Wal-Mart employees are the only ones? I don't.
I have always made an effort to better myself as a human, and with that, I have seen my ability to earn a living increase. I am not a big fan of "giving" people anything. I don't think it makes for better humans. As I have stated previously, the amazing thing about America is that you don't have to finish in the same place you start. YOU get to decide the path to individual success and achievement yourself. So yeah, it sucks, but if you want to make more than the minimum, you should probably do something to help yourself.
And fortunately for me, I don't have to decide what the minimum a business should provide an employee is. While I would love for everything to be fair and equal, it isn't, and will never be. The only reason I discuss it is so you understand I am not callous and blind to the situation. But unlike some, I reject the idea that Government can make it fair, and I know for certain that bad things happen when Government plays the equalizer.
So, while I don't think the Government should regulate what employers pay, I reject the idea that families like the Walton's should be permitted such enormous profits while a significant portion of their work force is on some form of public assistance.
The only legislation aimed at business I would be in favor of is something that would end that particular practice forever... as for the striking burger flipper? Sorry man, I can't force anyone to give you more. You have to go get it for yourself. Is it a lot of work to pull yourself up? Absolutely. But when is anything worth doing ever easy?
No comments:
Post a Comment