But here’s the problem—how do you fix it, seeing that there are many different reasons for seeking employment, everybody has different needs, and some people don’t even seek employment at all, but choose to work for themselves, by farming or hiring themselves out for odd jobs, or making things to sell?The gap does matter. Those at the top have more than enough to live a wonderful life, while those at the bottom half to scrape to get by. That is morally wrong.
But $15 isn’t the same across the board. $15 per hour in New York City is peanuts but a really good paying job in rural Ohio.The first way to start fixing things is to increase the minimum wage. Be it a raise up to $15 an hour or more.
there are already laws in place that punish employers who use illegals. However it is small businesses, agriculture, and families that employ most illegals. It’s the maid, nanny, gardener employer who is the most involved in illegals holding jobs. Billion dollar companies don’t employ illegals. The majority of their workforce is overseas.Those employers who hire illegal immigrants to work should be fined, because the inducement of their work, even at low wages, is what brings many illegals into our country
You’ve got to be kidding me. You know what companies will do? They’ll say, “Heck no I’m not hiring a bunch of fry cooks for $15 an hour each plus benefits! Engineers, go build a robot to make the food!” Because paying me twice that over a year or two to help develop that robot is cheaper than hiring five of those fry cooks.The first way to start fixing things is to increase the minimum wage. Be it a raise up to $15 an hour or more.
Our local McDonald’s is already automatedYou know what companies will do? They’ll say, “Heck no I’m not hiring a bunch of fry cooks for $15 an hour each plus benefits! Engineers, go build a robot
Yes, you do.The kid who works in a restaurant and lives at home and is supported by parents is there as a starter job—to pick up a few extra bucks and learn work habits.
But then you have a waitress who is a grownup, supporting a family and needs health benefits and to put a roof over their head and food on the table.
So…
Do you pay them the same pay for the same work?
And, if you hire a “family man” more because he has a family to support than a “single girl,” there are unintended consequences. Employers would benefit by hiring women orAlthough, that’s not necessarily the only way it can go down.
In ye olde days of the 50s, an employer might give an employee a raise because they were going to have another kid, or simply hire a family man at a higher salary than a single person.
But then, you ran into problems with how intrusive do you want you boss to be, or how much privacy to expect.
Or else, to hire a single girl at a smaller rate because she’s just gonna go off and get married anyway (especially if she’s pretty).
How is that relevant? What would matter is the conditions of the poor and whether there is opportunity to improve their lot.In the United States, there never has been a larger disparity between the very poor and the very rich.
I would love to hear how.As Catholics, we have an obligation to help the poor, but the government enforced universal basic income is not the way to do so and could even harm the poor.