What wage is just?

[Gingersnaps4]

So you’ve never decided to “boycott” a store or company based on anything happening that you didn’t like? Be it a company policy or even a bad experience in a store? What about food you don’t like in a restaurant? If so, you better keep eating it or that restaurant could go out of business and leave people jobless!

 

[godisgood77]

Artificially imposed “minimums” cause unemployment

Crazy talk… the concentration of wealth among a very small percentage of people and their corresponding greed cause a great deal of issues related to society’s decay…

The Church’s social teaching calls the right to work and earn enough to eat, sleep under one’s own roof and raise a family. So a just wage should provide enough for those things… it’s all laid out in Rerum Novarum … the obligations of both capital and labor are clear

 

[JimG]

Well, my first job that required a W-4 form paid 75 cents per hour, but soon it was raised to 1.00 per hour. That wasn’t enough to meet all my living needs, but I didn’t care, as I was only 15.

 

[JimG]

Stop bringing in immigrants, deport 90% of immigrants, get women out of the workplace.
Then there will be a labor shortage and wages will go up.

But there is already a labor shortage. This is the tightest labor market in decades. Employers are begging for people. Yet I personally know some young people who are unemployed because the jobs offered are ‘not in their field’ or they don’t like the shifts or the hours, or they don’t like working with customers, lots of reasons. I have to assume they don’t need the money. I always figured that any job was better than no job.

 

[Theo520]

Don’t feed the trolls

Much of the economic growth in ECOD countries is built on our greater utilization of labor, on women joining the workforce.

 

[Peeps]

JimmyTolder, give it up.

Laws will not be changed to stop women from working. That will never, ever happen.

I agree with you that more women should make a choice to stay home and raise their children, at least until the children are old enough for kindergarten or first grade. But that should be up to the women and her partner (hopefully a male husband!).

Please give credit, too, to the single women who get pregnant and choose to keep their baby(ies) rather than abort. They have no choice but to work. We currently have a young woman in our department who is 32 years old, unmarried, and has 2 children (a 14-year-old and a 3-yr-old!). She has refused to become a welfare mom and has fought her way to a college degree and works in our hospital–I think she’s one of the smartest people I’ve ever met, at least when it comes to her work. Obviously she’s made some poor decisions at two times in her life–although really now, is it a bad thing to give birth to two precious human beings? I don’t think so, although it would be ideal for them to have a mom and a dad who love each other.

My point is, this woman has no choice but to work to support herself and her children. Oh wait, she COULD stay home and collect guv’ment aid (welfare, housing, healthcare, etc.). But she doesn’t. Good for her!

Anyway, JimmyTolder, there will never be laws preventing women from working, and this will never, ever change, and you will be much more mentally calm if you accept it and don’t obsess about something that you or no one else will change.

 

[Peeps]

The “Right to Work” is guaranteed by law to every single person of age in the United States.

It’s not the small percentage of wealthy people who keep people from earning a living wage. It’s the PEOPLE THEMSELVES who make choices when they are young that hobble them and hold them back from being eligible to be hired in a decent job and earn a living wage.

It starts before the child gets to school, during the baby and toddler years–do their parents (if there are any) prepare the child for school? I’ve heard teachers talk about children who come to kindergarten and don’t even know their last name, let alone the alphabet, the numbers, and the colors!

It continues in grade school, when a kid decides to be a cut-up in class and not listen to the teachers and do their work. Today, teachers contact parents to let them know–what do the parents do (again, if there ARE parents)? Do they respond with alacrity and do what is necessary to help their kid? Or do they blame the teacher, the school, the system, the neighborhood, the gangs, racism, class warfare, the rich, the health care system, the Republicans, the cops, etc.?

It’s ALWAYS someone else’s fault, isn’t it? Those wealthy elites!

And the pattern continues–the child becomes a troubled teen who rarely makes it to school, and then fails to graduate, and that sets the pattern for a lifetime of minimum wage labor jobs and collection of government aid. If they are physically strong and healthy enough to work, then they have to somehow prove that they are mentally unable to work, and that gets a label of “mental illness” or “emotional illness” stamped on them, and for the rest of their lives, they will never, ever rise above their station in life.

I realize that there truly are people who aren’t like this, and who have kept trying and trying to rise out of poverty and really ARE being held back by an evil person.

BUT…I truly that most people in the U.S. DO have the ability and the law on their side to be able to do well in school (not brilliant, just well), graduate, get a certificate in something, and find a decent job that pays a living wage.

The biggest argument against your theory, godisgood77, is all th people who do exactly that–graduate from high school with average grades, go to trade school and get hired for a living wage. Most people in the United States do just this.

Some people like me and my husband do really well in school, go to college (my husband on a full ride scholarship earned by his high academics in high school), and then get really good jobs that don’t make us wealthy, but make us comfortable and able to afford things like sports when our kids were growing up and vacations and hobbies now that we are empty nesters and senior citizens.

The United States laws do NOT contradict Church social teaching. They support it.

 

[godisgood77]

Come visit a school in the south side of Chicago and then go to one on the north side and let me know if those kids have even remotely close to equal opportunity.

It continues in grade school, when a kid decides to be a cut-up in class and not listen to the teachers and do their work.

Got it… so you believe that the kindergarten or first grade kids choices are a major driver… The kid hasn’t even reached the age of reason. Unfair burden to say the least. Your theory that it’s all the kids fault is crazy…

Have you read Rerum Novarum?

Here is a passage that answers the OP’s question I think…

Let the working man and the employer make free agreements, and in particular let them agree freely as to the wages; nevertheless, there underlies a dictate of natural justice more imperious and ancient than any bargain between man and man, namely, that wages ought not to be insufficient to support a frugal and well-behaved wage-earner. If through necessity or fear of a worse evil the workman accept harder conditions because an employer or contractor will afford him no better, he is made the victim of force and injustice.

 

[Convert3]

But how would you make these “ living wages” happen? Who will determine what the wage will be? It’s easy to speak about social justice, but how does it happen? Should the government enforce it by law? That is a recipe for disaster. Boycott? Good luck with that. Capitalism may not be perfect, but it has brought more people out of poverty than any other system. Yes, we need a safety net. But binding companies to laws and regulations across the board will force many out of business.
Instead of claiming the system is unjust, offer a better alternative. Just beware of unintended consequences should they be implemented.

 

[RuthAnne]

When the state intervenes the fix is usually worse than the problem.

 

[godisgood77]

I certainly don’t have all of the answers, but I’d do a few things…

1. Have all priests preach about Church social teaching to their congregations … in my experience a tiny minority have even heard of Rerum Novarum. Most are surprised to hear the the Church teaches that all people have a right to private property and that the Church condemns unrestricted capitalism. Knowing is half the battle, so I think that is a good start.
2. I will continue to volunteer at and financially support programs that help those born in to poverty to raise above. And will encourage others to do the same… I believe this to be a fundamental, non-negotiable for all Catholics according to the Church’s social teaching… including the preferential option for the poor.
3. I would advocate and have the Church advocate for laws that provide for and protect the weakest among us - unborn children, persons with disabilities, the elderly and terminally ill, those born living in poverty and victims of injustice and oppression. The Church teaches about the role of the State in good government. The primary purpose of a State is to provide for the. All people have equal dignity regardless of social class, and a good government protects the rights and cares for the needs of all its members, both rich and poor.

Practically speaking, I would advocate that the very wealthy carry a heavier burden in raising the bar for the weakest among us. It is shameful that there are people who, through no fault of their own, are living in poverty in America. Ideally, those who have been blessed with financial wealth would do more than they do, since they are not, I believe the laws need force their hand.

 

[RuthAnne]

I believe the laws need force their hand

That’s the scariest thing I’ve read in this whole thread.

 

[godisgood77]

That’s the scariest thing I’ve read in this whole thread.

Why? Do you believe there should be no taxes? If you read Rerum Novarum you will see that the Church teaches that the state should intervene when necessary to work toward the equitable distribution of burdens, and protect those who cannot protect themselves, that is, the poor.

 

[RuthAnne]

Taxes should be the minimum possible to sustain a constitutional government. No more.

 

[Peeps]

It’s not the kids’ fault–it’s the PARENTS’ fault for not intervening when their kids starts falling behind.

I’ve worked with quite a few of these kids in various kids’ clubs and organizations. It’s so sad. Once they start falling behind, it’s harder and harder to catch up or stay interested in school. They start acting out, or they withdraw, and things just get worse and worse. Holding them back a grade might help, but not necessarily.

There are all kinds of studies showing that kids who don’t read by a certain age will, in all likelihood, end up poor.

It breaks my heart. I try to help, but I can’t make up for the years of mis-parenting when the children were babies and toddlers. A large amount of brain development takes place in the first three years, and if this window of opportunity is missed, it’s really hard to make up for it.

Paying Daddy and Mama more might help–perhaps they would have more energy to work with their children during their non-working hours.

But I know plenty of people who receive a more-than-adequate wage who don’t prepare their children for school. Some of them tell me that they just don’t have the energy after work, or that they need to have time to go work out and have some “down’time,” and they feel that the child gets enough “'school” in their daycare. Oh, well.

My kids didn’t even realize that their parents were preparing them for school! They were having too much fun with us to recognize “pre-reading” skills practice.

 

[Socrates92]

And - in this gamble they are staking the livelihoods and futures of their employees as much as their own on the success of their business.

That is, in most cases, absurdly wrong. Case in point, my old landscaping boss lost $20,000 the first season he expanded into snow removal. I never actually surveyed the guys that worked for him at the time, but I’d be willing to bet a fair bit that none of them had that much staked in the business.

 

[Theo520]

Practically speaking, I would advocate that the very wealthy carry a heavier burden in raising the bar for the weakest among us. It is shameful that there are people who, through no fault of their own, are living in poverty in America. Ideally, those who have been blessed with financial wealth would do more than they do, since they are not, I believe the laws need force their hand.

So you want tithing mandated and not from the heart, at least for the wealthy?

The wealthy do already carry the majority of the tax burden. Not saying their contribution is at the right level, but you misrepresent reality when you imply they are not doing more than people of lesser means.

You should also acquaint yourself with church teachings on subsidiarity.

 

[godisgood77]

So you want tithing mandated and not from the heart, at least for the wealthy?

No… want it from the heart… but when not happening, it becomes societies burden to take action

The wealthy do already carry the majority of the tax burden. Not saying their contribution is at the right level, but you misrepresent reality when you imply they are not doing more than people of lesser means.

Depends on what you mean by majority of the tax burden…20% on $40k is a larger burden on a family than 40% on $500k… obviously not in terms of absolute dollars, but in terms of impact. I’m not implying anything… plainly spoken.

You should also acquaint yourself with church teachings on subsidiarity.

Very familiar with subsidiarity… sounds lime you should familiarize yourself with Rerum Novarum

 

[Sarcelle]

I never suggested any law preventing women from working.

How do you propose getting women out of the workplace?

You did say that in a previous post.

 

[Sarcelle]

If you propose what you think are viable solutions, we expect you to have thought through how these solutions, even in theory, are to be applied.