What is the percentage of population that are CEOs, etc. that received mega increases? It's probably a small percentage also, and I am sure their renumeration effected costs and bottomlines in some instances more than minimum wage, but no one ever gets outraged about them, until they are out of control. As to legislators I think the last election showed there is something the little man can do, and that is stay vigilant and demand accountability.
Hey a little information on the cost of executives in the last few years: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/mar2005/ceos-m08.shtml
Not just those two read the whole article. It has effected the entire workforce not just the excesses of a minority.
That's an excellent read, gardener. Basically CEOs are being rewarded for keeping their rank in file impoverished. Pass a law and the rich will find a way of "lawyering" their way around it and the president of the United States of Corpomerica will say it's all good and try to sweep the truth under the Executive Rug. Pursuant to your earlier post and link... people need to made accountable... and not just at election time.
I think it's time to share the wealth and stop bellyaching about the bottomline, when executives are drawing these obscene salaries. What will it really affect...their ability to redecorate their living room every year. And they probably write that off as a business expense.
Good point... it's well past that time. Passing laws has proven to be an ineffectual remedy. When corporate greed serves to endanger the security of those who benefit most from it then we will see meaningful change.
As to the argument that many of the minmum wage earners are students there are many categories that are exempt: So in many cases of really small businesses it doesn't effect them at all. And many students are not paid minimum wage right now.
Yeah but what would a loaf of bread cost in this idealized world? If my instinct is anything close to correct, the economic structure would find a way of making folks part company with those assets just by keeping themselves clothed, sheltered and fed.
I agree Stinkfoot 23.03 an hour would be outrageous, but so is the compensation that executives are granted. It's time to grant the little guy a small increase since he hasn't gotten one in ten years. And start asking why executives are making what they are making. It's time for a little realistic equilibrium.
Once again, I'd like to reiterate. Coroporate greed is a cop-out, not a real cause of poverty. First, as mentioned before, the "huge, limitless" profits imagined by everybody here simply don't exist except in certain industries. Dug out from an old macroeconomic textbook: The fact of the matter is you need these investments of capital, because capital is the single biggest factor on productivity, and productivity determines living standards. Without a good rate of return, investment (especially foreign) dries up, capital dries up, jobs are lost and productivity is stunted, hurting everybodies living standards. *I am aware that this does not apply to certain markets with hugely imperfect competition, notably oil and pharmaceuticals. Those industries need a complete shakedown.
Thank you, and yes, I've put thought into this and a lot of other issues. I've been involved in political campaigns etc., since 1960 and I've fought in the minimum wage battles many times. Nothing being said here is new. Same is true for everyone else too... only shows we're all human (is that the good news or the bad, HMmmm ...). Mud slinging between politicians on TV or between hippies in a forum - never helps. And, yes, I've been guilty of it too & I always regret it. Back to the topic at hand. As to legislative pay and what's recieved by some CEO's - right & right ... but: Everyone keeps talking about the evil big businesses, and there some. However, most workers in the U.S. work in small businesses. The U.S. economy is by no means dominated by giant corporations. Fully 99 percent of all independent (non-government) enterprises in the country employ fewer than 500 people. 19.6 million Americans work for companies employing fewer than 20 workers, 18.4 million work for firms employing between 20 and 99 workers, and 14.6 million work for firms with 100 to 499 workers. By contrast, 47.7 million Americans work for firms with 500 or more employees. Small businesses produced three-fourths of the economy's new jobs between 1990 and 1995, an even larger contribution to employment growth than they made in the 1980s. For small businesses, passing on cost increases, absorbing cost increases, taking the increases out of fat-cat CEO's pay, etc., are somewhere between very difficult to impossible. And everyone keeps talking about only those at or below minimum wage. If ya'll look at the charts I posted back on post #121 of this thread, and compare 2004 & 2005 you'll see that the number of workers recieving minimum wage went down. Fewer in 2005 than in 2004. But so what. Look at the number of people (children, single parent housholds, elderly, mentally ill & homeless, etc.) living in poverty in America. On the other hand, when you mention "poverty in America", there are BILLIONS of people who would slap you (Bitch slap, dope slap, ??? - not sure), but you will get slapped. At other times, in other places, the phrase I've used about, "Poverty in America" is - "Even if you're the shortest person standing on the top of a mountain, you're still on top of the mountain". Poverty is world wide & a long time cause I've work within. That's why I'm going to Haiti next year to try to install some solar powered water systems. Peace, poor_old_dad
Actually, I'd go further than that. I am convinced raising the MW will not solve the poverty problem. Help a little, maybe, but will not solve it. Peace, poor_old_dad