Minimum wage should be $0

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
All the employers have is the old worn out excuses. First paid women less because
their husbands and fathers looked after them.
Then it was entry level employment for fast food making billion paying peanuts as
slave labour.
Now its we just can't pay. Nonsense. what has to happen is not so much a minimum
wage but a legislated end to gouging at the multiple factor between the base worker
and the bonus touting guy at the top.
Wage and price legislation is not the answer if we are going that route to fix a problem
then make it Wage, Price and Margin of Profit controls.
We need to restore balance to a system that is no longer sustainable and the problem
is about to manifest itself sooner rather than later.

Sweden has no minimum wage, but is does have co-determination legislation. Half of the board of directors of companies of more than so many employees are elected by the workers. The chairman must be chosen from among those elected by the investors and his is the tiebreaker vote.

Sweden does have a recommended minimum wage of sorts. If you earn less than a certain amount, you can quit your job and seek governmwnt assistance without penalty. If wages are that bad, people will choose social assistance over such employment without the need for coercion. If government coercion is needed, it's because what the employer is offering is more generous than what the government is offering. If this makes the employer a mean basterd, what does it make the government?
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Sweden has no minimum wage, but is does have co-determination legislation. Half of the board of directors of companies of more than so many employees are elected by the workers. The chairman must be chosen from among those elected by the investors and his is the tiebreaker vote.

Sweden does have a recommended minimum wage of sorts. If you earn less than a certain amount, you can quit your job and seek governmwnt assistance without penalty. If wages are that bad, people will choose social assistance over such employment without the need for coercion. If government coercion is needed, it's because what the employer is offering is more generous than what the government is offering. If this makes the employer a mean basterd, what does it make the government?




Still haven't figured out why you haven't moved to Sweden since it is such a great Country rather than trying to turn Canada into a clone of Sweden.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Still haven't figured out why you haven't moved to Sweden since it is such a great Country rather than trying to turn Canada into a clone of Sweden.

Greetings from Shenzhen.

My apologies, Gerryh. You're absolutely correct. Maybe we should get rid of universal compulsory education just to be different from the Swedes. We should also end all of our trade agreements just to be different from the Swedes. Very good logic indeed. Thanks for enlightening me.

I'd found that the Hong Kong Metro could teach a thing or two to the Montreal metro about access for the blind and the deaf. It could teach Ottawa and Montreal a thing or two about making overall transportation and commuting infrastructure deaf-friendly too. Silly me, thanks for helping me see the light. In the name of blind natuonalism, perhaps we should scrap the little we do have like sonic crossing lights at intersections. After all, we wouldn't want to be accused of learning from another country, would we.

From now on, whenever Canada acquires knowledhe from abroad, I shall protest to the limits of my power at such a travesty.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
I can agree with the official compulsory minimum wage being 0$, but I would also support an officially recommended minimum wage below which a worker could quit his job to attend government-funded trades or professional training free of charge, with his employer being required by law to inform him of this right. This way the worker can decide for himself whether his employer's offer is better or whether the government's is better. After all, to legislate someone out of a job to then force him on social assistance which pays even less would be hypocritical of the governmwnt. If the givernment's offer really is better than the employer's, then no government coercion should be needed.
and then what do you do with those who are too challenged mentally to do work other than menial?

what do you do with those who are physically or emotionally challenged and essentially unable to sustain themselves because they are unemployable?

who is going to oversee the system to ensure what is happening right now in the teaching profession does not happen elsewhere...we keep churning out teachers that will not get a full time job for at least a decade?
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
and then what do you do with those who are too challenged mentally to do work other than menial?

what do you do with those who are physically or emotionally challenged and essentially unable to sustain themselves because they are unemployable?

who is going to oversee the system to ensure what is happening right now in the teaching profession does not happen elsewhere...we keep churning out teachers that will not get a full time job for at least a decade?

The government can supplement the wages of the disabled to the degree necessary, even 100% if the person is completely unemployable.

The government could think outside the box too. For example, Supposing we modified the Constitution to get rid of all language rights and let legislation itself decide, this would make it easy for Federal institutions serving the public face to face to give hiring preference to those who know a sign lanfuage. This would increase the economic value of knowing a sign language, which on turn would make more people want to learn it, which in turn would create employment for sign language teachers including Deaf teachers for more advanced classes. Improving access to government services and indirectly creating jobs for at least some Deaf.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
The government can supplement the wages of the disabled to the degree necessary, even 100% if the person is completely unemployable.

The government could think outside the box too. For example, Supposing we modified the Constitution to get rid of all language rights and let legislation itself decide, this would make it easy for Federal institutions serving the public face to face to give hiring preference to those who know a sign lanfuage. This would increase the economic value of knowing a sign language, which on turn would make more people want to learn it, which in turn would create employment for sign language teachers including Deaf teachers for more advanced classes. Improving access to government services and indirectly creating jobs for at least some Deaf.
okay so wages get supplemented for those in need
so does that mean there is a base line income for all?

who decides what courses can be taken?
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
okay so wages get supplemented for those in need
so does that mean there is a base line income for all?

who decides what courses can be taken?

We could do a base line income for all. Hadn't the Green Party proposed something like that? I'd be concerned about the details, but I could support something like that in principle.

As for who decides on the courses, give them a school voucher and let them choose among trades and professions that are presently outstripping market supply, among other possible ideas.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
We could do a base line income for all. Hadn't the Green Party proposed something like that? I'd be concerned about the details, but I could support something like that in principle.

As for who decides on the courses, give them a school voucher and let them choose among trades and professions that are presently outstripping market supply, among other possible ideas.
yeah I'd be a bit worried about the government handling that too but at this point this convo isn't about corruption it's just about kicking ideas around on how to fix a broken system.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
yeah I'd be a bit worried about the government handling that too but at this point this convo isn't about corruption it's just about kicking ideas around on how to fix a broken system.

True. I appreciate the obligation to help the destitute. I just believe that raising the minimum wage would price unskilled labour out of the market or cause inflation so as to negate it, neither being good for them.

Providing training to raise the value of a worker will naturally raise his income rather than legislate him out of work.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
True. I appreciate the obligation to help the destitute. I just believe that raising the minimum wage would price unskilled labour out of the market or cause inflation so as to negate it, neither being good for them.

Providing training to raise the value of a worker will naturally raise his income rather than legislate him out of work.
well I am willing to examine the view point although not convinced it can work without a guaranteed income...the problem is there will always be people incapable of working for whatever reason, mental, physical, emotional...

we as a rich society simply can not allow people to starve...I don't care if they are the laziest thing god put breath into I could not live with that, it is simply wrong...plus people get that way for a reason we need to address the reason where we can and just suck the rest up and do the right thing
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
well I am willing to examine the view point although not convinced it can work without a guaranteed income...the problem is there will always be people incapable of working for whatever reason, mental, physical, emotional...

we as a rich society simply can not allow people to starve...I don't care if they are the laziest thing god put breath into I could not live with that, it is simply wrong...plus people get that way for a reason we need to address the reason where we can and just suck the rest up and do the right thing

A guaranteed income is something I can agree with in principle, though to prevent it from being used for drugs, etc., we might want to give it in the form of a government bank card of sorts that can be used towards housing, food, clothing toiletries, books, and other things that are considered legitimate.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
A guaranteed income is something I can agree with in principle, though to prevent it from being used for drugs, etc., we might want to give it in the form of a government bank card of sorts that can be used towards housing, food, clothing toiletries, books, and other things that are considered legitimate.

Crooks are going to be crooks- just give those deserving the money! Why stigmatize them with cards (another form of green stamp)?
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Crooks are going to be crooks- just give those deserving the money! Why stigmatize them with cards (another form of green stamp)?

There would be no stigma if everyone got one.

Crooks are going to be crooks- just give those deserving the money! Why stigmatize them with cards (another form of green stamp)?

Also if we're talking about a guaranteed income for all, then desert would be beside the point.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
There would be no stigma if everyone got one.



Also if we're talking about a guaranteed income for all, then desert would be beside the point.

I'm not sure how you would propose to give everyone a guaranteed income! If it's more than about 2 cents it's not going to work. ALL the money in the country comes from people. And what are we going to do about getting services when everyone quits working?
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
A guaranteed income is something I can agree with in principle, though to prevent it from being used for drugs, etc., we might want to give it in the form of a government bank card of sorts that can be used towards housing, food, clothing toiletries, books, and other things that are considered legitimate.
it won't matter what form payment takes whether it be cash or cards, a blackmarket will develop and it will be abused to a degree...it's a given

it is also a given that it will be traded for drugs...drug addicts have a need so you will never prevent it, only thing you can do is help them to get clean and sober and that is a choice that can never be forced short of lockup

I'm not sure how you would propose to give everyone a guaranteed income! If it's more than about 2 cents it's not going to work. ALL the money in the country comes from people. And what are we going to do about getting services when everyone quits working?
we pretty much have one now in Canada with social assistance, most if not all first world nations have one in some form or another.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Okay my little Minions (with a cap is close as it gets to being a compliment), on the morality scale of 1 to 10 where 10 is the best and 1 is the least what score should you get for setting a lower limit but not setting an upper limit also. So far this count would be a collective score of 'ZERO'.
Even $20/hr part-time hours is nothing when the current upper limit is in excess $10,000/hr paid 24/7 as a dream might be a business decision so it is 'work'.