geojanes wrote:Doctor Fate wrote:Let's try it another way. Are you paying the "true cost" of your property (presuming you own a home)?
The answer is "no" if you deduct interest, right?
Are you paying the "true cost" of raising a child?
The answer is "no" if you deduct him/her as a dependent, right?
That the government has fixed a certain level of income as eligible for benefits is no different. And, by forcing businesses to pay a "living" (nee "true") wage, you will simply change the market. Oh yes, the employer will bear the burden. Sure. Until he/she jacks their prices to make up the difference.
We've decided (and I think rightly) that there is a public interest in people having children, so they are subsidized by the state.
We've decided (I think wrongly) that there is a public interest in people taking out mortgages to buy their homes, so they are subsidized by the state.
We've decided (I think rightly) that if people work they should earn a minimum wage.
We've decided (I think rightly) that citizens should not go hungry, that many get housing subsidies, and if you don't make much, you get a credit on your taxes instead of having to pay.
All I'm saying is that some employers have figured out that if they pay very low wages, their workers can subsidize their low wages by getting public benefits so the true cost of that person is not being borne by the employer. Does anyone think that's not true?
Does anyone think that employers (for profit and not for profit) are not profiting from the fact that they don't have to pay a living wage and their employees still live and come to work?
I think those things are undeniable facts. The issue of opinion is that what, if anything, should be done about that, and if this even a bad thing or not. We can't really argue those latter points if we can't agree about the facts though.
Now we are getting somewhere:
1. (Children) Agree
2. (interest) Agree
3. (minimum wage) Agree
4. (hunger and housing) Agree
5. Agree if by "true cost" you mean "true societal cost" but not if you mean "true employee cost".
6. "Benefiting" but not necessarily "profiting" The profit, if any, comes from the ingenuity of the employer. (We really don't know what the employer has figured out.)
7. Ahh, now I see your point.