Byron Jeff wrote:

>> It's easy to label and dismiss. Easier than answering the question: if
>> paying workers more improves productivity, why do you need minimum wage
>> legislation?
> 
> Agreed. So let me ask a different question: If you did not have minimum
> wage laws, what do you think would be the balance point for wages? Pay
> too low and no one will do the job, pay too high and your competitors
> run you out of business. So what would you do for labor if their costs
> were unfixed?

Can't speak for Vitaliy, but I think he'd just pay something between what
he needs to pay to get the quality of work he needs and what he can pay
while still selling his products at a competitive price. Sometimes the
latter is lower than the former, for whatever reason, and that's when you
have trouble with your business model :) -- no minimum wage law will change
that.

I think one problem with minimum wages is that people often think of
themselves as employees, dependent workers. I don't think there's a way
where a society can "provide work" for everybody. IMO people should get
used to the approach that if you want to receive something, you have to
trade with something -- which leads you to the question "what do I have to
trade?" In that situation, you need to look at yourself and ask "what can I
do that makes someone pay me X?" The key point here is that what I can and
what I want doesn't really matter for itself, what matters is what any of
that is worth to someone else, and who that is. I think looking at working
from this perspective helps a good deal, and getting used to looking at it
from that perspective as early as possible may help some.

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist