re: "Limited/Small Government" and Job Creation

Quoting Nymphadora:" So do you guys believe an employer should be able to treat employees horribly-->sweat shops-->pre-government ... [snip!] ... to believe that people would be ethical if deregulated, but history and our treatment of workers overseas says differently."

The thing with that is people would themselves choose not to work there and the business would close without government involvement. Let's say you have Sweatshop A that pays $4.00 an hour and requires 12 hours of work, no breaks and horrible work conditions. Across the street, you have Sweatshop B that pays $5.00 an hour and requires 8 hours of work, have an hour lunch break, and good work conditions.

You make more money at Sweatshop A and some people would do it. You make less at Sweatshop B, but get better benefits. People will choose themselves what they are willing to give up and what are musts for them.

Add in Sweatshop C that pays $1.00 an hour, makes you work 18 hour days, and works you to the bone. Sweatshop C will go out of business because they won't be able to find workers. Hell, fruit farms here can't find workers and they pay damn well.

Quoting ~Julie Blue Eyes~:" Sure, I'd be fine with the government regulating "ethics"....of they were at all ethical! We've got a government who abuses their power to the nth degree. I pretty much don't trust them on anything."

I think we all agree that our government abuses its power.

<blockquote><b>Quoting Nymphadora:</b>" So do you guys believe an employer should be able to treat employees horribly-->sweat shops-->pre-government ... [snip!] ... to believe that people would be ethical if deregulated, but history and our treatment of workers overseas says differently."</blockquote>

People can choose what amount of money and under what conditions they would like to work without the government getting involved.

People are already paid based on what their employer deems their "worth". If businesses were all just evil capitalists who were out to make the absolute most amount of money, then 99% of people would be paid minimum wage right now.

Quoting khigh:" The thing with that is people would themselves choose not to work there and the business would close ... [snip!] ... out of business because they won't be able to find workers. Hell, fruit farms here can't find workers and they pay damn well. "

Do you really think that the people who resort to working sweatshops are in any position to leave a job or abandon an offer when there is no guarantee of another job? Case and point...the state of Arizona does not require employers to pay waitresses/waiters minimum wage. You will rarely find a company that pays a waitress more than $3 an hour (they are expected to make up any additional income with tips that have to be evenly split between the waitress, cooks, bus boy, and host). It is an unskilled, but still physically taxing job with long hours. People still take these jobs because they have to make something.

Quoting Nymphadora:" Do you really think that the people who resort to working sweatshops are in any position to leave a ... [snip!] ... unskilled, but still physically taxing job with long hours. People still take these jobs because they have to make something."

Servers here make $2.13 an hour and they usually average over $10 an hour with tips. I don't see a problem with it. If people decide to work in sweatshops, let 'em.

Or, show me in the Constitution where it says the government is compelled to regulate industry. It's not there.

Quoting Nymphadora:" Do you really think that the people who resort to working sweatshops are in any position to leave a ... [snip!] ... unskilled, but still physically taxing job with long hours. People still take these jobs because they have to make something."

I made less than $3/hr as a waitress. It was a great job as I made a bundle in tips on some days. Other days, when business was down i didnt make much. Servers get experience at crappy diners and move up if they are good and have the drive to do so.
BUT, I'd go back to waitressing if i could as it is very good money.

Quoting Nymphadora:" Do you really think that the people who resort to working sweatshops are in any position to leave a ... [snip!] ... unskilled, but still physically taxing job with long hours. People still take these jobs because they have to make something."

Lots of states pay their waiters far below minimum wage.

How dare they expect their workers to actually work for their money by doing a good job.

By the way, I worked at a restaurant that paid their servers $2.00 something an hour. If the waiters didn't average minimum wage, the restaurant had to compensate the difference. Pretty sure that's the law everywhere.

Quoting khigh:" Servers here make $2.13 an hour and they usually average over $10 an hour with tips. I don't see a problem ... [snip!] ... let 'em. Or, show me in the Constitution where it says the government is compelled to regulate industry. It's not there."

As I am not a constitutional purist, I don't see anything wrong with the government looking out for the general welfare of citizens (within reason of course).

Quoting Nymphadora:" As I am not a constitutional purist, I don't see anything wrong with the government looking out for the general welfare of citizens (within reason of course)."

The government does that already. We have safety nets.

Quoting Nymphadora:" As I am not a constitutional purist, I don't see anything wrong with the government looking out for the general welfare of citizens (within reason of course)."

I am a purist and believe that the problems we have are because they are taking too much leeway. If they want to regulate business, they need to submit a Constitutional amendment and go about it the right way.

Quoting Nymphadora:" As I am not a constitutional purist, I don't see anything wrong with the government looking out for the general welfare of citizens (within reason of course)."

The problem is, who decides what is reasonable?

The government, that's who.

Plus, since we can all agree about the ineptitude of government, how are you comfortable with that?

Quoting TheNuge:" The government does that already. We have safety nets."

Don't you mean safety hammocks? Safety nets went away in the 1930's.

Quoting khigh:" Don't you mean safety hammocks? Safety nets went away in the 1930's."

      

Quoting SpaceCowgirl:" Lots of states pay their waiters far below minimum wage. How dare they expect their workers to actually ... [snip!] ... waiters didn't average minimum wage, the restaurant had to compensate the difference. Pretty sure that's the law everywhere."

Not everyone tips, regardless of how great the service is. Some don't feel obligated to as "they are already getting paid to serve me". There are too many variants to expect people to rely on tips for income.

I worked at a mom and pop restaurant in my first year in college. Didn't get a lot of customers in general because the food kind of sucked anyway. I was never compensated for they days when I had one customer my entire shift...

Quoting Nymphadora:" Not everyone tips, regardless of how great the service is. Some don't feel obligated to as "they are ... [snip!] ... because the food kind of sucked anyway. I was never compensated for they days when I had one customer my entire shift..."

Do you feel as though every job a person has should pay them a "living wage"?