If you want to be a bleeding heart, send them your paycheck. Just don't demand that risk-taking entrepreneurs lower their wage class for the sake of benefiting grasshoppers. A business owner is a job description too. The federal government will even give you a grant for certain areas of business. Agricultural work is still not slavery.
What is on the table here is a) employer pays living wage and does less well himself, or b) employer uses weaseling bargaining tactics with an uneducated workforce without leaders or representation to screw wages down as low as they'll go, and employees and their family live in serfdom while employer's kids break wind through silk and go off to Harvard
Capitalism 101. Isn't it nice knowing you have the right to be rich if you want to? I'm surprised I got that. I feel dumb today.
Representation and syndical negotiations can't and won't secure each employee a four-hour workday and a corner office and expense account, with a salary starting at $75K.
The only thing that will secure that is for the employee to make himself valued at that.
So now the name-calling starts. Well, take a note here -- I just cited an unimpeachable Republican source, Milton Friedman, to the effect that the society is better off when the people who pull the load can negotiate a fair wage instead of getting individually skinned by smarter, better negotiators. What part of my reasoned and authoritative argument do you not want to understand?
Just don't demand that risk-taking entrepreneurs lower their wage class for the sake of benefiting grasshoppers.
Ah, "grasshoppers" -- another name being called, only this time it's the people you don't want to pay. Do I take it by "grasshopper" that you mean job-hoppers? Or do you mean people who don't seem to have the ability or inclination to plan ahead in 20-year increments the way the most successful people do?
But I take it that you do mean the people trying to retire with the firms that are busting them out after 15 or 20 years -- either documenting their files individually with thin beeves and firing them, or calling on "correlatable" corporate events to serve as pegs for running them off en masse, to avoid the catchup provisions of ERISA for over-50 employees?
Meanwhile, if my heart bleeds, it doesn't bleed as yours evidently does, for millionaires who have to settle on a fair wage with their employees rather than skinning them and beating them down as God (or was it Lucifer?) surely intended, so that they could be triple or quadruple millionaires instead. Labor unions were invented for hardnoses like you, to prevent your falling into the sin of avarice, and the social bad habit of engaging bond labor.
A business owner is a job description too.
Not really -- it's above job descriptions, since the proprietor is a principal not an agent. But I take your point; he has to get a living, too. (Hemorrhage check -- am I bleeding for him unnecessarily?)
Agricultural work is still not slavery.
I didn't say it is, but it has shown a historical tendency to become that, when there's too great a disparity between the organizational ability of employers and employees. We have a history of bond labor in this country which isn't confined to the 19th century. The FBI still makes the occasional arrest among agricultural-labor "contractors".