Replies

almost right....you should not take on an employee until the wage you are able to pay him supplies his child with the life you would find suitable for your child.

Wow. You've missed the whole point.

I didn't say anything about employees. I'm talking about the right for two people to negotiate their own terms in a business transaction. I set a price; you are free to pay that price or buy the product elsewhere.

There is no law protecting Hershey's income because they might want people to pay more for chocolate. There is no law protecting Duracell's income because they might want people to pay more for batteries. Labor is precisely the same: It's a product with a market value, and the two parties, employer and employee, are free to negotiate the value of that product. If the wage offered by the employer is too low, the employee is free to find a job somewhere else. If the wage demanded by the employee is too high, the employer is free to hire someone else.

The bottom line is freedom. Should people be free to negotiate between themselves, or not? Why is it fair to tie the hands of one but not the other?

An employee is paid what his work is worth. If he can only do $5.00 per hour worth of work, there is no reason for an employer to be forced to pay $7.25 for that work. It makes no more sense than if the Fed Gov were to declare that we all must pay $5.00/gallon for gasoline, just because oil company executives would like the higher priced lifestyle. The principle is the same, whether it's a "rich" person or a "poor" person flexing his greed.

If the $5.00-per-hour employee would like a bigger paycheck, then he has some options. He can improve his education, making his knowledge worth more in the labor market. He can go into business himself, risking his own money and efforts for the opportunity to keep all the profits for himself. In short, he can make his skills more valuable, then he will be paid more for his time. To demand more pay than his labor is really worth is simply theft. It's taking what isn't rightfully his. If he hasn't earned the pay, he has no right to demand it.

An employee is paid what his work is worth

It seems employees are paid as little as possible, thus increasing the owner's profits. If there is a surplus of laborers the employers will take the one willing to work for the lowest wage - the most desperate.

There is no law protecting Hershey's income because they might want people to pay more for chocolate. There is no law protecting Duracell's income because they might want people to pay more for batteries. Labor is precisely the same: It's a product with a market value, and the two parties, employer and employee, are free to negotiate the value of that product. If the wage offered by the employer is too low, the employee is free to find a job somewhere else. If the wage demanded by the employee is too high, the employer is free to hire someone else.

But it's not fairrrrrrr!!!