Friday, August 04, 2006

Minimum/living wage-Healthcare

Chicago has passed a living wage ordinance. Mayor Daley is looking like he may give in to fear tactics.

Daley tipped his hand one day after Target pulled out of a 32-acre shopping mall at 119th and Marshfield and hinted strongly it would cut and run from the North Side's Wilson Yards project as well....... Businesses don't have to be in Chicago. . . . If they don't feel welcome, they'll go someplace else. . . . They can build on the other side [of the city limits]. . . . They're going to get our customers anyway," Daley said.

And when all those low wage jobs are in cities around Chicago what do you think that is going to do to those areas. I mean ,especially today, people can't drive everyday 20 or 30 miles both ways for a low wage job. The poor will be in or as close as they can get to the suburbs or you will have very unskilled(teenagers) labor serving you. Lets also look at it the way a crafty entrepreneur would look at it. A shortage of these stores in Chicago would imply strong demand. It would help people avoid driving many miles to get the goods they are looking for, wasting gas and time. They might even be able to add a percent or two to the price without swamping the inconvenience of travel. Business would be boffo! Your labor poll is much larger because more people would likely want to and find it economically feasible to work there. Result....pick of the better, more productive employees.
From the political standpoint higher wages reduce welfare roles and actually makes employment easier.
Now the down side of this potential plan...10 dollars an hour and 3 dollars in other benefits. That is in the vicinity of 20 thousand a year in wages and 6 thousand in benefits. While this is certainly not an ungodly wage and in the ballpark as far as cost of health insurance it may be a bit much. I am pro small business(although box stores are certainly not that). Maybe 8 dollars would be a better starting point. The insurance thing is another matter completely. It seems to me that the large companies could almost start their own insurance companies and make it work..maybe not. Could we pool businesses, large and small together to make it more affordable? If people are going to whine about "socialism" when we talk universal health care then they are going to have to come up with another answer. Right now people with insurance are filling the gap of the uninsured. In other words you(if you are insured) are paying for the health care for Walmart and Targets' employees. Shouldn't they pull their boot straps and be personally responsible for their employees? Why should you have to pay so they can have another billions in profits? It seems to me universal health care is the answer. That takes the burden off business and makes sure everyone personally pays in for their own health care. A majority of America seems to agree with this according to polls but there are still the leftover "red scare" people out there. I say they should find their own solution to the problem if single payer doesn't satisfy them. They just look impotent to me. Do something and quit whining!

8 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

One thing that is interesting is how these corporatist big business types never complain about "socialism" when they are getting some type of tax abatement or tax cut deal to promote their "free" enterprise. It not only hurts employees but also samller independent or small chain businesses. Even if they don't give a flip about their empolyees, and that is usually not the case, you would think that they would know that big bidness tax abatements are not competitive, fair or good for their small business. The other day, CNBC did a "liberal" corporatist media prop piece for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce which showed the C of C bus (very big and very new) touring the country to make sure that the small business types get the message about the "gains" they have made that are now being "delayed" in Congress regarding, among other things, healthcare and pension reform i.e.,
making sure that Big Med is taken care of first and that people won't have their pensions or enough of it so they will have to be good,obedient employees at a low-pay, no-benefit McJob until they drop over dead at 80. Why? The "enevitable" global market place demands it! Plus, its a good way for a few powerful to own and control everything and everyone. Again, they constantly complain about "socialism" but as has been mentioned before: They Are What They Accuse Others of Being. Its no coincidence that they do "business" with China and others just like they did the former USSR in the 20s and Nazi Germany in the 30s. A police state society where the main or only business of the state is to control the populace while making sure the 3% to 5% of the "deserving" elite get theirs, is ideal for the global corporatist to do "business". The free market gobbledegook, and it really is, is for the masses. The privileged with their constant greed and lust may fight among themselves, but they want a Controlled Market. A controlled market of, by and for themselves. Actually, if you study history honestly , this is what it is all about and the only model that makes sense regardless of isms masks and to whatever degree and size. There can only be justice and people be free when Each has their own resources for the needed essentials: housing, health, nutrition, education. Only then can you have true Rights and Responsibilities. The world could be this way, not perfect but headed in the right direction, instead of the never-ending downward spiral of Communist-like Global Corporatism. It just takes a change in attitudes, not physical resources.

I wandered, but did you see Olberman's Countdown yesterday? One of his "Worst in the World" was one of the anti-human hatemongers usually aka right-wing radio talk show hosts. He was saying that the minimum wage issue is or should be irrelavent because people should be ashamed to have "just a minimum wage job". It was their fault for not doing better. As wages decrease and debt increases expect to hear more of this hate talk, and it is hate talk. Studs Terkel documented that this type of attitude was more than rare even during the 1930's Depression! And he should know because he was there. Fear, greed, hate and willful ignorance will bring on these attitudes and actions among the populace itself. They need be only directed by the propaganda of the privileged
"winners" through the proper
"channels".

Speaking of which, when the
"liberal" cable network CNN did a story on the Chicago Council's minimum wage thing they only showed interviews (3) with opponents of the measure, i.e., those who favored the big business view, including the very well groomed, manikin-like Chairman of the Chicago C of C. Just couldn't find anyone with an opposing view. Or maybe that's the way it is with the whores in the corporatist media.

Larry in Roswell

8:19 PM, August 05, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

Larry the right is just as guilty of class warfare as the left. Maybe even moreso. I say class warfare? There's one I'm damned ready to fight because it truly and directly involves the survival and happiness of me and my family and friends. You are also so right on the fact that the corporatists get a hell of a load of "welfare" themselves. It is certainly a way they control us and our economy. I ask this question to people who are scared of "socialism" again...
What is the difference between government controling business and business controling government(which we have now)?

5:58 PM, August 06, 2006  
Blogger The Game said...

Socialists (liberals) show that they don't get it.
Why are their no jobs in the inner cities?
Because unions (liberal) forced all the manufacturing jobs out of the United States because of regulations and wages that were too high...
So, here they go again...
This is going after Wal-mart (maybe K-mart and Target too)...
So, what is Wal-mart going to do??? Leave the inner city again...
It's not just the inner city either.
Anyone who doesn't have the skills to get a higher paying job needs Wal-mart.
You know who else needs it? Poor people.
You can save over $2,000 a year shopping at wal-mart....
So, liberals are taking away more jobs, and taking away an opportunity for poor people to get more for their money...
I thought liberals were the ones who got the credit for caring about poor people?
Once again, liberals think with their hearts and not with their heads...
Just like with welfare and the projects and every other liberal program EVER, they will hurt the people they want to help....
Yes, it "feels good" to pass a law giving poor people more money, but it will take away jobs and a place to shop...

2:41 PM, August 08, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ron, what is worse is that we have a big bidness controlled government
aka fascism now attempting to control everything and everyone. Question isn't whether corporatism can or should be done away with, but whether with it will the basic needs of people be met: housing, health, nutrition, education. If Big Biz wants to move elsewhere then these needs can be met through cooperatives, rationing coupons, even the PX. Works and worked before. Ron, recently read an article stating the root cause of many of our problems is Narcissism and how it leads to unbridled individulism in all aspects of a nation, society, culture. I had not thought that much about it, so, Ron what is your take on it?

Larry in Roswell

11:22 PM, August 08, 2006  
Blogger Ron said...

Game, you sound like you hate small business. Why do you want to destroy small business and people having a chance at the american dream?

10:15 PM, August 11, 2006  
Blogger Dedanna said...

Game said...
Why are their no jobs in the inner cities?

Because in the inner cities, there are jobs, just that no one wants to get up off their ass and go get a legit one. They'd rather rob, steal, shoot, and otherwise gang-bang & sell drugs for a living -- they see it as a way to make a living.

I see the minimum wage increases like this -- I'm not for them, because I think that corporations, businesses (large and small) should pay people what they're worth to begin with without having to have a minimum wage (this truly is the american dream imho), and give benefits that they should. Wal-Mart does neither; at least their benefits are a rip-off in the end.

I myself hate Wal-Mart; they sell sub-standard products in order to keep things cheap for the poor.

So, the poor shouldn't have access to the decent-standard stuff as the rest of us do? I don't think so. I don't care who you are, products should be affordable for everyone, and everyone, including the poor, should make a fair wage for their experience and type of job they're doing.

This is how we raise the standards of the country, for everyone, and allow the poor to have opportunity (which is something they have too little of). All humanity deserves this for putting up with the b.s. we call life. Opportunity is what we need for everyone, including the poor (rather, especially for the poor). I seem to remember an american slogan that alluded to the fact that america has opportunity. It does, just not for the people who need it the most.

1:25 PM, August 12, 2006  
Blogger Dedanna said...

The above comments I believe are because of the minimum wage laws. It puts the masses against the classes. In the older days before the minimum wage laws, it was a lot easier for people to move into the realm of opportunity. This is no longer.

1:29 PM, August 12, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Enjoyed a lot! Cadillac srx snow tires Multiple awnings distribution What does a 1993 mitsubishi eclipse look like

4:21 PM, February 28, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home