jfg wrote:Thing is, I didn't start a business, I'm just a bystander so I'm not morally obliged to buy a car. Anybody who starts a business should feel wrong paying their employees wages that aren't to the standards of what it costs to live. A business owner has a responsibility to the customers and the employees. A customer doesn't have any responsibility at all except for having the money to pay for their purchase.
Aspects of socialism would not be necessary if people would treat people with decency. Government is a necessity when it comes to this because people aren't ethical. We set rules and regulations on what you can't do to another human being because people are inherently evil and need a set of rules to abide by. Greed falls under that inherently evil category as well, and I see no reason why government shouldn't be involved in protecting it's citizens against it.
I agree. The Supreme Court needs to step in an protect the taxpayers from the unconstitutional use of TARP money (even by Robert Reich's standards) that will go to feed UAW greed.
I don't see people as inherently evil. I'm not of the opinion that everyone is out to screw me.
Labor gets paid at a discount to capital because labor doesn't take risk.
Just curiously, what should determine the cost to live? What's the minimum standard? What's an appropriate distance from work to live? What's the minimum allowable square footage of living space amongst a certain number of people? How should adults and non-adults be considered when determining living space minimum requirements that we would use to create this 'cost to live'? Minimum wage has to based on something concrete to be valid, otherwise we're just picking numbers out of the air. What sort of mandarin geniuses will figure out all of this for and and tell us what is a right amount and what is a wrong amount? When do right and wrong change? I am curious to know.