3 ms·
That's a strange way to look at the situation, when you consider the larger picture of a man's struggle in life. Someone who's working at Walmart does not make
by clicks 13y ago
That's a strange way to look at the situation, when you consider the larger picture of a man's struggle in life.
Someone who's working at Walmart does not make a lot of money, they most likely cannot afford to give their children the best education, they cannot afford a reliable car, they're more at risk of failing to make the rent payment due to some unforeseen accident.
Someone who's in the financial position to be able to comfortably invest their money, or is otherwise a millionaire, even if they lose a good few hundred thousand dollars, it will not affect them much. At least, not as much to pose the question of if they'll be sleeping on their own comfy bed or in a homeless shelter.
When you say that people "deserve" minimum wage because that's all of the value they're providing to society, this is what you're talking about. You're talking about putting them in a very shakey position, you're talking about making them borderline-homeless.
- philwelch 13y agoIf people can't earn enough to support themselves and their families, they should get help from the public. I don't want to see anyone borderline homeless. But it breaks the entire system to say employees should receive profits rather than shareholders when the company only exists, and only works, because shareholders are bearing the risks that the workers either can't afford to or choose not to. And we're not just talking about millionaires bearing the risk, either. About half of Americans own stock one way or another.