Wednesday, November 14, 2012 8:09:34 AM
Musuko42-" you'll have large areas where adults supporting families are stuck taking these "kids" jobs"
So you`re saying that `adults supporting families` should be paid MORE for performing the same exact job a 16-year-old earning pocket money is?
The work performed determines the pay. A job that entails lining up Fruit-Loops boxes and cleaning up a spill on Aisle 5 is worth minumum wage (IF you perform enough work). It doesn`t matter if you`re a 16-year-old geek or a 45-year-old father of three. Of course, if you`re a 45-year-old who`s only job skill is stocking, that says much more about you as an individual than Walmart.
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:06:02 AM
"Why? Some jobs are designed for kids, living at home, to give them experience and some pocket cash."
There's your answer: allow companies to undercut minimum wage simply by claiming "these jobs are meant for kids". If enough employers, or large-enough employers (read: Walmart, etc) do this, then you`ll have large areas where adults supporting families are stuck taking these "kids" jobs.
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 5:44:33 AM
Musuko42-"Every job should pay a living wage."
Why? Some jobs are designed for kids, living at home, to give them experience and some pocket cash. Some are entry level.
In order to EARN a living wage, your contribution to the business must worth MORE than your wage. Lining up Cheerios on a shelf does not contribute enough to warrent a living wage. (MAYBE if each Walmart store only had ONE stock boy, he'd be earning the company enough to receive a living wage.)
Musuko42-"That`s the point of minimum wage."
That is incorrect. Try studying history. The Minimum Wage was never designed as a living wage. It was about income equity for those with little or no job skills and to help eliminate sweat shops.