Quote:
|
Originally Posted by August
I said "around that amount" because it varies depending on where you are in the country. All their wages however are within a buck or two of federally mandated minimum wage.
And yes if prices are based on illegal below minimum wage pay then yes that is a compromise that should be met. To argue otherwise is to favor slavery, pure and simple.
|
My bad for not getting the around that amount definition. You'll have to pardon me for not being very good at interpreting the language (as evidenced by my wife's continual fascination with my inability to "read between the lines"
)
Definitely agree with you regarding how things should be in a perfect world. If the cost of an item is based on the below standard wages of the producer, then we should be willing to pay more in order for the working person to make a decent wage. However, if we take that stand, then we shouldn't be buying anything at Wally-World, anyway, since the prices of many of their products are based on the below standard wages of people overseas making those products, so the people at Wally-World would be out of work, too.
My apologies for getting off of the original subject, which is the widening gap between the "haves" and the "have nots". We could discuss the reasons for that 24/7 for years and not come to a solution. There are thousands of reasons why some have and some don't with the "fault" lying on both sides, the solution is equally difficult to quantify.