thats what they're supposed to do...?

“At home, fellow citizens, you best know whether we have done well or ill. The suppression of unnecessary offices, of useless establishments and expenses, enabled us to discontinue our internal taxes. These covering our land with officers, and opening our doors to their intrusions, had already begun that process of domiciliary vexation which, once entered, is scarcely to be restrained from reaching successively every article of produce and property. If among these taxes some minor ones fell which had not been inconvenient, it was because their amount would not have paid the officers who collected them, and because, if they had any merit, the state authorities might adopt them, instead of others less approved.

The remaining revenue on the consumption of foreign articles, is paid cheerfully by those who can afford to add foreign luxuries to domestic comforts, being collected on our seaboards and frontiers only, and incorporated with the transactions of our mercantile citizens, it may be the pleasure and pride of an American to ask, what farmer, what mechanic, what laborer, ever sees a tax-gatherer of the United States?”
Thomas Jefferson
Second Inaugural Address

Many don’t know this, but from the end of the Civil War until the end of 1913, taxation of one’s labor was considered to be a form of soft slavery

Hypothetical: someone tells you "If you run a business and cannot afford to pay your employees a wage they can live off, you should not be in business." What do you respond with?

They are correct.

But employees still work there, so they must be doing it for a reason

It's a free country. Who am I to deny them that reason.

😉

In what capacity do you see them as correct?

Well, the question is pretty easy, because if they employees couldn't live, then there would be no employees and the company would not be in business. So its really just a general statement of truth

Aka, they obviously still work there for some reason other than simply to live.

Which means the question is useless to begin with and not really a question just a statement of fact

Hm, the way I see it, companies in regards to wages are only responsible for providing market value compensation

The self care of the worker is up to the worker themselves, not the business

I'd say it's better to have two people working for $7/hour than one person for $14/hour for this very reason

You're not listening to what I am saying or actually reading the question. You are simply making statements off of your beliefs.

Take 2 steps back and read what was said.

Clear your mind of preconceived perceptions

I am trying to challenge you on where you stand 😑

the problem of a living wage is the area that they live in

🤦‍♂️

@mightytrump @nono if your business kills all of its employees should it still be a business?

Yes. Black and white thinking will bring out my die hard support for capitalism

im not arguing with you im just saying that a living wage changes for wherever you live

It physically cannot be a business if it's employees were dead

Come on guys

New labor hello

You're arguing 2 points besides the fact

You think anyone would want to join if death was guaranteed?

Come on

Lmao

You did not ask that, you asked whether it should exist still

Let a company live by its successes and die by its failures

lol

im not arguing anything, im just pointing out the idea of a 'living wage' changes vastly depending on the area you are in

Does not even want to engage, how rich 🙄

like nyc rent

compared to living in your van

Hard to hold a conversation with someone who won't listen @mightytrump

I’m just glad to see there’s somebody on this server who’s as Pro Capitalist as me, probably more so