4 votes

What if government refused to grant welfare benefits to corporations able to pay a living wage?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who keeps hearing this topic brought up over and over among friends and on Facebook, about how places like McDonald's should pay their employees more, etc. This story and video below got me thinking to come up with an answer for all my liberal friends who think the minimum wage should be raised. As long as the federal government is supplementing their employees' pay with welfare, what incentive or why should they bother to change anything? What if government disallowed welfare benefits to anyone working at corporations that make bookoo bucks a year? Places such as Walmart, McDonald's, etc. Not saying government would do this, but would it help? Is it anti-libertarian in some way?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

This is a down-voter to me

What's this got to do with corporations, or forcing anybody to do anything.

These corporations along with their faux-adversary bedfellows in the unions have been quite successful in the offloading of benefits (e.g. retirement) onto the taxpayer. Now they're offloading wages, too, by persuading the government to give generous handouts in the form of refundable tax credits and food stamps and other in-kind aid.

This is the fault of the complicit government, not the fault of the corporations.

Companies would be compelled by market forces to pay a living wage and to provide better retirement if Uncle Sugar wasn't picking up the load. The libertarian solution isn't to deny welfare merely to people working for corporations, it's to eliminate those doomed programs altogether.

Take back the GOP and Restore America Now.

Without the state

manipulating the currency and making capital and services artificially scarce poverty outside of that which is voluntary would disappear. The proposed solution is more government solution to fix government problem.

Living wage, welfare for corporations,..

What kinda of crap is all that? Why in the world would we want to give corporations our tax money for any reason? Any company worth a damn would just cut pay to minimum wage and have the feds pick up the rest of the tab. No raises. Nobody would work beyond what they were explicitly told. What a f'ing nightmare.

All government is anti-libertarian, so who cares if this is too?

All government is anti-libertarian, so who cares if this is too? I happen to think its brilliant!!

Corporate welfare outstrips food stamps and other welfare programs by ten times. If these welfare hogs want to snort at the largesse trough, they ought to pay more to their employees and get some of them off the dole.

The current situation of extremely high comp for executives cannot be solved by imposing salary caps or other strong-armed means. Applying caps, for example, would force the last corporate holdouts to relocate their compensation overseas.

But this is a soft-armed strategy: "You want to suck the public teat? Take a chunk of that $20,0000,000 per annum compensation and give your people a raise."

A lot of federal contractor jobs require winners to use union workers receiving union pay. They might as well do the same to the sugar companies that get subsidies, and any other firm that gets special treatment.

Its not libertarian, but this is not a libertarian situation. Its pure power and money.

"Cowards & idiots can come along for the ride but they gotta sit in the back seat!"

It's not true that all government is anti-libertarian

Libertarianism isn't anarchy. The government which governs best, governs least. That's not the same thing as no government at all. More manipulation and micromanaging of the economy is not the answer, though.

We need less regulation, not more. The government should not be micromanaging relations between employers and employees, but instead should zero out corporate welfare and should zero out federal welfare for individuals--leaving all handouts entirely in the hands of the states. Market forces will then compel employers to pay living wages. The government, usually led by Democrats but with Republicans as willing accomplices, continually undermines the free market, then points its finger and says, "look the free market doesn't work," when, of course, it is not at all free thanks to government manipulation.

Take back the GOP and Restore America Now.

WTF is a living wage?

What exactly is a living wage? I doubt anyone can really define it. The problem is when you artificially prop up wages, prices will rise for everyone to balance out the equation. Then the people you were trying to help with artificial wages end up having the same standard of living because they pay more for milk, bread, etc....

Milk and bread prices are stabilized, so it doesn't really matte

Milk and bread prices are stabilized, so it doesn't really matter what a living wage is, providing whatever pay they get exceeds necessity.

"Cowards & idiots can come along for the ride but they gotta sit in the back seat!"

Apparently she CAN AFFORD it

Apparently she CAN AFFORD it because she's been doing it for 10 years.

Southern Agrarian

The government does not want

The government does not want a living wage. If they did then they would no longer reduce the purchasing power of our wages via inflation.

All the gov wants is to cause inflation to the maximum accepted extent possible, so that the old bills are easier to pay off. One way they could speed this process up is by increasing the minimum wage to be whatever is considered to be a "living wage." It's also the reason why many government employees have automatic "cost of living" wage increases in the pay.

Soon after any associated wage increases we would then see followed by increased costs of nearly everything as well as increased tax revenues into the gov.


The Gordian Knot

Gor·di·an knot (gôrd-n)
1. An exceedingly complicated problem or deadlock.
2. An intricate knot tied by King Gordius of Phrygia and cut by Alexander the Great with his sword after hearing an oracle promise that whoever could undo it would be the next ruler of Asia.