Skip to main content

View Diary: Maryland and Minnesota Democrats Undercut the National Party on the Minimum Wage (67 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It wouldn't target (0+ / 0-)

    specific companies, merely set a rate for ALL companies who fit certain criteria, and as those criteria would not be industry based, or geopraphically, or by any other metric that could be discriminatory, there wouldn't be a problem.

    Besides, they would still have to get up in court and explain why they couldn't afford to pay the minimum wage when they could pay very high wages to some.

    Actually, few large companies would fall foul, and they should support such a measure because it reduces unfair competition from those paying poverty wages.

    I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
    but I fear we will remain Democrats.

    Who is twigg?

    by twigg on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:46:09 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  what criteria? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      coffeetalk

      "Companies that don't pay people enough" is not a criteria.  It is arbitrary.  This isn't about discrimination.. we're talking business regulation.  

      They would not argue that they couldn't pay a minimum wage.  They would just argue that statutorily mandating wage ratios is a break of established liberty of contract and they would be right.

      The only "State interest" that could be offered would be "The need to make sure low-skill employees are not exploited and paid a minimum wage" but that's what minimum wage laws are for.  If you think people need to make at least $X.00 then legislate it across the board and enforce it.  But the court is not going to uphold an argument that low-skill employees of certain companies must make $Y.00 just because someone else at the company makes 200 x Y.  

      I get the idea behind what you are saying, but there is absolutely ZERO chance that withstands even passing scrutiny at any level, state or Federal.  Seriously.

      I'm not saying the court should go back to its rulings under Lochner.  We have clearly shown that the State can, in certain cases, make a compelling case for regulation of contracts but voluntary salary ratios is beyond a weak argument.  At that point why not allow Congress to regulate what prices can be set for products or services.  Or how many employees any given company should or should not have.

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 07:58:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Actually no ... (0+ / 0-)

        Because the minimum wage is legal and established.

        Sanctioning a company that is breaking the law is not discriminatory and indeed one could make a very sound "public interest" argument that the tax system be used to recoup public expense incurred by a failure to meet minimums.

        All of which is merely an example of debating why something can't be done. That helps no one. You can argue that something "shouldn't" be done, I'm all for that.

        If there is an issue that should be addressed, let's work out how to do so effectively rather than simply point to all the obstacles, any one of which could probably be overcome if a policy proposal were popular.

        I threw in a simple alternate way to accomplish something we would all like to see, and immediately was told that "We can't do that". It's a liberal plague that the right doesn't suffer from ... they just do it.

        My off-the-cuff proposal might not have much merit, but it would scare the crap out of many, and who knows what might be proposed as a serious solution, if we decided to "just do it".

        I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
        but I fear we will remain Democrats.

        Who is twigg?

        by twigg on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:11:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Minimum wage is absolutely legal (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          twigg, coffeetalk

          And, since it is argued as a state compelling interest to protect all employees, is mandated across the country (or state for state-level minimums) in all sectors and all employers.

          And the fact that there is a statutory minimum undermines any argument to create some kind of secondary special-circumstances other minimum.  

          If the state interest is to set a floor on labor wages to prevent exploitation then DO IT with a fair and accurate minimum wage.

          If any company is found violating the minimum wage laws they should absolutely be punished.  I agree 100%.

          But I fail to see the merit of debating something that is not merely politically unlikely, but actually legally prohibited in our country.

          I am not dismissing your intention.  I think I understand exactly what you are trying to accomplish, I was merely pointing out that Maximum Wage laws would not be legally enforceable in the country in which you and I live.

          This isn't a "I don't think we should do this." argument.  Its just an observation of almost 80 years of established precedent.

          Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

          by Wisper on Tue Apr 08, 2014 at 08:18:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site