53 Living Wage

<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There's a huge difference between Minimum Wage and Living Wage but Living Wage promoters intentionally confuse their intentions with the much easier to defend Minimum Wage argument. In the case of Minimum Wage, you rely on people's sense of outrage & rejection of extreme exploitation, but Living Wage is a liberty verses socialism argument that would normally only be accepted by a small segment of the population. Minimum Wage people are thinking “enough money to buy lunch,” but Living Wage champions espouse “human dignity,” which usually involves a nice place to live, wi-fi, privacy, clothes, transportation, and other things they deem important to a person's self-esteme. Of course, it's totally subjective: what's one person's essentials is another person's luxory.<br /><br />Living Wage is another attempt to switch government's responsibility onto business. Market Forces are a proven method of solving complex interactions like wages, especially when combined with Welfare since the cost of Welfare comes out of General Tax receipts, meaning that The Rich pay to help The Poor, rather than the Middle Class who would normally have to shoulder the burden of artificially high wages. Market Forces will beat a Top-Down-Grand-Design every time. Also, government is a terrible teacher, mentor, or life coach. It would be better if there were more entry level jobs, and the subsequent "real world" aspects they bring. However, even with these unassialable arguments, a Europe-like “Living Wage” political majority probably will emerge over time: the concept is just too sensitive to demogogery.</p>