Many believe that raising wages universally is of exigent concern. Too many have too little. Many cannot produce the funds to pay for life’s necessities. Those of us in the social order who have been bequeathed with enough wealth to live comfortably have an obligation: We must provide an opportunity for the needy to become people of means.
There must be one ingredient in existence to make the recipe of raising wages. This ingredient is the available funding that employers must have on hand with which to reward their employees in the first place. So, how exactly can it be ensured that companies and businesses attain optimum capital?
The problem in today’s business place is the outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries. Regrettably, workers living in developing nations who are employed by western corporations typically do not spend their dollars buying the merchandise that they themselves manufacture. Those workers, in turn, use their salaries to purchase the necessary goods and services of life which are produced autochthonously in their own lands. The goods and services these foreign workers spend their earnings on are produced by and for their own people in their own nation. In this fashion, the money that goes to pay the foreign workers is never fully repatriated to the country of the western employer, nor the western buyer. Instead, the funding is transferred to the money circulations of those developing nations. Accordingly, this begets a procedure of perpetual unremitting monetary drain on western nations in allowing the fabrication of commodities abroad. Furthermore, foreign laborers are ordinarily paid a wage that is typically so insubstantial that they do not even have the sufficient income on hand in order to buy back the very goods that they themselves manufacture.
If products are purchased in relatively the same region where those products are being manufactured and by the same workers who manufactured those goods, we develop isolated economies. Isolated economies, in which the money never leaves the circulation, are superior to today’s global economies which are contingent on overseas’ work forces. Not only do employees have the potential to find greater wealth in an economy where the cash flow has no risk of leaking out, but employing firms can achieve greater gains. It is necessary that before wages can be raised, we must ensure that our companies have enough disposable income on hand through the implementation of isolated economies.
Once attaining comfortable higher revenues, corporations must come to terms with succoring their underpaid employees. When discussing the minimum wage, it’s critical to remember the well-being of our least fortunate members of the business world: the little guy. The quandary with boosting the current minimum wage through national blanket-style implementation is that very lucrative companies such as Walmart could feasibly bear a wage increase for its employees, whereas small businesses such as a shoemaker operating out of his garage may not have sufficient capital to pay his laborers any additional money. Consequently, the shoemaker may be compelled to lay off some of his staff, his operations would be less efficacious and his earnings would wane. Most urgently however, some if not all of his employees would be now without a job. On that account, this would leave the more profitable companies to endure and monopolize those industries as the little businesses are pushed out.
When considering enhancing wages for workers, aim must be taken at the elephant in the room: companies lack an inducement to award their workers with a pay increase, unless they are obliged to do so through the command of law. What should really be done about ameliorating wages is to escalate the minimum wage only for those employers who are suitably financially prosperous. To the worried wealthy people who’s businesses would face such an ordinance, a wage increase for workers of those financially capable companies can be enforced to allow for fair ample profit for its shareholders and directors and to allow for adequate re-investment in the company to ensure competitive economic growth. Workers’ wages should not be increased in small and impecunious businesses to safeguard their opportunity to earn ample profit and proliferate as a business. If a wage-earner is amenable to working for same wage in lieu of being laid off because the compensation he currently receives is all that his employer can afford, does government have a right to adjudicate contrarily? No. Minimum wage should be raised only in proportion to the amount of accessible wherewithal that a company has, not in an indiscriminate and sweeping fashion.