The Minimum Wage War

The Minimum Wage War

The bar of income and the limit set on to the level of wage at a minimum is already determined. The soundproof science of wages and how it affects the labor market has been there for hundreds of years, especially the limit that is set on the minimum wage.

There is a specific correlation that merges the factors of employee reputation, employability and the lowest bar below which dysfunctional ties will occur. The lowest bar in turn will be the veto for workers who have predetermined capabilities that match their wage. So therefore what you get is what you offer, on a give and take basis and that forms the function which sets out to form the wage hierarchy.

Often in wonder, we reach a point in thinking that: Is the wage I am getting a perfect form of benefit directly from the job? The answer to this lies in the ambiguities present in the society and by setting this we are on our way to mitigate foul elements in the job force.

The minimum wage is the price floor below which the employee will not sell their labor. Minimum wages increase the cost of labor because by setting the limit of the payable wage for a particular job without any deviation, there will be increased competition and this means the real war on wage and unrest will start if not for economic stability achieved by varying mechanisms.

The exploitation of workers in “Sweatshops” has paved the way to the modern-day equilibrium in terms of how wages are arranged, designated, developed and delivered. Although differences exist in many laws for and against the minimum wage for a particular business, there are benefits and then there are drawbacks. There is this massive confusion surrounding that the fact that wage barriers can somehow account for employability losses and eventually hurt the economy and the confusion doesn’t end there.

Through decades and in history, the minimum wage has been a scapegoat for the financial markets. The downturns that we have seen in the recent past, have all indicated that the minimum wage cannot be the only factor for employee characterization. Whatever the minimum wage is, it always increases the standard of living and reduces poverty and inequality.

Finding works that suits the lowest of the minimum wage may also mean that a lot of people are missing out on jobs otherwise in their grasp. The reasons for this are particularly clear because as we set a minimum wage suppose 20 cents an hour for an employee at a certain job, there will be people who could do it better even at lower wage rates. So why do the employee and the persons employing lower the wage rates more at risk?

The answer to this very difficult question lies in the fact that there is no particular measure of how good an employee can do a job. There is a proven economic correlation that suggests for some time the minimum wage theory works well for certain demographic, it is not liable to benefit everyone and there are going to be sufferers. When the majority suffers the minority also suffers. But does this profusely interact with the economic statistics of the country and the world?

At first, the minimum wage is a micro-economical concept and bears no relation to how it affects the country as a whole. Through studying individual markets one by one, household to household, the effect of minimum wage is perfectly understood. But minimum wage did work based on the concept of feudalism and has then grown into something bigger.

The 20th century led to evolutionary steps in how to activate a system that in turn creates social coarse. Based on empirical research carried out throughout the world decade-wise, there has been an uptrend of the minimum wage increasing to validify the involvement of labor unions and workforce mandates. The term monopsony has become a tradable asset that informs us about the current state of markets and how market behaviors affect the labor minimum wage.

Basically in a monopsony, the buyer has multiple options to choose from when choosing to buy a particular product from many of the sellers. The opposite of this called monopoly has lost as it has become a baseless economic concept in the scenario of the modern world. Why is this? As the question reiterates the seller now has the precedence and has multiple buyers for the same product. This would lead to unproductive competition and eventual degradation of market economics.

The discrimination of price is an aftermath of monopsony. Different wages are paid to different groups and the elasticity of supply will diminish with the particular group of employees as there may be discrepancies within the system. The bilateral monopoly there in the world today is the exact mixture of that of a single buyer and a single seller and works well in this combination. Through the nash bargaining games, a point of the bargain will be reached from where both sides will benefit from maximum profit.

However, there are disadvantages with expenses also called switch expenses which are expenses on hold and in a state of doubt of whether to be used or not to be used. A lot of money is lost through this doubt which translates into doubts regarding the job pay or wage security of a particular person. Just by defining concepts, the real war on wage is not won.

We own identity and from that, we own the ethical backdrop which unveils the former self. In magnificent combination, character and integrity profusely adhere to the bad sides of the society, in other words, people with morale have in it themselves to fight against the wrong and right. The discussion of wrong and right takes enough backdrop from which the amassment of the science of generating wages and sub-classifying wage systems have been built with purity and perfection.

Leave a Reply