On the US’s relationship with job creators

Whenever there is a push for increased regulation on industries in the US, we always seem to hold ourselves back due to the threat that we’re biting the hand that feeds us.

It’s profoundly troubling to me that we have given ourselves this mindset that Americans’ jobs and livelihoods are merely a byproduct of companies thriving.

What happened to the free market? I feel that we can work hard to create regulations requiring companies to provide better working conditions. If we push companies out of the US, let another company that’s willing to handle our high standards step in. If the company that left the US tries cheating the system by employing mostly people outside of the US while trying to cater to US customers, let’s make that more difficult for them.

I want the US to become a place where being able to do business here is a privilege, not being able to earn a meager paycheck is a privilege. China and India have already proven that they’re willing to play in a race to the bottom on wages. That isn’t what the US is about.

2 responses to “On the US’s relationship with job creators”

  1. Ben says:

    It’s funny that you mention the words “free market” and a bit later speak of making it harder for trade into the country harder to achieve. Also, people buy things they can get the best deal on. For many different reasons many of us in this country cannot afford to pay higher prices on the things we want/need. Higher prices is what would exist if we started restricting trade because we have an ego about the quality of USA products. Higher costs all around in your scenario.

  2. Aaron says:

    Higher costs is also the threat made whenever we try to enact laws to improve our standards of living. Truthfully, most of our fiscal issues would be a non-issue if companies weren’t blindly pursuing profits, working conditions be damned. Corporations are earning more profit than ever before (even when adjusted for inflation) but corporate tax rates are not as high as income tax rates. Since corporations have pushed to pay people less (or not at all), the government is taking in less tax revenue, and the problem is exacerbated because the newly unemployed people and those with pay cuts are now more reliant on our safety net programs (and these corporations lobby politicians to try to convince us that we can’t afford the safety net programs we now rely on).

    We’d probably do a lot better if we pressed on corporations to quit taking so many profits and just pay workers more. Yes, it makes the corporation more vulnerable if it has a bad year or two, but I’m more concerned about people’s welfare than that of the corporation. If the status quo for businesses is to be paying workers well and offering great benefits, we’re going to end up with a more stable economy overall (people will not be struggling to pay bills and will instead have disposable income) and with this greater stability will come the ability for people to find jobs should a few corporations die off because they had a bad year and weren’t hoarding cash.

    The free market comment I made is referring to the fact that we allegedly value our free market, yet we’re convinced that if we drive a company away with our… standards, that no company will step in to take its place. That just doesn’t seem likely.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *