Abolish the Minimum Wage - bring back Indentured Servitude
@TheCasualReporter (283)
France
January 15, 2009 6:44am CST
If I told you I'd pay off all your debts but you'd have to cede your material possessions to me and agree to work for me for 3 - 10 years without pay, and I'd provide housing, food, drink, clothing, and other basic necessities, would you do it? What if I offered to train you as an apprentice in a valuable trade?Indentured servitude and apprenticeship are ideas that in the current economic crisis have merit, but it'd require abolishing the minimum wage. We could create a cheap, skilled labor market within our own borders, cutting shipping expenses, reducing carbon emissions, and making the USA competitive, thus reviving the economy and fighting global warming. Indentured servants would be productive members of society with a roof over their heads, provided housing, food, clothing, etc. - the essentials - but no wages (or extremely limited wages - at the discretion of the "owner"). Many would be thrilled to be cared for and not have to think about rent, insurance, bills, and so on. If we treated the rights of indentured servants and apprentices as well as we do rights of animals, they would be well cared for (health care, reasonable shelter, etc).
Of course there are surely loads of negatives to abolishing the minimum wage, indentured servitude, and the apprenticeship system, so please feel free to research further and share your thoughts. Here's a good site to start with: http://www.balancedpolitics.org/minimum_wage.htm
What are your thoughts on abolishing the minimum wage and bringing back indentured servitude and the apprenticeship system?
2 people like this
6 responses
@bantilesroger (341)
• Philippines
19 Jan 09
It will not just be the Minimum Wage that will be abolished; the whole Constitution itself will have to be abolished and rewritten, especially the portion on the Bill of Rights.
It's a reverse revolution - economically, politically, socially, culturally - going back to the era of Mercantilism and Colony-Making, even feudalism. New laws, rules, regulations will have to be written, and new systems, processes, policies, structures and procedures installed.
It is striking directly at the heart of the concept of democracy.
No, I don't think it is tenable, acceptable and practicable under modern circumstances. Most likely the affected population will immediately take up arms.
@TheCasualReporter (283)
• France
19 Jan 09
It does seem a bit radical, doesn't it? Yet one might view the military, as someone else pointed out here, as already providing an apprenticeship/indentured servant model, and with success for most parties involved. Is there a way the same model could be applied to the private sector? Thanks for your comment.
@soooobored (1184)
• United States
18 Jan 09
For me, hiking the minimum wage to just above $7 is a worthless move... it's not a liveable wage, will not move anyone closer to self-sufficiency, and it makes certain government funded programs (i.e. apprenticeship or subsidized employment) less available to the public because it costs more to serve each participant.
I am a huge fan of apprenticeship programs, and I would love to see more of them. I would imagine that a LOT of kids who enter into training programs at their own expense would be willing to work with an employer, for almost slave wages (i.e. $3-$4/hour), and be guaranteed that they learn the ins and outs of a trade. Employers would love to hire, because it's affordable and they get assistance from someone who is clearly invested in the trade.
@TheCasualReporter (283)
• France
19 Jan 09
Apprenticeship seems to have some potential, doesn't it? As opposed to the university system, where you commit yourself to 4 years of education, which may or may not result in usable skills, and commit to another 10-15 years of debt to pay for the privelage, an well structured apprenticeship program would eliminate the debt burden and enable people to start producing immediately.
@sid556 (30960)
• United States
18 Jan 09
It sounds good on the surface but it doesn't settle right with me at all. I work hard for and like my independence. I have been with controlling men and it really is not a pleasant thing at all. I see this sort of arrangement leading back to the days of slavery. I have had moments in my life where I have been somewhat dependent on another even tho I worked. It is hard to escape when things are not good. I, would never, ever trade my independence just to be taken care of ever. I have my own place and I've raised my 4 kids on my own and I am poor and don't have much in the way of material gain but what I have, I have earned and no one can take it away. I have my freedom and that is worth everything to me. No thankyou casual reporter....I can't be bought.
@TheCasualReporter (283)
• France
19 Jan 09
I respect your courage and values. You make perhaps the strongest case against my proposal - personal freedom is to be preserved at all costs. It's not just what you do, it's how you do it and why you do it. Thanks for your comment!
@rosdimy (3926)
• Malaysia
18 Jan 09
Theory sounds plausible at a glance bt I do not think that it is really practical. It is a kind of step back to many years ago where whole villages were owned by one landlord. There are three main disadvantages to this system.
1) Workers will become less creative because everything is owned by the employer.
2) Employers may take advantage and force the workers to spend long hours on the job.
3) Workers will do a minimal amount of work because whether they work hard or not they still have the same number of years in servitude.
Anyway, it sounds like a form of slavery.
Abolishing the minimum wage may be a good idea, but this should be balanced with incentives so that people will work hard instead of skivving. This can work if everybody is honest.
all the best,
rosdimy
rosdimy@TheCasualReporter (283)
• France
19 Jan 09
It doesn't seem practical at first glance, but there's an argument the minimum wage is being made less relevant anyhow, in effect if not in policy: the buying-out of the economy will almost certainly result in inflation, reducing the current minimum wage's buying power dramatically and making the minimum wage unable to pay for basic goods. Much of the plan to re-start the economy may involve government-funded infrastructure work, paid at minimum wage. As for the slavery issue, many of us already feel like wage slaves because we allow ourselves to be sucked into the consumer culture mentality combined with easily obtained credit - and quickly sentence ourselves to 30 years of hard labor to pay off our credit obligations. The difference, and this is another area where I agree with you, is that we have the freedom to NOT get sucked into the consumer/credit mentality. Indentured servants would not have the freedom to choose to saddle themselves with debt. And this would be a choice for both parties (indentured servitude), not an obligation. Thanks for your comment!
@savypat (20216)
• United States
18 Jan 09
I think apprenticeship is a very good idea, it gives the small buiness a work force, it takes young people who don't like or want additional schooling in useless subjects and gives them experience and training in a trade. It seems to me that where this goes wrong is when others make the choices for the apprentice.
It also seems to me that this is exactly what the military does right now.
@TheCasualReporter (283)
• France
19 Jan 09
This is basically what the military does right now, isn't it? I wonder what the negatives would be to extending the military model to the civilian world? Thanks for your comment!
@TheCasualReporter (283)
• France
19 Jan 09
I take your point on animal shelters. But true freedom-fighters argue that having a minimum wage inhibits freedom: freedom to negotiate wages and for workers to choose to be productive and self-sufficient rather than rely on welfare. Instead we pay welfare for those needy folks - at less than minimum wage - to produce nothing. And feel dependent, and develop an entitlement mentality. Currently, productive citizens pay taxes to pay welfare recipients to produce nothing, except for perhaps unwanted children, with the argument that less than $7+ per hour is not fair.
Yet we buy billions of dollars of products produced in countries where people work for almost nothing.. so the ethical/moral argument falls flat.
