It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Doesn't that require the government to know what stimulates the economy, and that they want to do it? I haven't seen much evidence of that over the last several years. But for the sake of discussion, let's say they adopt your ideas.
My approach would be to give tax cuts/incentives to businesses for doing things that DO directly stimulate the economy.
Fine, let's say it cost the business $100,000 to raise the pay of their minimum wage workers. Where does that money come from? Will the government give them $100,000 in tax breaks? If the company gets less than that they have to cover it out of their pocket, so they raise prices, fire some workers, or both.
My first example being that a lot of people are right around the poverty level, and that minimum wage earners often struggle. I believe businesses that do pay minimum wage ( some retail stores, fast food restaurants, etc ) could be given tax breaks to increase the wages of people making near minimum wage.
To make companies eager to do it, they would have to make more money from the program than they would without it. That bonus means even higher taxes.
You could even give a slight bonus tax break to companies for participating in the program, making it something companies would be eager to participate in.
Same problems as above, plus if those firms needed minimum wage employees, they would have hired them already.
There are bound to be businesses that do not pay their employees minimum wage. I mean this would be obvious for something like a law firm, medical practices, and the like. I believe such businesses could be given tax cuts/bonus tax cuts based on creating lower-end jobs, especially to employ people that do not have jobs. Programs could be created with this money that create jobs for formally unemployed people, while the bigger businesses get tax cuts, and even a little bonus money in their own pockets for doing such a thing.
Would all this be mandatory or optional? What happens if a business shows a loss? Can they cut salaries?
To make numbers easy, let's say federal tax for any business that pays minimum wage is 30% and their labor pay is around 20%. Basically what I am suggesting is that their federal tax could be 25%, and their labor could 25%, as well. That's a 25% increase in money that could be allocated towards paying workers.
--What pension? This class of workers receive no retirement benefits, generally. Pension? That's a truly lovely thought...
--People under the power structure don't demand anything, haven't for a long time (last time was working women in the 80s? Civil Rights in the 60s?). Demanding raises is not likely, in low paying jobs.