NationStates Jolt Archive

Hi, I have made a new proposal concerning income issues. It's my first proposal and I would appreciate any criticism on it and on my spelling since I'm from a non-english-speaking country.

Minimum Income:

Since the economy of a nations rises and falls with time people in nations are highly underpaid in times of bad economy.

Employers have all the power over the wages of their employees. To prevent poorness and diseases I suggest a minimum wage law. So that there will still be competition in the economy but more justice concerning salaries.

To protect employees against their employers there will be a law saying the minimum income:
- Of citizens under the age of 23 should be minimal 732.13 per month of the national currency.
- Of citizens above the age of 23 should be minimal 4927.2 per month of the national currency.

The gouvernment will have no direct profit on this law so it is made purely to protect nation's citizens. Still the economy may grow cause people have more to spend.

The Democratic Republic of Oukratia.

Two objections.

The first, and most important, is a moral objection. To suggest that government is justified in involving itself in what is a private matter between employer and employee is not just incorrect, it is downright reprehensible!

The second is with regards to this:
- Of citizens under the age of 23 should be minimal 732.13 per month of the national currency.
- Of citizens above the age of 23 should be minimal 4927.2 per month of the national currency.

Different currencies are worth different amounts. In a nation where one unit of its currency is ridiculously worthless, this would do jack shit. In a nation such as mine, where one unit of its currency is equal to the value of one troy ounce of gold, the minimum pay would be ridiculously high.

Thus, no moral nation can support this resolution--and neither can any nation with a shred of common sense.

nice idea, but would not get any support from the whole range of nations. Thus I'd give it the thumbs down.

What you could do is write it something like this:
---------
The United Nations:

Mindful that there are people who suffer from malnurishment, poor living conditions;

Concerned that employers have absolute control over wages in many corporate controlled nations;

Mindful of the work of unions to provide fairer pay and working conditions;

Resolves to do the following:

Urges member states to consider introducing a minimum wage into their nation, in order to provide the poorest with subsistence

Further urges member states to consider improving social welfare of the unemployed;
---------------

But even then I doubt it would get anywhere

Wow... that's a great way to make small business fire people and refuse to hire more. Not only will it drive the unemployment rates up, but it will anger the employers to boot :)

A minimum wage, defined as enough to be able to afford:
- adequate housing
- food and drink
- health care
for the person who earns the wage, plus members of the family that are supported by the wage earner who cannot work (due to being to young, raising the children, being handicapped, etc)

Would certainly be backed by the PRoGG. One has to take into account the following issues:
- that a minimum wage is a *minimum* wage and should not be used for luxury
- that a minimum wage should enable a person and supported family members to survive
- that a minimum wage is based on a full time job
- that the government should provide a minimum wage for the unemployed to enable them to stay alive and healthy and if possible find a job.

The contribution of Hirota is a good starting point for this proposal, although we think it shouldn't urge to consider but should implement a minimum wage in all UN member nations. Voluntary resolutions don't work.

The PRoGG offers to help in the development of this proposal, telegram is that help is appreciated.

regards,

UN ambassador of the People's Republic of Groot Gouda

The contribution of Hirota is a good starting point for this proposal, although we think it shouldn't urge to consider but should implement a minimum wage in all UN member nations. Voluntary resolutions don't work.

Well, I was just placing the proposal in UN-speak (the real UN has a tendancy to "urge" when they really mean "expect")

But I don't think nations should be forced to introduce minimum wages, as this is a national issue (in my opinion)

But I don't think nations should be forced to introduce minimum wages, as this is a national issue (in my opinion)

All resolutions deal more or less with national issues. Whether it's an SDI, education, fighting the axis of evil. Only the level of "meddling" differs, and I fear that for many nations this goes too far.

Worth a try though. It's a million-to-one chance, but it might just work.

G Bugle: "The first, and most important, is a moral objection. To suggest that government is justified in involving itself in what is a private matter between employer and employee is not just incorrect, it is downright reprehensible!"

Ah, my dogmatic little friend. Ecopoeia and many other nations and people disagree with your particular definition of morality. Your comments on currency are more pertinent, however.

To those who believe that minimum wages increase unemployment, the evidence from Ecopoeia's history (and also a number of other nations) suggests that this fear is unfounded.

Vlad Taneev
Speaker for the Economy

DP

The contribution of Hirota is a good starting point for this proposal, although we think it shouldn't urge to consider but should implement a minimum wage in all UN member nations. Voluntary resolutions don't work.

Well, I was just placing the proposal in UN-speak (the real UN has a tendancy to "urge" when they really mean "expect")

But I don't think nations should be forced to introduce minimum wages, as this is a national issue (in my opinion)

I don't think this should be considered a national issue since we all should work on a world without poorness and diseases. Considering you should also prevent your country against immigrants with no money and possibly highly infective diseases. It's not only about economy it's also about social justice.

I will use some of your suggestions and criticism to make a new proposal. By the way, does anyone know if you can edit/modify your proposal?

We'd be inclined to agree that this is an international issue - there's no justification for paying wages which workers can't survive on. And we'd be delighted to help Oukratia to rewrite this into a more workable form.

It's not possible to edit a proposal once submitted, but you can be fairly certain that this won't reach quorum this time around - that takes a sustained telegramming campaign and some hard arguing here. So it's worth starting the rewriting process now.

Also, have a read of the stickied thread here:
http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=124639

Standard procedure is to draft a proposal, post it here in draft form for discussion, make amendments etc as suggested by UN members and then submit the revised version. You'll end up with a much stronger proposal that way.

Comrade Albert
Delegate for the Economy

EDIT: sorry, gave the wrong thread. Corrected now. Sophista's main post and Frisbeeteria's follow-up about drafting proposals are both excellent (where is Frisbeeteria, btw?)

I love the idea.

It would be good in the RW as well.


A few ideas though:
1. Currencies have different values. You would need to find a NS standard, or compare it to a RW standard.

2. The workers making the minimum wage need to have a requirement as to how many hours a work they work. I work 21 hours a work as a high school student. Should I get at least $700 American a month? I'm actually averaging nearly $800 American a month already anyway.

3. Benifits. Should the employers also provide for things such as health care, or will the employees pay?

I'm not sure what you'd want to do with those.

If you want some help, send me a telegram.

This is a good idea.

Good luck.

Heh. Our region has started independent plans to cook up an improved version of this proposal - perhaps we should collaborate?

-DP-

It is impossible to justify government involvement in agreements between employer and employee unless one accepts slavery as a justifiable state of man.

By using an arbitrary formula without regard for varying economic conditions in different nations and regions, you could fail to aid some of the poor while unintentionally enriching others.

In my OOC nation, a person can own a home and car on federal minimum wage in one state yet be unable to afford an apartment or public transportation on the same income in another state.

The Holy Empire of Gethamane is concerned as to how this would impact nations with no private industry?
And while we're on the subject, what about nations with no public currency? Citizens of Gethamane live comfortable lives while making a whopping $0/hr... would we be put in a position to offer our employees wages?

For those redrafting: I suggest defining minimum wage along the lines of receiving enough to survive. Something more specific, obviously, but you get the drift.

And G Bugles, what if the employer is the government? I imagine that's not what you're talking about, though.

By using an arbitrary formula without regard for varying economic conditions in different nations and regions, you could fail to aid some of the poor while unintentionally enriching others.

An arbitrary formula wouldn't be necessary. You could try to define a minimum wage as "be able to afford food, shelter, education, healthcare and transport for the family the wage-earner is supporting".

That would be valid in every country. No need to get complicated, just think of what a minimum wage is for - and that is, so people will be able to survive on their wages without the need to work 24/7.

The Holy Empire of Gethamane is concerned as to how this would impact nations with no private industry?
And while we're on the subject, what about nations with no public currency? Citizens of Gethamane live comfortable lives while making a whopping $0/hr... would we be put in a position to offer our employees wages?

Whether a private industry exists, or even money, does not matter, if a minimum wage is defined as above. Perhaps with an added "the government is responsible for providing their people with enough resources to be able to survive in health." Or something like that. On one nation that might be 3.000.000 florps per month, in another country a state-provided cow and free healthcare.

Regards,

UN Ambassador of the PRoGG

A suggestion:

-----
The United Nations:

NOTING WITH REGRET that many people in the world suffer from malnutrition and poor living conditions

AFFIRMING that every person should be able to live in humane conditions

NOTING FURTHER that employers have absolute control over wages in many corporate controlled nations;

RECOGNIZING the work of unions to provide fairer pay and working conditions;

EMPHASIZING that there are situations where a person is unable to earn a full wage to sustain themself and their family, which may be beyond their control,

HAVING CONSIDERED that the standard of living varies accross countries

RESOLVES to do the following:

1. URGES all member states to implement a minimum wage for all citizens
2. DECLARES that a minimum wage shall enable a person to afford OR consists of food, shelter, healthcare and education for the person earning the wage and all supported members of the household unable to support themselves.
3. EMPHASIZES that the minimum wage should be a minimum to survive, but shall contain no luxury beyond the minimum subsistence level
4. REQUESTS that member nations take action to ensure that any corporation that is traded with from outside the UN pays their labourers a minimum wage

Groot Gouda's draft looks to be far better expressed than the original proposal.

sounds like a good draft overall, much better than anything so far.

However, I did have a problem with this proposal.

How this would fit into a nation with a well funded social care system? The DSH basically has such a large proportion of our national GDP allocated to social care that a person could ultimately earn nothing, and still have food, shelter, heathcare and education...any money they do earn is a luxury, and nobody can earn too much, thanks to 100% on all income over 100000 hinkels per annum.

However, for countries at the opposite end of the scale, will privatised healthcare need to be included when determining the minimum wage?

Oh, also I don't think education needs to be mentioned as it is already covered?

Anyway, those are niggling tiny things; overall a much better proposal :)

How this would fit into a nation with a well funded social care system? The DSH basically has such a large proportion of our national GDP allocated to social care that a person could ultimately earn nothing, and still have food, shelter, heathcare and education...any money they do earn is a luxury, and nobody can earn too much, thanks to 100% on all income over 100000 hinkels per annum.

That nation already complies as everybody has a good standard of living. If a wage of 0 currency is enough to provide a minimum standard of living, then you basically already implemented the resolution.

In the case of privatised healthcare a state can choose to raise the wage so basic healthcare can be paid for, or make basic health care free. As long as money is no objection to see a doctor.

Education might already be free according to a previous resolution, so it's included only because these 4 components make up the basic needs for society.

Of course, this was only a first (re-)draft, so modifications are more than welcome.

Regards,

UN Ambassador of the PR of Groot Gouda

I'm sure this post will reveal some of my right thoughts, but I have a problem with one of the comments by Groot Gouda, which was

"the government is responsible for providing their people with enough resources to be able to survive in health"

I don't wish for this to become a discussion on RW welfare, but why should an unemployed person have the EXACT benefints and income as a person who works hard everyday to provide for their family?

I'm not saying that there are no good reasons for people to need welfare, but now we're making it even more appealing for the people who can find loopholes and expoit them.

I would be more willing to support something that says the government will only temporarily support an unemployed individual unless they can provide good reason for not working.

why should an unemployed person have the EXACT benefints and income as a person who works hard everyday to provide for their family?


They don't. They have the EXACT same rights, which is a bare minimum to survive. But someone who works hard everyday is likely to earn more than a minimum income. Someone who is unemployed will never get more than a bare minimum.

I would be more willing to support something that says the government will only temporarily support an unemployed individual unless they can provide good reason for not working.

There are so many good reasons why a person is not working ("EMPHASIZING that there are situations where a person is unable to earn a full wage to sustain themself and their family, which may be beyond their control,") but that's not the point. The point is, that there should be a minimum wage to ensure that everybody, regardless of abilities to work, can live in relative health and has the opportunities to change their situation. Whether that person is not working because of pregnancy, illness, or lack of education.

Regards,

UN ambassador Groot Gouda

If there are no further comments the PRoGG offers to propose their amended resolution as a new draft resolution on minimum income, if the original proposer has no objections.

regards,

PRoGG UN Ambassador

A suggestion:

-----
The United Nations:

NOTING WITH REGRET that many people in the world suffer from malnutrition and poor living conditions

AFFIRMING that every person should be able to live in humane conditions

NOTING FURTHER that employers have absolute control over wages in many corporate controlled nations;

RECOGNIZING the work of unions to provide fairer pay and working conditions;

EMPHASIZING that there are situations where a person is unable to earn a full wage to sustain themself and their family, which may be beyond their control,

HAVING CONSIDERED that the standard of living varies accross countries

RESOLVES to do the following:

1. URGES all member states to implement a minimum wage for all citizens
2. DECLARES that a minimum wage shall enable a person to afford OR consists of food, shelter, healthcare and education for the person earning the wage and all supported members of the household unable to support themselves.
3. EMPHASIZES that the minimum wage should be a minimum to survive, but shall contain no luxury beyond the minimum subsistence level
4. REQUESTS that member nations take action to ensure that any corporation that is traded with from outside the UN pays their labourers a minimum wage

*claps*

I support this proposal.

I saw the new proposal of Groot Gouda and it's great. Please support it if you didn't allready.

Please reply in that thread so it stays in the first forum page, I would say ;)

I also belive that there sould be a minimum income/wage. My reasons fo this is that a lot of my citizens are under-paid and my next generation of work force, well there is not one.