On the contrary, a “livable wage”, or really anything that makes labor more expensive, results in less labor being utilized. And who do you think that hurts? If you guessed the poor, uneducated, and minority, you guessed right!

The livable wage, the minimum wage, and generally higher labor regulations in Europe is precisely why their unemployment rate is significantly higher than it is the United States, see here and here.

This is why it is usually rich white liberals that favor European economics over US economics…after all, its precisely them that benefit, while the poor, the uneducated, and especially the discriminated against bares the brunt of its down fall.

“I claimed that forcing Disneyland to pay more for its employees could result in less people working, all of which will be worse off than those that merely lost their HEALTHCARE.”

Just to summarize:

I claimed that forcing Disneyland to pay more for its employees could result in less people working, all of which will be worse off than those that merely lost their job.

I also claimed that forcing employers to provide healthcare is a bad way to help the poor. It forces those that don’t need health insurance (say, the young) to take a pay cut when in many cases extra pay would have helped them better.

And I also made the claim that what Disneyland is doing is really no different than what other companies already do – if you work part time, you don’t get health insurance. Period.

Let me add one final claim. I believe, strongly believe, that an economy where GM and Ford are the models is an economy that leaves us all poorer. Short term gains for long term loses. Detroit, the workers in the area, and the economy as a whole suffers because unions don’t know where to stop.

Now, what part of this do you disagree with? Because even a non-arithmetic, living at home ignoramus like myself could understand it.

Disney’s hotels, theme parks and stores require a certain number of employees to keep it operating at a level that will keep customers satisfied. Paying more money to give the same benefits to part-time employees as full-time employees means less money to hire more employees or worse, keep some employees on the payroll.

Government doesn’t really have to worry about debt, which is why part-time employees (whose paychecks are obviously smaller than those of their full-time colleagues) should be able to turn to the government for health insurance. Unfortunately, some members of the working poor, for reasons only known to Congress, are not deemed poor enough to qualify for Medicaid or Medicare.

State-sponsored universal health care for those who cannot afford a private insurer is not a perfect solution for millions of uninsured Americans, but it’s a better and more realistic solution than using the law to force private companies to provide health benefits to its employees.

Besides, if the union cares so damn much about its low-wage workers, perhaps they shouldn’t make them pay union dues. If the unions don’t know where in their budget to cut expenses to allow low-wage workers free union membership, perhaps they should look at the six-figure salaries of their highest ranking officers. Most union bosses are paid very well, growing fat off the union dues of the working poor. That’s worse than any allegation of “corporate greed” that I could ever think of.

Go ahead, boycott Disney. Warner Bros. is funnier anyway and Six Flags theme parks are way better than Disney World.