Trump doubles down on claim that US 'wages are too high

[IlarMeilyr]

Please...allow me...

“We are a country that is being beaten on every front — economically, militarily,” Trump said. “Taxes too high, wages too high, we’re not going to be able to compete against the world. … People have to go out, they have to work really hard, and they have to get into that upper stratum.”

Donald Trump said wages are 'too high' in his opening debate statement | Business Insider

And, of course, taken in context, whether we agree or have reservations about it, he obviously was making specific reference to arbitrarily and artificially raising the minimum wage for the so-called "unskilled" labor force.

Only a liberal drone would even attempt to deny that companies which are striving to survive in a competitive market will seek to pay LOWER wages not higher. ONE way to help keep costs as low as possible is not to get forced by purely artificial laws to pa more for their unskilled labor force than the market can rationally justify.

It will lead to either a reduction in the work force (thanks for the higher unemployment, government) OR to a higher cost per unit of the companies' goods/services which (very predictably) will LOWER demand resulting (predictably) in labor force reductions (thanks either way, government, for the increased unemployment).

If our workers are paid (again, artificially, due to mindless government legislation) such a markedly higher wage than the workers in other places, then it could very well lead to companies HAVING to move their production elsewhere.

No matter how you slice it, the temporary feel good artificial increase in minimum wage ultimately has to get PAID for. Freakin' idiot liberals tend to gloss over such things and thus have little or no ability to contemplate the undesired consequences of their childish notions and policies.

Perhaps right wingers would be willing to take a pay cut to help out the job creators and move the economy along?

Perhaps some day science will advance sufficiently for you to have brain surgery so successful that even you will see how idiotic your non-sequitur reply is.

 

[Campbell]

Trump was never my first pick, though he was very useful in waking up that sleeping giant. He brought out what it is that has the people in the country worried about...and it's not some phony BS, like income equality, or GIVING 15 bucks an hour for a hamburger flipper, or what gawddam bathrooms a person who surgically added or cut off parts to themselves were going to be using...

what's even better, is it has the Democrat party and their cult followers pooping all over themselves.

Given what went down today I think PRO-guns, PRO-deportation and PRO-wall are about to propel him up another ten points.

Only with Republicans and they've lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. Learn to say, "Madame President!"

omg, do you have that saying on speed dial or something? I can see you at one of her pathetic rally's cheerleading with: everyone all together now, say Heil Hillary.....
you really need someone better to worship. A corrupted Politician who has done nothing outstanding the whole time she's been sucking a living off us taxpayers is pretty shallow. just my 2cents.

Pay your two cents into that $6,000,000,000,000 Bush borrowed from foreign banks. The debt left by Reagan and the Bushes has the debt so high that now nearly $2,000,000,000,000 has been borrowed by Obama just to pay the interest on it. Anybody who would rather have one of those Right Wing clowns than Hillary really has their political ideas all screwed up!

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Trump was never my first pick, though he was very useful in waking up that sleeping giant. He brought out what it is that has the people in the country worried about...and it's not some phony BS, like income equality, or GIVING 15 bucks an hour for a hamburger flipper, or what gawddam bathrooms a person who surgically added or cut off parts to themselves were going to be using...

what's even better, is it has the Democrat party and their cult followers pooping all over themselves.

Given what went down today I think PRO-guns, PRO-deportation and PRO-wall are about to propel him up another ten points.

Only with Republicans and they've lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. Learn to say, "Madame President!"

omg, do you have that saying on speed dial or something? I can see you at one of her pathetic rally's cheerleading with: everyone all together now, say Heil Hillary.....
you really need someone better to worship. A corrupted Politician who has done nothing outstanding the whole time she's been sucking a living off us taxpayers is pretty shallow. just my 2cents.

Pay your two cents into that $6,000,000,000,000 Bush borrowed from foreign banks. The debt left by Reagan and the Bushes has the debt so high that now nearly $2,000,000,000,000 has been borrowed by Obama just to pay the interest on it. Anybody who would rather have one of those Right Wing clowns than Hillary really has their political ideas all screwed up!

Obumbler has accumulated more debt than all other Presidents combined. While interest on that debt prior to his time in Office is certainly a big problem, his massive increase in the size of our debt won't make paying interest any easier.

Stop passing the buck. Just admit that Obumbler is the WORST President EVER!

 

[Borillar]

Please...allow me...

“We are a country that is being beaten on every front — economically, militarily,” Trump said. “Taxes too high, wages too high, we’re not going to be able to compete against the world. … People have to go out, they have to work really hard, and they have to get into that upper stratum.”

Donald Trump said wages are 'too high' in his opening debate statement | Business Insider

And, of course, taken in context, whether we agree or have reservations about it, he obviously was making specific reference to arbitrarily and artificially raising the minimum wage for the so-called "unskilled" labor force.

Only a liberal drone would even attempt to deny that companies which are striving to survive in a competitive market will seek to pay LOWER wages not higher. ONE way to help keep costs as low as possible is not to get forced by purely artificial laws to pa more for their unskilled labor force than the market can rationally justify.

It will lead to either a reduction in the work force (thanks for the higher unemployment, government) OR to a higher cost per unit of the companies' goods/services which (very predictably) will LOWER demand resulting (predictably) in labor force reductions (thanks either way, government, for the increased unemployment).

If our workers are paid (again, artificially, due to mindless government legislation) such a markedly higher wage than the workers in other places, then it could very well lead to companies HAVING to move their production elsewhere.

No matter how you slice it, the temporary feel good artificial increase in minimum wage ultimately has to get PAID for. Freakin' idiot liberals tend to gloss over such things and thus have little or no ability to contemplate the undesired consequences of their childish notions and policies.

Perhaps right wingers would be willing to take a pay cut to help out the job creators and move the economy along?

Perhaps some day science will advance sufficiently for you to have brain surgery so successful that even you will see how idiotic your non-sequitur reply is.

The only thing that is idiotic would be for a working class American to vote Republican. If there are such people who work for a living and feel that wages are out of hand, they should immediately run to their employers and demand a pay cut. The only salaries that are out of hand are those of executives and CEO's.

 

[Boss]

Please...allow me...

“We are a country that is being beaten on every front — economically, militarily,” Trump said. “Taxes too high, wages too high, we’re not going to be able to compete against the world. … People have to go out, they have to work really hard, and they have to get into that upper stratum.”

Donald Trump said wages are 'too high' in his opening debate statement | Business Insider

And, of course, taken in context, whether we agree or have reservations about it, he obviously was making specific reference to arbitrarily and artificially raising the minimum wage for the so-called "unskilled" labor force.

Only a liberal drone would even attempt to deny that companies which are striving to survive in a competitive market will seek to pay LOWER wages not higher. ONE way to help keep costs as low as possible is not to get forced by purely artificial laws to pa more for their unskilled labor force than the market can rationally justify.

It will lead to either a reduction in the work force (thanks for the higher unemployment, government) OR to a higher cost per unit of the companies' goods/services which (very predictably) will LOWER demand resulting (predictably) in labor force reductions (thanks either way, government, for the increased unemployment).

If our workers are paid (again, artificially, due to mindless government legislation) such a markedly higher wage than the workers in other places, then it could very well lead to companies HAVING to move their production elsewhere.

No matter how you slice it, the temporary feel good artificial increase in minimum wage ultimately has to get PAID for. Freakin' idiot liberals tend to gloss over such things and thus have little or no ability to contemplate the undesired consequences of their childish notions and policies.

Perhaps right wingers would be willing to take a pay cut to help out the job creators and move the economy along?

Perhaps some day science will advance sufficiently for you to have brain surgery so successful that even you will see how idiotic your non-sequitur reply is.

The only thing that is idiotic would be for a working class American to vote Republican. If there are such people who work for a living and feel that wages are out of hand, they should immediately run to their employers and demand a pay cut. The only salaries that are out of hand are those of executives and CEO's.

And yet, CEOs are the only people in the company who's salary is determined by a board of directors instead of the discretion of a formula, a manager or human resource director.

Whenever I encounter some brainwashed liberal idiot whining about CEO pay, I always like to ask them if they know what a CEO actually does? I have found that none of them do. Without fault, they are unable to explain to me what a CEO actually does. In your mind, you have perceived a person who contributes very little... sort of like the Queen of England. They're just there to suck up money and have a good time.

People with more than billy goat sense can understand that capitalists are not going to pay a CEO more than they are worth because this defeats the objectives of the capitalist to make the most profit possible. Their pay is high because the capitalist finds a value in their service. The difference between a "good" and "bad" CEO can be billions of dollars or could completely destroy your company.

 

[Borillar]

Please...allow me...
Donald Trump said wages are 'too high' in his opening debate statement | Business Insider

And, of course, taken in context, whether we agree or have reservations about it, he obviously was making specific reference to arbitrarily and artificially raising the minimum wage for the so-called "unskilled" labor force.

Only a liberal drone would even attempt to deny that companies which are striving to survive in a competitive market will seek to pay LOWER wages not higher. ONE way to help keep costs as low as possible is not to get forced by purely artificial laws to pa more for their unskilled labor force than the market can rationally justify.

It will lead to either a reduction in the work force (thanks for the higher unemployment, government) OR to a higher cost per unit of the companies' goods/services which (very predictably) will LOWER demand resulting (predictably) in labor force reductions (thanks either way, government, for the increased unemployment).

If our workers are paid (again, artificially, due to mindless government legislation) such a markedly higher wage than the workers in other places, then it could very well lead to companies HAVING to move their production elsewhere.

No matter how you slice it, the temporary feel good artificial increase in minimum wage ultimately has to get PAID for. Freakin' idiot liberals tend to gloss over such things and thus have little or no ability to contemplate the undesired consequences of their childish notions and policies.

Perhaps right wingers would be willing to take a pay cut to help out the job creators and move the economy along?

Perhaps some day science will advance sufficiently for you to have brain surgery so successful that even you will see how idiotic your non-sequitur reply is.

The only thing that is idiotic would be for a working class American to vote Republican. If there are such people who work for a living and feel that wages are out of hand, they should immediately run to their employers and demand a pay cut. The only salaries that are out of hand are those of executives and CEO's.

And yet, CEOs are the only people in the company who's salary is determined by a board of directors instead of the discretion of a formula, a manager or human resource director.

Whenever I encounter some brainwashed liberal idiot whining about CEO pay, I always like to ask them if they know what a CEO actually does? I have found that none of them do. Without fault, they are unable to explain to me what a CEO actually does. In your mind, you have perceived a person who contributes very little... sort of like the Queen of England. They're just there to suck up money and have a good time.

People with more than billy goat sense can understand that capitalists are not going to pay a CEO more than they are worth because this defeats the objectives of the capitalist to make the most profit possible. Their pay is high because the capitalist finds a value in their service. The difference between a "good" and "bad" CEO can be billions of dollars or could completely destroy your company.

Yeah, you have a CEO like Carly Fiorina, who made millions, yet ran her company in the ground, and made off with a golden parachute when they parted ways. But some poor schmuck trying to get by on $15/hr or less is making too much money.

 

[Boss]

And, of course, taken in context, whether we agree or have reservations about it, he obviously was making specific reference to arbitrarily and artificially raising the minimum wage for the so-called "unskilled" labor force.

Only a liberal drone would even attempt to deny that companies which are striving to survive in a competitive market will seek to pay LOWER wages not higher. ONE way to help keep costs as low as possible is not to get forced by purely artificial laws to pa more for their unskilled labor force than the market can rationally justify.

It will lead to either a reduction in the work force (thanks for the higher unemployment, government) OR to a higher cost per unit of the companies' goods/services which (very predictably) will LOWER demand resulting (predictably) in labor force reductions (thanks either way, government, for the increased unemployment).

If our workers are paid (again, artificially, due to mindless government legislation) such a markedly higher wage than the workers in other places, then it could very well lead to companies HAVING to move their production elsewhere.

No matter how you slice it, the temporary feel good artificial increase in minimum wage ultimately has to get PAID for. Freakin' idiot liberals tend to gloss over such things and thus have little or no ability to contemplate the undesired consequences of their childish notions and policies.

Perhaps right wingers would be willing to take a pay cut to help out the job creators and move the economy along?

Perhaps some day science will advance sufficiently for you to have brain surgery so successful that even you will see how idiotic your non-sequitur reply is.

The only thing that is idiotic would be for a working class American to vote Republican. If there are such people who work for a living and feel that wages are out of hand, they should immediately run to their employers and demand a pay cut. The only salaries that are out of hand are those of executives and CEO's.

And yet, CEOs are the only people in the company who's salary is determined by a board of directors instead of the discretion of a formula, a manager or human resource director.

Whenever I encounter some brainwashed liberal idiot whining about CEO pay, I always like to ask them if they know what a CEO actually does? I have found that none of them do. Without fault, they are unable to explain to me what a CEO actually does. In your mind, you have perceived a person who contributes very little... sort of like the Queen of England. They're just there to suck up money and have a good time.

People with more than billy goat sense can understand that capitalists are not going to pay a CEO more than they are worth because this defeats the objectives of the capitalist to make the most profit possible. Their pay is high because the capitalist finds a value in their service. The difference between a "good" and "bad" CEO can be billions of dollars or could completely destroy your company.

Yeah, you have a CEO like Carly Fiorina, who made millions, yet ran her company in the ground, and made off with a golden parachute when they parted ways. But some poor schmuck trying to get by on $15/hr or less is making too much money.

Well I can't speak for any individual or their performance. The Denver Broncos paid Peyton Manning $18 million a year for 5 years to play football... I don't know if that will be a good investment for them or not. They obviously felt that it was and I can't question that.

But your attitude is what bothers me here. You seem to think that it's not fair for some people to make considerably more money that some other people. Whenever you have a system where everyone makes the same wage, do you have freedom and liberty or do you have tyranny and oppression? History shows your "fair and equal" system is a disastrous failure.

When you have the mindset that you look at your neighbor and say... it's not fair that he has more than me... we should have the same things... this is what it ultimately leads you to:

There IS no more "individual" or individual freedom. Everything is for the STATE!

 

[Borillar]

Perhaps right wingers would be willing to take a pay cut to help out the job creators and move the economy along?

Perhaps some day science will advance sufficiently for you to have brain surgery so successful that even you will see how idiotic your non-sequitur reply is.

The only thing that is idiotic would be for a working class American to vote Republican. If there are such people who work for a living and feel that wages are out of hand, they should immediately run to their employers and demand a pay cut. The only salaries that are out of hand are those of executives and CEO's.

And yet, CEOs are the only people in the company who's salary is determined by a board of directors instead of the discretion of a formula, a manager or human resource director.

Whenever I encounter some brainwashed liberal idiot whining about CEO pay, I always like to ask them if they know what a CEO actually does? I have found that none of them do. Without fault, they are unable to explain to me what a CEO actually does. In your mind, you have perceived a person who contributes very little... sort of like the Queen of England. They're just there to suck up money and have a good time.

People with more than billy goat sense can understand that capitalists are not going to pay a CEO more than they are worth because this defeats the objectives of the capitalist to make the most profit possible. Their pay is high because the capitalist finds a value in their service. The difference between a "good" and "bad" CEO can be billions of dollars or could completely destroy your company.

Yeah, you have a CEO like Carly Fiorina, who made millions, yet ran her company in the ground, and made off with a golden parachute when they parted ways. But some poor schmuck trying to get by on $15/hr or less is making too much money.

Well I can't speak for any individual or their performance. The Denver Broncos paid Peyton Manning $18 million a year for 5 years to play football... I don't know if that will be a good investment for them or not. They obviously felt that it was and I can't question that.

But your attitude is what bothers me here. You seem to think that it's not fair for some people to make considerably more money that some other people. Whenever you have a system where everyone makes the same wage, do you have freedom and liberty or do you have tyranny and oppression? History shows your "fair and equal" system is a disastrous failure.

When you have the mindset that you look at your neighbor and say... it's not fair that he has more than me... we should have the same things... this is what it ultimately leads you to:

There IS no more "individual" or individual freedom. Everything is for the STATE!

I don't have a problem with people making lots of money. I have a problem with employers paying as little as they possibly can, treating their employees as disposable commodities to be cast aside and replaced with fresh meat to be ground down. How much freedom do you have if you are a wage slave barely making enough to survive? Do you think it is a wonderful thing to make minimum wage so your CEO can buy a second yacht and a country estate?

 

[Campbell]

Trump was never my first pick, though he was very useful in waking up that sleeping giant. He brought out what it is that has the people in the country worried about...and it's not some phony BS, like income equality, or GIVING 15 bucks an hour for a hamburger flipper, or what gawddam bathrooms a person who surgically added or cut off parts to themselves were going to be using...

what's even better, is it has the Democrat party and their cult followers pooping all over themselves.

Given what went down today I think PRO-guns, PRO-deportation and PRO-wall are about to propel him up another ten points.

Only with Republicans and they've lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. Learn to say, "Madame President!"

omg, do you have that saying on speed dial or something? I can see you at one of her pathetic rally's cheerleading with: everyone all together now, say Heil Hillary.....
you really need someone better to worship. A corrupted Politician who has done nothing outstanding the whole time she's been sucking a living off us taxpayers is pretty shallow. just my 2cents.

Pay your two cents into that $6,000,000,000,000 Bush borrowed from foreign banks. The debt left by Reagan and the Bushes has the debt so high that now nearly $2,000,000,000,000 has been borrowed by Obama just to pay the interest on it. Anybody who would rather have one of those Right Wing clowns than Hillary really has their political ideas all screwed up!

Obumbler has accumulated more debt than all other Presidents combined. While interest on that debt prior to his time in Office is certainly a big problem, his massive increase in the size of our debt won't make paying interest any easier.

Stop passing the buck. Just admit that Obumbler is the WORST President EVER!

Only to those who think George W. Bush was a good one!!

That idiot told three world leaders:

Nabil Shaath, who was Palestinian foreign minister at the time, said: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."

Mr Bush went on: "And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it."

Bush also analogized using Gog and Magog to tell French prime minister Chirac the same kind of story:

The only reason Bush invaded Iraq was to get even for Saddam Hussein trying to assassinate his Daddy in Qatar circa 1993. Saddam Hussein hated the Bushes....not America:

Let's see just how much we paid for God's fuckup!! 4500 young American lives, 35,000 seriously wounded and a trillion dollars.

About the debt! When George W. Bush took the helm we had been generating a surplus for three years and we on a path to completely pay off the $5.7 trillion but Bush had to cut taxes for his oil buddies....not once but in 2001 and again in 2003 using reconciliation to block Democrat opposition. That's where the goddam debt came from. When the debt goes up the annual interest on it goes up too.

Anybody who doubts that the entire Republican party was pissed off about the attempted Bush assassination should read this letter:

December 18, 1998


The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President,

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor. The policy of containment of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq's chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam's secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons. Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world's supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat. Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate.
The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for
removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council. We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitag
William J. Bennett Jeffrey Bergner
John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad William Kristol
Richard Perle Peter W.Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr.
Vin Weber Paul Wolfowitz
R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick

 

[Boss]

Perhaps some day science will advance sufficiently for you to have brain surgery so successful that even you will see how idiotic your non-sequitur reply is.

The only thing that is idiotic would be for a working class American to vote Republican. If there are such people who work for a living and feel that wages are out of hand, they should immediately run to their employers and demand a pay cut. The only salaries that are out of hand are those of executives and CEO's.

And yet, CEOs are the only people in the company who's salary is determined by a board of directors instead of the discretion of a formula, a manager or human resource director.

Whenever I encounter some brainwashed liberal idiot whining about CEO pay, I always like to ask them if they know what a CEO actually does? I have found that none of them do. Without fault, they are unable to explain to me what a CEO actually does. In your mind, you have perceived a person who contributes very little... sort of like the Queen of England. They're just there to suck up money and have a good time.

People with more than billy goat sense can understand that capitalists are not going to pay a CEO more than they are worth because this defeats the objectives of the capitalist to make the most profit possible. Their pay is high because the capitalist finds a value in their service. The difference between a "good" and "bad" CEO can be billions of dollars or could completely destroy your company.

Yeah, you have a CEO like Carly Fiorina, who made millions, yet ran her company in the ground, and made off with a golden parachute when they parted ways. But some poor schmuck trying to get by on $15/hr or less is making too much money.

Well I can't speak for any individual or their performance. The Denver Broncos paid Peyton Manning $18 million a year for 5 years to play football... I don't know if that will be a good investment for them or not. They obviously felt that it was and I can't question that.

But your attitude is what bothers me here. You seem to think that it's not fair for some people to make considerably more money that some other people. Whenever you have a system where everyone makes the same wage, do you have freedom and liberty or do you have tyranny and oppression? History shows your "fair and equal" system is a disastrous failure.

When you have the mindset that you look at your neighbor and say... it's not fair that he has more than me... we should have the same things... this is what it ultimately leads you to:

There IS no more "individual" or individual freedom. Everything is for the STATE!

I don't have a problem with people making lots of money. I have a problem with employers paying as little as they possibly can, treating their employees as disposable commodities to be cast aside and replaced with fresh meat to be ground down. How much freedom do you have if you are a wage slave barely making enough to survive? Do you think it is a wonderful thing to make minimum wage so your CEO can buy a second yacht and a country estate?

I don't have a problem with people making lots of money.

Obviously, you most certainly do. Why do you want to deny this?

I have a problem with employers paying as little as they possibly can...

Then you have a problem with capitalism. All capitalists will pay employees as little as they possibly can. That is why it is important for the employee to negotiate with the capitalist for a wage that is fair to both parties. When we establish government mandates and minimum wages, it hinders our individual ability to negotiate because the baseline has been set. We are no longer worth our true value but the value the government has said we're worth and it's the same amount for everyone regardless of individual worth.

...treating their employees as disposable commodities to be cast aside and replaced with fresh meat to be ground down.

Again, in a free capitalist system, the employees are disposable. If your performance doesn't provide value to your employer, they replace you with someone better. This serves as a motivation for the employee to perform their best work. In a system where the employee is in-disposable there is no motivation, you can't lose your job no matter how much you suck. The result is inferior quality. Would you rather have a watch made by Chinese peasants who work at the watch factory their whole life for the same equal pay, or a watch made in Switzerland by the best watch makers in the world?

How much freedom do you have if you are a wage slave barely making enough to survive? Do you think it is a wonderful thing to make minimum wage so your CEO can buy a second yacht and a country estate?

In this country, you have all the freedom in the world to leave such a job and get a better job. Or, you can become your own CEO and start your own company. You don't have to remain miserable and stuck in a crappy job. If you didn't have the artificial government baseline of a minimum wage you could negotiate a wage reflective of your individual worth. You've limited your freedom with a minimum wage.

You said in the beginning, you didn't have a problem with people making lots of money but this doesn't sound like you don't have a problem. It sounds like you are very jealous of the CEO buying yachts and estates. And again, what you are doing is looking at someone else and saying... I should be treated equally to them! Well, in this case, you shouldn't. The CEO has worked his/her way up to that position and you haven't.

Now let me ask you to use an open mind and consider the following scenario. Let's say you have a job that you've worked at for 15 years and you get paid fairly well. Your company just hired a young kid to come in and make coffee and bring doughnuts... The kid starts whining and moaning that you make way more than him and it's just not fair that you can live in a nice home and drive a nice car and he can barely get by. So your boss decides the kid makes a valid point and he adds up all wages and divides by number of employees to come up with an average wage which all employees then will make. Everyone is equal, all is fair, right? You are making considerably less but doughnut boy is making the same as you now. This is okay with you because it's more fair, right?