Category: Worldviews
Well, it appears that no one has any views on the Wal-Mart issue so I'll answer my own questions.
The primary role given by God to the government is to punish evildoers (see Romans 13), that is why it bears the sword. When a person, group, or corporation commits a crime, the magistrate should pour out the appropriate wrath. That's what governments are supposed to do--penalize illegal actions. It is almost exclusively a negative enterprise. By that I mean that God has tasked the state with the job of responding to crimes; He has not given it the job of promoting agendas.
However, the government in America has taken upon itself the responsibility not only to punish, but also to advance the causes of some of its citizens. For example, it takes money away from some of its people (via taxation) and gives it to others (via welfare, etc.). It has adopted many of the assumptions of socialism. Consequently, we find politicians asserting that Wal-Mart has a "corporate responsibility" to enable its employees to maintain a certain standard of living. The Scripture does not make the same assertion.
Let's think this through a little further. Suppose these government officials pressured Wal-Mart into providing a "middle-class life" for its workers. The cost of doing business, at least in terms of salary and benefits (which used to be considered a bonus, but apparently these lawmakers view them as a duty) would double (or so). Wal-Mart would then have to significantly increase prices in order to pay the increased wages. So, the millions of customers who shop at Wal-Mart every week would have to pay more for their products. Many of these customers are well below middle-class and would experience a significant decrease in their ability to purchase necessities.
Therefore, at least one result of a coerced raising of the Wal-Mart employees' lifestyles will be the lowering of the lifestyles of many of its customers. Of course, the consistent response would be for these lower-class citizens to seek congressmen to call out their employers for not providing enough compensation to enable them to live at a higher level. And if that happened, then these businesses would increase their prices, and all of their customers would experience a decreased ability to purchase the goods. Then they could demand that the government require their employers to pay them more. And on it would go, resulting in escalated prices for everything. But if the prices of everything increases, then what used to be a middle-class salary would no longer be enough to maintain a middle-class life, because everything would cost more. The employees of Wal-Mart would once again be victims of its failure to fulfill its "corporate responsibility." So, the government would have to step in and demand that Wal-Mart increase its payment to workers. And on it would go.
However, biblically-speaking, the only time the state should become involved in wage disputes is when the employer fails to pay what it has agreed to pay for the services rendered. If an agreement was reached, then the owner is obligated, legally, to pay the contracted amount, and any boss who withholds what is due ought to be punished. But it is not the government's place to determine wages. God has not given the civil magistrate the responsibility to guarantee a certain level of income for its constituents. Citizens do not have a right to a "middle-class life," and employers do not have an obligation to provide it.