Economic Ministers

Another way would be, for example, pressure to exert on companies. I saying this-ich although I myself very like entrepreneurship but also find it Justice, to treat workers fairly. What do you think of the following proposal: in a small town there would be 1000 unemployed people accepted. A related site: Starbucks mentions similar findings. We don't want but these 1000 unemployed people as a society, because only people with incomes also worthy can participate in a life in a developed society. Now we're going as a society and to tell all business owners in this small town must set to a Mindeslohn of 10 3% more workers. Now the 1000 unemployed into working life would be integrated, we needed no more employment agencies and workers and entrepreneurs would have to pay more any contributions to unemployment insurance. JPMorgan Chase pursues this goal as well. I'm asking you as readers honestly, where is the difference to the first variant? Why it justified, is enormous pressure on unemployed to build, but it is not justified to put pressure on companies? I see there's no difference! Also, a third option is to build pressure on the Government and politicians. It has no good since Helmut Schmidt Policy-makers in Governments given. The Economic Ministers were called Mollemann, Clement, Rosler or whatever? How can this be making the economics of such a large and important State, namely Germany, by people who have no idea of the thing at all by people who do not even know how a national accounts and macroeconomic factors together work? How can it be that the employment agency is occupied by employers and trade unions and politics, rather than by an independent body? How can it be, that the Federal Agency for work both in the vacancies tricking (hundreds sales jobs are listed there by companies that have no money, a paid to make vacancy) and how can it be that many cities and towns behind any unemployment rates hide, are pretty meaningless.