According to Kant we should live by three rules: “(1) act only on maxims which you can will to be universal laws of nature, (2) always treat the humanity in a person as an end, and not as a means merely, and (3) act as if you were a member of an ideal kingdom as both subject and sovereign.” Therefore, according to Kant, there should not have to be a minimum wage because those in the ideal kingdom should believe that everyone has the universal right to a livable wage, should not use employees’ wages as a way to cut cost, and should pay the employees the livable wage because everyone should use their power over others in an ideal fashion. Therefore, also according to Kant, the government should not have to regulate the free market because everyone should already not be treating people as a means to an end. The Seattle example of this failed. However, that was only because it was not a universal law of nature. It was only a law in Seattle. If it truly was universal, then it would have worked because then companies would not have any other option, but to pay the increased wages. …show more content…
Therefore, the “greater good” would be achieved through a higher minimum wage. Again, this is simply because it benefits the most people. The company would still have some profits, the increase in prices to balance the wages would not be immensely high, and those who were once suffering due to low wages would no longer be suffering. Although, everyone may not be completely satisfied, one group would no longer bear the entire burden anymore. This can be shown in the Walmart example. Walmart decided that it was the right thing to do to pay their employees a bigger wage. This then caused prices to go up minimally and their profits to go down quite a bit. However, they knew that it was their duty as a major power to help increase the overall utility for