This is why you shouldn't pay burger flippers 15 an hour

[Andylusion]

I would suggest wages do not increase to meet the cost of living. No employer is looking at the inflation index every morning, to determine if he should raise wages.

Wages increasing is the CAUSE the cost of living to go up. Wages are a cause of inflation. Not inflation a cause of wages.

The reason wages are higher in Norway, is simply because the supply of low-wage workers is low. Nothing to do with cost of living.

. None of this should be tied together in concerning individual companies, and the trying to tell them what to do as if they are equal somehow. Every company should be a stand alone company. The feds know all companies are not equal, so why is it asking them to pay a minimum wage as sanctioned by the government at $15.00 and hour ?

I'm against there being any minimum wage. What you are saying, I agree with. The only thing that I was disagree with, was the idea that minimum wage should only be for 6 months, and then people should be moved up the corporate ladder.

. Well there is nothing wrong with an entrance pay in which meets a minimal standard for young folks to not be taken advantage of when entering the workforce, but the wage should be no more than a training wage that drops no lower than 8.50 an hour. If a company can't meet a standardized entrance pay of at least $8.50 an hour, then why are they in business to begin with ? Most if not all companies could honor such a wage as this, and if they can't their pond scum. Undoubtedly there has been abuse found in exploiting people in the past, so the government as in we the people set forth to have a standard set that would be adjusted over time to keep pace with changing economic times. $15.00 is nice, but in my opinion it is to much for an entrance pay where as the person has to have an incentive to move ahead in job & in life.

No, I don't think most companies could meet such a wage. I really don't. You are assuming a lot.

Why are then in business? Because they want to run their own business. That's why. What kind of question is that? I don't get it.

So the only reason I should ever start my own business is if I can pay someone else $8.50 an hour to start? You do realize that most businesses are started on less than $5,000 cash... right?

You do realize that if you made that a rule, that millions of people would be unemployed earning zero.... right?

The bottom line is that there are many jobs that do not, and can not pay $8.50 an hour. I can't pay you more money in wages, than you bring in, in revenue. If you only bring in $17,000 a year in revenue... I can't pay you $17,000 in wages. Actually you have to bring in tons more in revenue than $17,000, for me to pay you $17,000. I have to pay taxes, and unemployment comp, and benefits. Plus I have to pay for the overhead. Plus I have to pay for the cost-of-goods-sold.

And on top of all that, I have to make some sort of profit off of your labor. If I don't, then I would be better off to not have you as an employee.

So this idea that any business should magically be able to afford $8.50 as an entry wage.... That'd be great, but it's not reality for many businesses. Let alone automatically paying more after some set period of time.

. I respectfully disagree... Here is what's funny IMO of the recent drive by KFC, Taco Bell, Burger King and others who have lost customers by the thousands over the years. They think it's because of their menu's changing or the discontinuience of a product that has done this. That's not it at all.... It's because they were somehow convinced by government that they need to give every applicant a chance in life, and so they relaxed their quality standards, and began hiring anybody and everybody to work for them. Well do you think the customers didn't take note of this when their orders weren't right anymore or when they would see no hair nets and bad hygene habbits in these workers that began working in these places ? Enough is enough they had figured, and so they began taking their business elsewhere. The corporation gambled on having corporate row insulated from the exodus, but they have learned that they didn't, and now their trying these add campaigns that are saying things like we're bringing back the burritto or in the case of KFC, the're bringing back quality control on how the chicken is being cooked, but not on who is doing the cooking or serving ? LOL. Too funny they are, and so clueless as to why their customers left to begin with. You see this is the problem with corporate thinking, where as once they win the nation over, then it's let's see just how far we can take these idiots, and rack it up for us and our shareholders. Then when they ride that train into the ground, they come up with these add campaigns that doesn't address the real problems they have in which is the quality of service they offer along with their products. Chic-filet is one of thee most successful ff place out there lately, and the other idiots could learn a thing or two if they would pay attention.

Not sure about those hair nets. You go to any up scale, super expensive restaurant, and the waiters and waitresses never have hair nets, and occasional you get a hair.

Now if you get a dead fly or gigantic beetle in your food.... you got a point there. Why do I say that? I ordered a pizza a year ago, and right in the middle, dead center, was a massive June Bug. Huge beetle, in the middle of the pizza. Unless it was intentional, how they managed to cook, and cut the pizza, without seeing this massive beetle... beyond me.

You think the government did it? I thought it was minorities and special interest groups. I thought it was the store being sued by applicants based on discrimination.

Taco Bell, I thought it was just the market moved. People preferred other products.

KFC, I'll take your word for it. I rarely go to KFC, so I honestly don't know.

Burger King. You may be right on that one. My experience with Burger King was so utterly horrendous, that I stopped going there for life.

I went to one store, and ordered two items. The person on the speaker, got both wrong, and I had to repeat my order 3 times. Finally he said "just pull up". So I did... when I should have driven away. The guy at the window, never spoke to me. He was on a cell phone the entire time. He was handed a bag by someone else, and shoved it at me through the window, again without looking at me, or talking to me. When I pulled away, I found both items in the bag were not what I had ordered. They were tasty.... but not what I ordered. I laughed about that, and drove away.

I went to a different store, and this time they got the order, I pulled up to the window, and waited..... and waited... and waited... They apparently 'forgot' I was there until another car came to the drive through, and when they came to the window.... "oh!" The employee was shocked there was a guy at the window waiting! I spent 10 minutes sitting at the window, before the other car pulled up, apparently waking up the employees that I was there.

So then I went to a third Burger King, and this time, I drove up to the window after ordering, to find two people arguing, one apparently a manager. And ironically, with the manager there, I received the absolute worst possible result. In the other two cases, at least the food given, was good. In this case, they managed to screw up EVERYTHING. The fries... were burnt... like crunchy hard, charred, burnt... The burger.... was COLD.. As in luke warm, not even sitting under a heat lamp, but on a counter somewhere until room temperature. And the pop.... which I don't know how you screw up pop.... was completely and totally flat. No carbonation at all. It was slightly flavored water.

Now I wasn't so stupid that this happened in a week, but this was a visit to 3 stores over a year. Never again. Never. Burger King doesn't exist in my world. I'll never go there.

 

[beagle9]

. None of this should be tied together in concerning individual companies, and the trying to tell them what to do as if they are equal somehow. Every company should be a stand alone company. The feds know all companies are not equal, so why is it asking them to pay a minimum wage as sanctioned by the government at $15.00 and hour ?

I'm against there being any minimum wage. What you are saying, I agree with. The only thing that I was disagree with, was the idea that minimum wage should only be for 6 months, and then people should be moved up the corporate ladder.

. Well there is nothing wrong with an entrance pay in which meets a minimal standard for young folks to not be taken advantage of when entering the workforce, but the wage should be no more than a training wage that drops no lower than 8.50 an hour. If a company can't meet a standardized entrance pay of at least $8.50 an hour, then why are they in business to begin with ? Most if not all companies could honor such a wage as this, and if they can't their pond scum. Undoubtedly there has been abuse found in exploiting people in the past, so the government as in we the people set forth to have a standard set that would be adjusted over time to keep pace with changing economic times. $15.00 is nice, but in my opinion it is to much for an entrance pay where as the person has to have an incentive to move ahead in job & in life.

No, I don't think most companies could meet such a wage. I really don't. You are assuming a lot.

Why are then in business? Because they want to run their own business. That's why. What kind of question is that? I don't get it.

So the only reason I should ever start my own business is if I can pay someone else $8.50 an hour to start? You do realize that most businesses are started on less than $5,000 cash... right?

You do realize that if you made that a rule, that millions of people would be unemployed earning zero.... right?

The bottom line is that there are many jobs that do not, and can not pay $8.50 an hour. I can't pay you more money in wages, than you bring in, in revenue. If you only bring in $17,000 a year in revenue... I can't pay you $17,000 in wages. Actually you have to bring in tons more in revenue than $17,000, for me to pay you $17,000. I have to pay taxes, and unemployment comp, and benefits. Plus I have to pay for the overhead. Plus I have to pay for the cost-of-goods-sold.

And on top of all that, I have to make some sort of profit off of your labor. If I don't, then I would be better off to not have you as an employee.

So this idea that any business should magically be able to afford $8.50 as an entry wage.... That'd be great, but it's not reality for many businesses. Let alone automatically paying more after some set period of time.

. If can't pay the entrance pay, then get your fat lazy brother & law off of the couch to work for you for nothing until you can afford to pay employee's to work for you. LOL.

My brother in law... is a Iraq Veteran. He's a brick wall. If he's at home, he's either fixing something, or making something. The only time I have EVER seen him on a couch is, when he's curled up with his wife.

I'm the lazy one honestly.

Anywho... if you can do that, what you say... great. I still thing you are making a drastic judgement on other people.

There was a book store owner in the news, which closed down because the minimum wage went up. The owner said that his take home pay from the prior year was $30,000. He only had a few employees... but he can't pay them more. He's only making $10K more than they are.

But he can't run the whole store himself either. So if some high school student is willing to stock book shelves for minimum wage, while he runs the cash register.... why not? But there is no corporate ladder that he can promote this guy to. There is no ladder. He can't pay someone more, if he wanted to. What position is there above floor stock? Cashier? The owner IS the cashier.

There is no magic "move up" position in every business.

. I agree that no business is equal, and so what should happen is a qualification for exemptions should be in order. Thank your brother&law for his service from us all here.

 

[Andylusion]

I'm against there being any minimum wage. What you are saying, I agree with. The only thing that I was disagree with, was the idea that minimum wage should only be for 6 months, and then people should be moved up the corporate ladder.

. Well there is nothing wrong with an entrance pay in which meets a minimal standard for young folks to not be taken advantage of when entering the workforce, but the wage should be no more than a training wage that drops no lower than 8.50 an hour. If a company can't meet a standardized entrance pay of at least $8.50 an hour, then why are they in business to begin with ? Most if not all companies could honor such a wage as this, and if they can't their pond scum. Undoubtedly there has been abuse found in exploiting people in the past, so the government as in we the people set forth to have a standard set that would be adjusted over time to keep pace with changing economic times. $15.00 is nice, but in my opinion it is to much for an entrance pay where as the person has to have an incentive to move ahead in job & in life.

No, I don't think most companies could meet such a wage. I really don't. You are assuming a lot.

Why are then in business? Because they want to run their own business. That's why. What kind of question is that? I don't get it.

So the only reason I should ever start my own business is if I can pay someone else $8.50 an hour to start? You do realize that most businesses are started on less than $5,000 cash... right?

You do realize that if you made that a rule, that millions of people would be unemployed earning zero.... right?

The bottom line is that there are many jobs that do not, and can not pay $8.50 an hour. I can't pay you more money in wages, than you bring in, in revenue. If you only bring in $17,000 a year in revenue... I can't pay you $17,000 in wages. Actually you have to bring in tons more in revenue than $17,000, for me to pay you $17,000. I have to pay taxes, and unemployment comp, and benefits. Plus I have to pay for the overhead. Plus I have to pay for the cost-of-goods-sold.

And on top of all that, I have to make some sort of profit off of your labor. If I don't, then I would be better off to not have you as an employee.

So this idea that any business should magically be able to afford $8.50 as an entry wage.... That'd be great, but it's not reality for many businesses. Let alone automatically paying more after some set period of time.

. If can't pay the entrance pay, then get your fat lazy brother & law off of the couch to work for you for nothing until you can afford to pay employee's to work for you. LOL.

My brother in law... is a Iraq Veteran. He's a brick wall. If he's at home, he's either fixing something, or making something. The only time I have EVER seen him on a couch is, when he's curled up with his wife.

I'm the lazy one honestly.

Anywho... if you can do that, what you say... great. I still thing you are making a drastic judgement on other people.

There was a book store owner in the news, which closed down because the minimum wage went up. The owner said that his take home pay from the prior year was $30,000. He only had a few employees... but he can't pay them more. He's only making $10K more than they are.

But he can't run the whole store himself either. So if some high school student is willing to stock book shelves for minimum wage, while he runs the cash register.... why not? But there is no corporate ladder that he can promote this guy to. There is no ladder. He can't pay someone more, if he wanted to. What position is there above floor stock? Cashier? The owner IS the cashier.

There is no magic "move up" position in every business.

. I agree that no business is equal, and so what should happen is a qualification for exemptions should be in order. Thank your brother&law for his service from us all here.

It would be impossible to make enough qualification, for each business and corporation. That's why, I'm just for letting the free-market reign supreme. Germany didn't even have a minimum wage law at all until last year. Seems to have worked well for them to not have one.

 

[beagle9]

. Well there is nothing wrong with an entrance pay in which meets a minimal standard for young folks to not be taken advantage of when entering the workforce, but the wage should be no more than a training wage that drops no lower than 8.50 an hour. If a company can't meet a standardized entrance pay of at least $8.50 an hour, then why are they in business to begin with ? Most if not all companies could honor such a wage as this, and if they can't their pond scum. Undoubtedly there has been abuse found in exploiting people in the past, so the government as in we the people set forth to have a standard set that would be adjusted over time to keep pace with changing economic times. $15.00 is nice, but in my opinion it is to much for an entrance pay where as the person has to have an incentive to move ahead in job & in life.

No, I don't think most companies could meet such a wage. I really don't. You are assuming a lot.

Why are then in business? Because they want to run their own business. That's why. What kind of question is that? I don't get it.

So the only reason I should ever start my own business is if I can pay someone else $8.50 an hour to start? You do realize that most businesses are started on less than $5,000 cash... right?

You do realize that if you made that a rule, that millions of people would be unemployed earning zero.... right?

The bottom line is that there are many jobs that do not, and can not pay $8.50 an hour. I can't pay you more money in wages, than you bring in, in revenue. If you only bring in $17,000 a year in revenue... I can't pay you $17,000 in wages. Actually you have to bring in tons more in revenue than $17,000, for me to pay you $17,000. I have to pay taxes, and unemployment comp, and benefits. Plus I have to pay for the overhead. Plus I have to pay for the cost-of-goods-sold.

And on top of all that, I have to make some sort of profit off of your labor. If I don't, then I would be better off to not have you as an employee.

So this idea that any business should magically be able to afford $8.50 as an entry wage.... That'd be great, but it's not reality for many businesses. Let alone automatically paying more after some set period of time.

. If can't pay the entrance pay, then get your fat lazy brother & law off of the couch to work for you for nothing until you can afford to pay employee's to work for you. LOL.

My brother in law... is a Iraq Veteran. He's a brick wall. If he's at home, he's either fixing something, or making something. The only time I have EVER seen him on a couch is, when he's curled up with his wife.

I'm the lazy one honestly.

Anywho... if you can do that, what you say... great. I still thing you are making a drastic judgement on other people.

There was a book store owner in the news, which closed down because the minimum wage went up. The owner said that his take home pay from the prior year was $30,000. He only had a few employees... but he can't pay them more. He's only making $10K more than they are.

But he can't run the whole store himself either. So if some high school student is willing to stock book shelves for minimum wage, while he runs the cash register.... why not? But there is no corporate ladder that he can promote this guy to. There is no ladder. He can't pay someone more, if he wanted to. What position is there above floor stock? Cashier? The owner IS the cashier.

There is no magic "move up" position in every business.

. I agree that no business is equal, and so what should happen is a qualification for exemptions should be in order. Thank your brother&law for his service from us all here.

It would be impossible to make enough qualification, for each business and corporation. That's why, I'm just for letting the free-market reign supreme. Germany didn't even have a minimum wage law at all until last year. Seems to have worked well for them to not have one.

. Businesses that can prove they can't pay at least $8.50 minimum, should be able to apply for an exemption. That should solve it.

 

[Andylusion]

No, I don't think most companies could meet such a wage. I really don't. You are assuming a lot.

Why are then in business? Because they want to run their own business. That's why. What kind of question is that? I don't get it.

So the only reason I should ever start my own business is if I can pay someone else $8.50 an hour to start? You do realize that most businesses are started on less than $5,000 cash... right?

You do realize that if you made that a rule, that millions of people would be unemployed earning zero.... right?

The bottom line is that there are many jobs that do not, and can not pay $8.50 an hour. I can't pay you more money in wages, than you bring in, in revenue. If you only bring in $17,000 a year in revenue... I can't pay you $17,000 in wages. Actually you have to bring in tons more in revenue than $17,000, for me to pay you $17,000. I have to pay taxes, and unemployment comp, and benefits. Plus I have to pay for the overhead. Plus I have to pay for the cost-of-goods-sold.

And on top of all that, I have to make some sort of profit off of your labor. If I don't, then I would be better off to not have you as an employee.

So this idea that any business should magically be able to afford $8.50 as an entry wage.... That'd be great, but it's not reality for many businesses. Let alone automatically paying more after some set period of time.

. If can't pay the entrance pay, then get your fat lazy brother & law off of the couch to work for you for nothing until you can afford to pay employee's to work for you. LOL.

My brother in law... is a Iraq Veteran. He's a brick wall. If he's at home, he's either fixing something, or making something. The only time I have EVER seen him on a couch is, when he's curled up with his wife.

I'm the lazy one honestly.

Anywho... if you can do that, what you say... great. I still thing you are making a drastic judgement on other people.

There was a book store owner in the news, which closed down because the minimum wage went up. The owner said that his take home pay from the prior year was $30,000. He only had a few employees... but he can't pay them more. He's only making $10K more than they are.

But he can't run the whole store himself either. So if some high school student is willing to stock book shelves for minimum wage, while he runs the cash register.... why not? But there is no corporate ladder that he can promote this guy to. There is no ladder. He can't pay someone more, if he wanted to. What position is there above floor stock? Cashier? The owner IS the cashier.

There is no magic "move up" position in every business.

. I agree that no business is equal, and so what should happen is a qualification for exemptions should be in order. Thank your brother&law for his service from us all here.

It would be impossible to make enough qualification, for each business and corporation. That's why, I'm just for letting the free-market reign supreme. Germany didn't even have a minimum wage law at all until last year. Seems to have worked well for them to not have one.

. Businesses that can prove they can't pay at least $8.50 minimum, should be able to apply for an exemption. That should solve it.

That is just begging for corruption.

The politicians would LOVE your plan. Just imagine how many hundreds of millions of dollars would be spent lobbying government politicians, how many "donations" would start pouring in, in order to get your application for exemptions from the "entrance wage" requirement, to be approved.

This proposed regulations right here, is exactly why corporations pay for full time lobbyists to live and work in Washington DC.

 

[beagle9]

. If can't pay the entrance pay, then get your fat lazy brother & law off of the couch to work for you for nothing until you can afford to pay employee's to work for you. LOL.

My brother in law... is a Iraq Veteran. He's a brick wall. If he's at home, he's either fixing something, or making something. The only time I have EVER seen him on a couch is, when he's curled up with his wife.

I'm the lazy one honestly.

Anywho... if you can do that, what you say... great. I still thing you are making a drastic judgement on other people.

There was a book store owner in the news, which closed down because the minimum wage went up. The owner said that his take home pay from the prior year was $30,000. He only had a few employees... but he can't pay them more. He's only making $10K more than they are.

But he can't run the whole store himself either. So if some high school student is willing to stock book shelves for minimum wage, while he runs the cash register.... why not? But there is no corporate ladder that he can promote this guy to. There is no ladder. He can't pay someone more, if he wanted to. What position is there above floor stock? Cashier? The owner IS the cashier.

There is no magic "move up" position in every business.

. I agree that no business is equal, and so what should happen is a qualification for exemptions should be in order. Thank your brother&law for his service from us all here.

It would be impossible to make enough qualification, for each business and corporation. That's why, I'm just for letting the free-market reign supreme. Germany didn't even have a minimum wage law at all until last year. Seems to have worked well for them to not have one.

. Businesses that can prove they can't pay at least $8.50 minimum, should be able to apply for an exemption. That should solve it.

That is just begging for corruption.

The politicians would LOVE your plan. Just imagine how many hundreds of millions of dollars would be spent lobbying government politicians, how many "donations" would start pouring in, in order to get your application for exemptions from the "entrance wage" requirement, to be approved.

This proposed regulations right here, is exactly why corporations pay for full time lobbyists to live and work in Washington DC.

. Yes that too, but what is gonna happen then ? Just let abuse go for fear of corruption or corrupting the system even worse than it already is ? Heck, can it get anymore corrupt ?

 

[Andylusion]

My brother in law... is a Iraq Veteran. He's a brick wall. If he's at home, he's either fixing something, or making something. The only time I have EVER seen him on a couch is, when he's curled up with his wife.

I'm the lazy one honestly.

Anywho... if you can do that, what you say... great. I still thing you are making a drastic judgement on other people.

There was a book store owner in the news, which closed down because the minimum wage went up. The owner said that his take home pay from the prior year was $30,000. He only had a few employees... but he can't pay them more. He's only making $10K more than they are.

But he can't run the whole store himself either. So if some high school student is willing to stock book shelves for minimum wage, while he runs the cash register.... why not? But there is no corporate ladder that he can promote this guy to. There is no ladder. He can't pay someone more, if he wanted to. What position is there above floor stock? Cashier? The owner IS the cashier.

There is no magic "move up" position in every business.

. I agree that no business is equal, and so what should happen is a qualification for exemptions should be in order. Thank your brother&law for his service from us all here.

It would be impossible to make enough qualification, for each business and corporation. That's why, I'm just for letting the free-market reign supreme. Germany didn't even have a minimum wage law at all until last year. Seems to have worked well for them to not have one.

. Businesses that can prove they can't pay at least $8.50 minimum, should be able to apply for an exemption. That should solve it.

That is just begging for corruption.

The politicians would LOVE your plan. Just imagine how many hundreds of millions of dollars would be spent lobbying government politicians, how many "donations" would start pouring in, in order to get your application for exemptions from the "entrance wage" requirement, to be approved.

This proposed regulations right here, is exactly why corporations pay for full time lobbyists to live and work in Washington DC.

. Yes that too, but what is gonna happen then ? Just let abuse go for fear of corruption or corrupting the system even worse than it already is ? Heck, can it get anymore corrupt ?

Well yes.... I'd rather have companies pay what workers agree to be paid, to begin with, and leave government out of it, than have government collect millions in lobbying... AND STILL pay what workers agree to be paid.

See, with either system.. yours... or mine... the big companies are going to pay whatever they want, because they'll lobby for the exception.

The difference between your system, and my system, is that under your system, the smaller businesses that can't afford to lobby for your exception, will be forced to pay higher wages. Which with competition from the major companies who get the exception.... they will be at a disadvantage.

Think about it....

Let's say you set the entry wage at $10/hour, or whatever. Doesn't matter.

You are Mom&Pop's Restaurant.

I'm a McDonald's Franchise.

Between the two of us, which of us is going to be able to spend billions lobbying congress, to slip into the "Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016" an exception for the entrance wage?

Answer, McDonalds. Of course. So, I get to pay my employees, as low a wage as my employees are willing to do the work for.

You on the other hand, have to pay the $10 an hour, or whatever you deem the entrance wage.

As a result... your prices go up, and mine stay the same.

Fewer customers are willing to pay your high priced food, for your high priced labor. And more come to my McDonalds, and fewer to your Mom&Pop's Store.

Result... you go out of business, and I become wealthy, and McDonald's Corporate, even more wealthy.

Because of this, the workers that were at your store "not being abused" are now "not being employed" either. The ones at my store, that are supposedly "being abused" stay being "abused" and because I have more customers because my competition is now out of business, I am hiring even more employees to "be abused" than I had before.

Are you seeing the problem here?

You system doesn't benefit the workers at all. But it sure as heck benefits the wealthy mega corporations, and of course the politicians who will be more than happy to sell those exceptions to your regulations.

By the way... which companies got exemptions from ObamaCare.... small companies with just 50 people, or Mega Corps like McDonalds and Walmart? I'll give you one guess. Oh... and let's not forget all the millions spent lobbying congress. The politicians LOVE Obama Care. Hard to sell exemptions from regulations if you don't have regulations. Good thing "we have to pass the law, to see what is in it".

 

[beagle9]

. I agree that no business is equal, and so what should happen is a qualification for exemptions should be in order. Thank your brother&law for his service from us all here.

It would be impossible to make enough qualification, for each business and corporation. That's why, I'm just for letting the free-market reign supreme. Germany didn't even have a minimum wage law at all until last year. Seems to have worked well for them to not have one.

. Businesses that can prove they can't pay at least $8.50 minimum, should be able to apply for an exemption. That should solve it.

That is just begging for corruption.

The politicians would LOVE your plan. Just imagine how many hundreds of millions of dollars would be spent lobbying government politicians, how many "donations" would start pouring in, in order to get your application for exemptions from the "entrance wage" requirement, to be approved.

This proposed regulations right here, is exactly why corporations pay for full time lobbyists to live and work in Washington DC.

. Yes that too, but what is gonna happen then ? Just let abuse go for fear of corruption or corrupting the system even worse than it already is ? Heck, can it get anymore corrupt ?

Well yes.... I'd rather have companies pay what workers agree to be paid, to begin with, and leave government out of it, than have government collect millions in lobbying... AND STILL pay what workers agree to be paid.

See, with either system.. yours... or mine... the big companies are going to pay whatever they want, because they'll lobby for the exception.

The difference between your system, and my system, is that under your system, the smaller businesses that can't afford to lobby for your exception, will be forced to pay higher wages. Which with competition from the major companies who get the exception.... they will be at a disadvantage.

Think about it....

Let's say you set the entry wage at $10/hour, or whatever. Doesn't matter.

You are Mom&Pop's Restaurant.

I'm a McDonald's Franchise.

Between the two of us, which of us is going to be able to spend billions lobbying congress, to slip into the "Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016" an exception for the entrance wage?

Answer, McDonalds. Of course. So, I get to pay my employees, as low a wage as my employees are willing to do the work for.

You on the other hand, have to pay the $10 an hour, or whatever you deem the entrance wage.

As a result... your prices go up, and mine stay the same.

Fewer customers are willing to pay your high priced food, for your high priced labor. And more come to my McDonalds, and fewer to your Mom&Pop's Store.

Result... you go out of business, and I become wealthy, and McDonald's Corporate, even more wealthy.

Because of this, the workers that were at your store "not being abused" are now "not being employed" either. The ones at my store, that are supposedly "being abused" stay being "abused" and because I have more customers because my competition is now out of business, I am hiring even more employees to "be abused" than I had before.

Are you seeing the problem here?

You system doesn't benefit the workers at all. But it sure as heck benefits the wealthy mega corporations, and of course the politicians who will be more than happy to sell those exceptions to your regulations.

By the way... which companies got exemptions from ObamaCare.... small companies with just 50 people, or Mega Corps like McDonalds and Walmart? I'll give you one guess. Oh... and let's not forget all the millions spent lobbying congress. The politicians LOVE Obama Care. Hard to sell exemptions from regulations if you don't have regulations. Good thing "we have to pass the law, to see what is in it".

. Sounds like government is totally corrupt according to you, and are you satisfied with that ? You speak about it being impossible to be fair because of a corrupt government. Now while government is in this way, then it's like take advantage of it as long as possible eh ?

 

[Andylusion]

It would be impossible to make enough qualification, for each business and corporation. That's why, I'm just for letting the free-market reign supreme. Germany didn't even have a minimum wage law at all until last year. Seems to have worked well for them to not have one.

. Businesses that can prove they can't pay at least $8.50 minimum, should be able to apply for an exemption. That should solve it.

That is just begging for corruption.

The politicians would LOVE your plan. Just imagine how many hundreds of millions of dollars would be spent lobbying government politicians, how many "donations" would start pouring in, in order to get your application for exemptions from the "entrance wage" requirement, to be approved.

This proposed regulations right here, is exactly why corporations pay for full time lobbyists to live and work in Washington DC.

. Yes that too, but what is gonna happen then ? Just let abuse go for fear of corruption or corrupting the system even worse than it already is ? Heck, can it get anymore corrupt ?

Well yes.... I'd rather have companies pay what workers agree to be paid, to begin with, and leave government out of it, than have government collect millions in lobbying... AND STILL pay what workers agree to be paid.

See, with either system.. yours... or mine... the big companies are going to pay whatever they want, because they'll lobby for the exception.

The difference between your system, and my system, is that under your system, the smaller businesses that can't afford to lobby for your exception, will be forced to pay higher wages. Which with competition from the major companies who get the exception.... they will be at a disadvantage.

Think about it....

Let's say you set the entry wage at $10/hour, or whatever. Doesn't matter.

You are Mom&Pop's Restaurant.

I'm a McDonald's Franchise.

Between the two of us, which of us is going to be able to spend billions lobbying congress, to slip into the "Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016" an exception for the entrance wage?

Answer, McDonalds. Of course. So, I get to pay my employees, as low a wage as my employees are willing to do the work for.

You on the other hand, have to pay the $10 an hour, or whatever you deem the entrance wage.

As a result... your prices go up, and mine stay the same.

Fewer customers are willing to pay your high priced food, for your high priced labor. And more come to my McDonalds, and fewer to your Mom&Pop's Store.

Result... you go out of business, and I become wealthy, and McDonald's Corporate, even more wealthy.

Because of this, the workers that were at your store "not being abused" are now "not being employed" either. The ones at my store, that are supposedly "being abused" stay being "abused" and because I have more customers because my competition is now out of business, I am hiring even more employees to "be abused" than I had before.

Are you seeing the problem here?

You system doesn't benefit the workers at all. But it sure as heck benefits the wealthy mega corporations, and of course the politicians who will be more than happy to sell those exceptions to your regulations.

By the way... which companies got exemptions from ObamaCare.... small companies with just 50 people, or Mega Corps like McDonalds and Walmart? I'll give you one guess. Oh... and let's not forget all the millions spent lobbying congress. The politicians LOVE Obama Care. Hard to sell exemptions from regulations if you don't have regulations. Good thing "we have to pass the law, to see what is in it".

. Sounds like government is totally corrupt according to you, and are you satisfied with that ? You speak about it being impossible to be fair because of a corrupt government. Now while government is in this way, then it's like take advantage of it as long as possible eh ?

Let me put it another way......

Would you spend $100, and 3 weekends, to save yourself 1% on your taxes? Likely not. 2%? Likely not. 5%? 10%? 25%?

What is my point....? As the amount of savings goes up... the rational for making an expenditure goes up.

A $1 an hour exemption to a regulation, could make McDonalds hundreds of billions of dollars. Not just in rather small savings in hourly wages... but in the millions of new customers, that no longer have a competitor to go to.

Is that worth something? Is that something of value Congress could sell? You think they don't know? A few million, and a lobby in Washington DC? And here's the real kicker, most of these companies already have lobbying groups they are paying in Washington. Again, put yourself in place of the corporation. If you are ALREADY paying money to a lobbying group, and you hear about this new regulation.... you are already paying millions... why not get something for it?

And better still... the people in Congress ARE OFFERING SALES.

Again, the Al Gore tapes. Were major corporations calling Al Gore at his office? Or was Al Gore calling them? Al Gore was calling them.

So let's flip the picture around. You are a McDonald CEO, and you hear about this new regulation, and suddenly you get a phone call from a Congressman, asking if.... oh... you know... you might was to... "donate to the cause".

Did you watch the 60 Minutes last week?

Are members of Congress becoming telemarketers?

Dialing for dollars. Keep in mind... who is dialing who... Corporations dialing congress? Or Congress dialing corporations? Whose pushing the sales? CEOs or Congress?

And by the way.... who exactly would Congress be calling, if there were no regulation exemptions to hand out?

Every single time you hear anyone anywhere, suggest "let's raise taxes on the rich, to pay for...... (insert whatever)".... What you need to see and hear is a politicians, which a cash register going 'cha-ching' above his head.

 

[beagle9]

. Businesses that can prove they can't pay at least $8.50 minimum, should be able to apply for an exemption. That should solve it.

That is just begging for corruption.

The politicians would LOVE your plan. Just imagine how many hundreds of millions of dollars would be spent lobbying government politicians, how many "donations" would start pouring in, in order to get your application for exemptions from the "entrance wage" requirement, to be approved.

This proposed regulations right here, is exactly why corporations pay for full time lobbyists to live and work in Washington DC.

. Yes that too, but what is gonna happen then ? Just let abuse go for fear of corruption or corrupting the system even worse than it already is ? Heck, can it get anymore corrupt ?

Well yes.... I'd rather have companies pay what workers agree to be paid, to begin with, and leave government out of it, than have government collect millions in lobbying... AND STILL pay what workers agree to be paid.

See, with either system.. yours... or mine... the big companies are going to pay whatever they want, because they'll lobby for the exception.

The difference between your system, and my system, is that under your system, the smaller businesses that can't afford to lobby for your exception, will be forced to pay higher wages. Which with competition from the major companies who get the exception.... they will be at a disadvantage.

Think about it....

Let's say you set the entry wage at $10/hour, or whatever. Doesn't matter.

You are Mom&Pop's Restaurant.

I'm a McDonald's Franchise.

Between the two of us, which of us is going to be able to spend billions lobbying congress, to slip into the "Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016" an exception for the entrance wage?

Answer, McDonalds. Of course. So, I get to pay my employees, as low a wage as my employees are willing to do the work for.

You on the other hand, have to pay the $10 an hour, or whatever you deem the entrance wage.

As a result... your prices go up, and mine stay the same.

Fewer customers are willing to pay your high priced food, for your high priced labor. And more come to my McDonalds, and fewer to your Mom&Pop's Store.

Result... you go out of business, and I become wealthy, and McDonald's Corporate, even more wealthy.

Because of this, the workers that were at your store "not being abused" are now "not being employed" either. The ones at my store, that are supposedly "being abused" stay being "abused" and because I have more customers because my competition is now out of business, I am hiring even more employees to "be abused" than I had before.

Are you seeing the problem here?

You system doesn't benefit the workers at all. But it sure as heck benefits the wealthy mega corporations, and of course the politicians who will be more than happy to sell those exceptions to your regulations.

By the way... which companies got exemptions from ObamaCare.... small companies with just 50 people, or Mega Corps like McDonalds and Walmart? I'll give you one guess. Oh... and let's not forget all the millions spent lobbying congress. The politicians LOVE Obama Care. Hard to sell exemptions from regulations if you don't have regulations. Good thing "we have to pass the law, to see what is in it".

. Sounds like government is totally corrupt according to you, and are you satisfied with that ? You speak about it being impossible to be fair because of a corrupt government. Now while government is in this way, then it's like take advantage of it as long as possible eh ?

Let me put it another way......

Would you spend $100, and 3 weekends, to save yourself 1% on your taxes? Likely not. 2%? Likely not. 5%? 10%? 25%?

What is my point....? As the amount of savings goes up... the rational for making an expenditure goes up.

A $1 an hour exemption to a regulation, could make McDonalds hundreds of billions of dollars. Not just in rather small savings in hourly wages... but in the millions of new customers, that no longer have a competitor to go to.

Is that worth something? Is that something of value Congress could sell? You think they don't know? A few million, and a lobby in Washington DC? And here's the real kicker, most of these companies already have lobbying groups they are paying in Washington. Again, put yourself in place of the corporation. If you are ALREADY paying money to a lobbying group, and you hear about this new regulation.... you are already paying millions... why not get something for it?

And better still... the people in Congress ARE OFFERING SALES.

Again, the Al Gore tapes. Were major corporations calling Al Gore at his office? Or was Al Gore calling them? Al Gore was calling them.

So let's flip the picture around. You are a McDonald CEO, and you hear about this new regulation, and suddenly you get a phone call from a Congressman, asking if.... oh... you know... you might was to... "donate to the cause".

Did you watch the 60 Minutes last week?

Are members of Congress becoming telemarketers?

Dialing for dollars. Keep in mind... who is dialing who... Corporations dialing congress? Or Congress dialing corporations? Whose pushing the sales? CEOs or Congress?

And by the way.... who exactly would Congress be calling, if there were no regulation exemptions to hand out?

Every single time you hear anyone anywhere, suggest "let's raise taxes on the rich, to pay for...... (insert whatever)".... What you need to see and hear is a politicians, which a cash register going 'cha-ching' above his head.

. So what do you suggest ? How to clean it all up " Trump" ? Who is the best candidate for the job ? Will they (either one of them elected) not accept the status quoe or will it be business as usual in Washington ?

 

[Andylusion]

That is just begging for corruption.

The politicians would LOVE your plan. Just imagine how many hundreds of millions of dollars would be spent lobbying government politicians, how many "donations" would start pouring in, in order to get your application for exemptions from the "entrance wage" requirement, to be approved.

This proposed regulations right here, is exactly why corporations pay for full time lobbyists to live and work in Washington DC.

. Yes that too, but what is gonna happen then ? Just let abuse go for fear of corruption or corrupting the system even worse than it already is ? Heck, can it get anymore corrupt ?

Well yes.... I'd rather have companies pay what workers agree to be paid, to begin with, and leave government out of it, than have government collect millions in lobbying... AND STILL pay what workers agree to be paid.

See, with either system.. yours... or mine... the big companies are going to pay whatever they want, because they'll lobby for the exception.

The difference between your system, and my system, is that under your system, the smaller businesses that can't afford to lobby for your exception, will be forced to pay higher wages. Which with competition from the major companies who get the exception.... they will be at a disadvantage.

Think about it....

Let's say you set the entry wage at $10/hour, or whatever. Doesn't matter.

You are Mom&Pop's Restaurant.

I'm a McDonald's Franchise.

Between the two of us, which of us is going to be able to spend billions lobbying congress, to slip into the "Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016" an exception for the entrance wage?

Answer, McDonalds. Of course. So, I get to pay my employees, as low a wage as my employees are willing to do the work for.

You on the other hand, have to pay the $10 an hour, or whatever you deem the entrance wage.

As a result... your prices go up, and mine stay the same.

Fewer customers are willing to pay your high priced food, for your high priced labor. And more come to my McDonalds, and fewer to your Mom&Pop's Store.

Result... you go out of business, and I become wealthy, and McDonald's Corporate, even more wealthy.

Because of this, the workers that were at your store "not being abused" are now "not being employed" either. The ones at my store, that are supposedly "being abused" stay being "abused" and because I have more customers because my competition is now out of business, I am hiring even more employees to "be abused" than I had before.

Are you seeing the problem here?

You system doesn't benefit the workers at all. But it sure as heck benefits the wealthy mega corporations, and of course the politicians who will be more than happy to sell those exceptions to your regulations.

By the way... which companies got exemptions from ObamaCare.... small companies with just 50 people, or Mega Corps like McDonalds and Walmart? I'll give you one guess. Oh... and let's not forget all the millions spent lobbying congress. The politicians LOVE Obama Care. Hard to sell exemptions from regulations if you don't have regulations. Good thing "we have to pass the law, to see what is in it".

. Sounds like government is totally corrupt according to you, and are you satisfied with that ? You speak about it being impossible to be fair because of a corrupt government. Now while government is in this way, then it's like take advantage of it as long as possible eh ?

Let me put it another way......

Would you spend $100, and 3 weekends, to save yourself 1% on your taxes? Likely not. 2%? Likely not. 5%? 10%? 25%?

What is my point....? As the amount of savings goes up... the rational for making an expenditure goes up.

A $1 an hour exemption to a regulation, could make McDonalds hundreds of billions of dollars. Not just in rather small savings in hourly wages... but in the millions of new customers, that no longer have a competitor to go to.

Is that worth something? Is that something of value Congress could sell? You think they don't know? A few million, and a lobby in Washington DC? And here's the real kicker, most of these companies already have lobbying groups they are paying in Washington. Again, put yourself in place of the corporation. If you are ALREADY paying money to a lobbying group, and you hear about this new regulation.... you are already paying millions... why not get something for it?

And better still... the people in Congress ARE OFFERING SALES.

Again, the Al Gore tapes. Were major corporations calling Al Gore at his office? Or was Al Gore calling them? Al Gore was calling them.

So let's flip the picture around. You are a McDonald CEO, and you hear about this new regulation, and suddenly you get a phone call from a Congressman, asking if.... oh... you know... you might was to... "donate to the cause".

Did you watch the 60 Minutes last week?

Are members of Congress becoming telemarketers?

Dialing for dollars. Keep in mind... who is dialing who... Corporations dialing congress? Or Congress dialing corporations? Whose pushing the sales? CEOs or Congress?

And by the way.... who exactly would Congress be calling, if there were no regulation exemptions to hand out?

Every single time you hear anyone anywhere, suggest "let's raise taxes on the rich, to pay for...... (insert whatever)".... What you need to see and hear is a politicians, which a cash register going 'cha-ching' above his head.

. So what do you suggest ? How to clean it all up " Trump" ? Who is the best candidate for the job ? Will they (either one of them elected) not accept the status quoe or will it be business as usual in Washington ?

I don't put my faith in a man. If you put your faith in some idiot in Washington to fix your life, or this country, you deserve to be miserable and poor.

How many black people put all their faith in Obama, and now 8 years later, and complaining bitterly that "oh he was just a politician"..... as if that would be a shocker to anyone.

The solution is simply this.... stop trying to force others to operate the way you want. Stop trying to regulate your way into success.

Teach people that 90% of where they are, and the situation they are in, is due to the choices they made.

You want someone to "move up" from a minimum wage job? Teach them, it's their job.... Their job alone... to fix their situation. Ask for help? Sure. Ask for advice? Sure. But ultimately, it's their duty to learn a skill... not their employers job to provide it. Their duty to work a new job.... Not their employers to offer it. Their duty to learn something of value, not get a degree in art history, and wonder why they are working at Burger King.

That's the solution. That's the fix.

And lastly, you need to simply accept the fact some people will refuse, and you should allow them to fail.

My father helped a guy get a car, an apartment, and even went and helped him get a job. The guy refused to work, and refused to do what was required to pay the rent. He ended up unemployed, and homeless, right back where he started.

It's not governments, or societies, or anyone's job, to fix this guys life. He refused, and my father washed his hands of him. Haven't seen him since.

And better still, when the people of this country see that those who refuse to fix their lives, are left in their misery, more people will stop waiting for others to fix them. They will see the solution is to do whatever they have to fix themselves, and thus will do so. When you give handouts to people who do nothing, more people will do nothing. The only reason guys walk around grocery store parking lots asking everyone for money, is because people give them money. No different than feeding birds, results in more birds showing up. You stop feeding the birds, they go away and actually look for food.

You stop feeding able bodied men, they'll go do something to get fed.

As the requirements for food stamps went down, and more and more people could get food stamps without doing anything.... more people ended up on food stamps. The situation plays out over and over and over. It's just a fact.