Chick-fil-A restaurant in CA will pay employees $17 an hour

[OnePercenter]

In Nevada, $475.00.

I'd like to open a McDonalds franchise.
Is $475 enough?

The issue was shell companies, not a McDonalds franchise. Quit lying!

Learn to read, idiot.

their personal wealth is protected;

Except for the wealth they invested in the LLC.

BULLSHIT! You asked: How much "wealth" does it take to open a shell company?

I answered. Quit lying.

And I said the wealth you invest in an LLC is at risk.
Quit being stupid.

At risk of what?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I caught you once for lying , I will catch you again, it's a simple question post pictures of one of " your company's " heck if I owned a company I would brag about it on here.

You've NEVER caught me lying. Nobody, can promote a private business on the USMB. It's a violation of rules.

You said the Walton family owned the transportation/logistics part of the business, outside of WalMart.
You lied.

You said your trust dropped your federal tax rate to single digits.
You lied.

Her ya go;

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC: Private Company Information - Bloomberg

ALL corporations PAY single digit percentages of revenue.

Thanks for the link...…

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC operates as a subsidiary of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

And thanks for the laugh.

ALL corporations PAY single digit percentages of revenue.

We don't tax them on revenue.

So tell me why you think a Nevada Corporation is a benefit to you.

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC is a privately owned company. No mention of the private LLC in any Wal-Mart SEC filings.

I never stated that corporations are taxed on revenue, corporations PAY single percentage of tax of revenue.

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC is a privately owned company.

Your own link shows you're lying.

I never stated that corporations are taxed on revenue

So why do you keep telling us how much tax they pay as a percentage of revenue?
It could not be less relevant.


So tell me why you think a Nevada Corporation is a benefit to you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'd like to open a McDonalds franchise.
Is $475 enough?

The issue was shell companies, not a McDonalds franchise. Quit lying!

Learn to read, idiot.

their personal wealth is protected;

Except for the wealth they invested in the LLC.

BULLSHIT! You asked: How much "wealth" does it take to open a shell company?

I answered. Quit lying.

And I said the wealth you invest in an LLC is at risk.
Quit being stupid.

At risk of what?

Loss.

 

[OnePercenter]

Go ahead and show us how much $17 an hour is going to add to the average fast food order at any store with a decent business..

Sounds like an interesting exercise.
You should definitely open a fast food restaurant, pay all your employees at least $17/hour and be
sure to post your results here. Your food will probably be cheaper than all your competitors, and your profits higher, because you're such an economics wiz.

We have metrics from establishments that passed on that cost via a surcharge.

No where near what right wing hearsayers and right wing soothsayers claim.

At the average McDonalds', it would add in the neighbor hood of 11 cents per order to raise the wages from $7.25 to $17 an hour. The cheapest order is around $1, or 11%, with a drink $2, or 5.5%, a regular breakfast meal at $4 or so, 2.75 %, etc., etc, etc. That Big giant increase in burgers?Well, a Big Mc meal is what, now, $6 or so? 1.8%

At the average McDonalds', it would add in the neighbor hood of 11 cents per order to raise the wages from $7.25 to $17 an hour.

An extra 975 cents per employee per hour would be paid for by 11 cents per order?
That would mean 89 orders per hour per employee. How many employees? 7? More?
I don't think your numbers add up.

View attachment 200314
Owning a McDonald’s Franchise: Purchase Cost vs. Annual Profit

Assuming "Crew Payroll" is the minimum wage employees, 17/7.25=2.345,
2.345 x 540,000 = 1,266,207. An increase of 726k.
726000/2700000(net sales) = 27%.

You think 11 cents an order is 27%? DERP!

Keep talking out of your ass, it's amusing.

Since I'm qualified to, and have seen the ACTUAL numbers, I'll help you with the actual's.

McDonalds make 700-900% profit on every item they sell.

Cost of food and paper goods is $400.000.00

Gross profit is $2,300,000.00

Profit after controllable's is $1.4M. Maintenance and repair are cover under the lease. Linen is covered under food and paper costs.

Total operating income is actually $905K. Depreciation and amortization is removed because everything is leased.

Since I'm qualified to, and have seen the ACTUAL numbers, I'll help you with the actual's.

Post the actuals....from a real source.

I posted the real numbers and showed why the ESTIMATE was wrong. I WILL NOT scan and post the actual table because I don't want to get my ass sued.

If you have any information where my numbers are wrong, please post.

 

[OnePercenter]

The issue was shell companies, not a McDonalds franchise. Quit lying!

Learn to read, idiot.

their personal wealth is protected;

Except for the wealth they invested in the LLC.

BULLSHIT! You asked: How much "wealth" does it take to open a shell company?

I answered. Quit lying.

And I said the wealth you invest in an LLC is at risk.
Quit being stupid.

At risk of what?

Loss.

Why would you have a loss?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We have metrics from establishments that passed on that cost via a surcharge.

No where near what right wing hearsayers and right wing soothsayers claim.

At the average McDonalds', it would add in the neighbor hood of 11 cents per order to raise the wages from $7.25 to $17 an hour. The cheapest order is around $1, or 11%, with a drink $2, or 5.5%, a regular breakfast meal at $4 or so, 2.75 %, etc., etc, etc. That Big giant increase in burgers?Well, a Big Mc meal is what, now, $6 or so? 1.8%

At the average McDonalds', it would add in the neighbor hood of 11 cents per order to raise the wages from $7.25 to $17 an hour.

An extra 975 cents per employee per hour would be paid for by 11 cents per order?
That would mean 89 orders per hour per employee. How many employees? 7? More?
I don't think your numbers add up.

View attachment 200314
Owning a McDonald’s Franchise: Purchase Cost vs. Annual Profit

Assuming "Crew Payroll" is the minimum wage employees, 17/7.25=2.345,
2.345 x 540,000 = 1,266,207. An increase of 726k.
726000/2700000(net sales) = 27%.

You think 11 cents an order is 27%? DERP!

Keep talking out of your ass, it's amusing.

Since I'm qualified to, and have seen the ACTUAL numbers, I'll help you with the actual's.

McDonalds make 700-900% profit on every item they sell.

Cost of food and paper goods is $400.000.00

Gross profit is $2,300,000.00

Profit after controllable's is $1.4M. Maintenance and repair are cover under the lease. Linen is covered under food and paper costs.

Total operating income is actually $905K. Depreciation and amortization is removed because everything is leased.

Since I'm qualified to, and have seen the ACTUAL numbers, I'll help you with the actual's.

Post the actuals....from a real source.

I posted the real numbers and showed why the ESTIMATE was wrong. I WILL NOT scan and post the actual table because I don't want to get my ass sued.

If you have any information where my numbers are wrong, please post.

I posted the real numbers

Yes, I saw the numbers you pulled out of your ass. Very impressive.
Now try posting some from a better source than your imagination.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Learn to read, idiot.

their personal wealth is protected;

Except for the wealth they invested in the LLC.

BULLSHIT! You asked: How much "wealth" does it take to open a shell company?

I answered. Quit lying.

And I said the wealth you invest in an LLC is at risk.
Quit being stupid.

At risk of what?

Loss.

Why would you have a loss?

No business ever has a loss? DERP!

 

[OnePercenter]

You've NEVER caught me lying. Nobody, can promote a private business on the USMB. It's a violation of rules.

You said the Walton family owned the transportation/logistics part of the business, outside of WalMart.
You lied.

You said your trust dropped your federal tax rate to single digits.
You lied.

Her ya go;

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC: Private Company Information - Bloomberg

ALL corporations PAY single digit percentages of revenue.

Thanks for the link...…

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC operates as a subsidiary of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

And thanks for the laugh.

ALL corporations PAY single digit percentages of revenue.

We don't tax them on revenue.

So tell me why you think a Nevada Corporation is a benefit to you.

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC is a privately owned company. No mention of the private LLC in any Wal-Mart SEC filings.

I never stated that corporations are taxed on revenue, corporations PAY single percentage of tax of revenue.

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC is a privately owned company.


View attachment 200641

Your own link shows you're lying.

I never stated that corporations are taxed on revenue

So why do you keep telling us how much tax they pay as a percentage of revenue?
It could not be less relevant.


So tell me why you think a Nevada Corporation is a benefit to you.

Read the link

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC: Private Company Information - Bloomberg

Whether it's revenue or income, a cost is a percent of all the money you make.

 

[OnePercenter]

BULLSHIT! You asked: How much "wealth" does it take to open a shell company?

I answered. Quit lying.

And I said the wealth you invest in an LLC is at risk.
Quit being stupid.

At risk of what?

Loss.

Why would you have a loss?

No business ever has a loss? DERP!

Which is why you create a shell corporation for $495.00 to discharge the debt.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You said the Walton family owned the transportation/logistics part of the business, outside of WalMart.
You lied.

You said your trust dropped your federal tax rate to single digits.
You lied.

Her ya go;

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC: Private Company Information - Bloomberg

ALL corporations PAY single digit percentages of revenue.

Thanks for the link...…

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC operates as a subsidiary of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

And thanks for the laugh.

ALL corporations PAY single digit percentages of revenue.

We don't tax them on revenue.

So tell me why you think a Nevada Corporation is a benefit to you.

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC is a privately owned company. No mention of the private LLC in any Wal-Mart SEC filings.

I never stated that corporations are taxed on revenue, corporations PAY single percentage of tax of revenue.

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC is a privately owned company.


View attachment 200641

Your own link shows you're lying.

I never stated that corporations are taxed on revenue

So why do you keep telling us how much tax they pay as a percentage of revenue?
It could not be less relevant.


So tell me why you think a Nevada Corporation is a benefit to you.

Read the link

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC: Private Company Information - Bloomberg

Whether it's revenue or income, a cost is a percent of all the money you make.

​

Read the link​

See where the link says "Wal-Mart Transportation LLC operates as a subsidiary of Wal-Mart Stores Inc."

Need a translation?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And I said the wealth you invest in an LLC is at risk.
Quit being stupid.

At risk of what?

Loss.

Why would you have a loss?

No business ever has a loss? DERP!

Which is why you create a shell corporation for $495.00 to discharge the debt.

Cool.
Your shell corporation gonna borrow the money you need to buy a McDonald's franchise?
Tell me more!!!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You said the Walton family owned the transportation/logistics part of the business, outside of WalMart.
You lied.

You said your trust dropped your federal tax rate to single digits.
You lied.

Her ya go;

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC: Private Company Information - Bloomberg

ALL corporations PAY single digit percentages of revenue.

Thanks for the link...…

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC operates as a subsidiary of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

And thanks for the laugh.

ALL corporations PAY single digit percentages of revenue.

We don't tax them on revenue.

So tell me why you think a Nevada Corporation is a benefit to you.

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC is a privately owned company. No mention of the private LLC in any Wal-Mart SEC filings.

I never stated that corporations are taxed on revenue, corporations PAY single percentage of tax of revenue.

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC is a privately owned company.


View attachment 200641

Your own link shows you're lying.

I never stated that corporations are taxed on revenue

So why do you keep telling us how much tax they pay as a percentage of revenue?
It could not be less relevant.


So tell me why you think a Nevada Corporation is a benefit to you.

Read the link

Wal-Mart Transportation LLC: Private Company Information - Bloomberg

Whether it's revenue or income, a cost is a percent of all the money you make.

Whether it's revenue or income, a cost is a percent of all the money you make.

What's your tax cost if your income is zero?

 

[hadit]

Ah, now you're just projecting as usual. You really should learn about business before you run around the net prattling about it.

Tell us have you seen the books or spread sheets on company's you worked for?


I have..

So what? I do my own accounting, I don't need to read fiction generated by somebody else. You seem impressed by software, though. Another reason why you can't compete.

I do my own accounting

OMG. Hilarious.

The business can't be that large if the owner can do all the accounting.

Doesn't do away with the facts that you and your $12 an hour buddies here can't come up with any evidence you ever even filled out a tax return, much less ran a business, or know how to calculate labor costs, or can dream up a reason for not raising minimum wage to reflect real inflation, other than it would make you look like the low paid chumps you are and you don't like it. As we can see from the last couple of pages of posts, you're just about class warfare, and sniveling personal attacks. lol no surprise there.

I never claimed to be a business owner. I have, however, worked for small and large companies and have taken economics classes and can think logically. That's really all you need to understand the impact of a MW. It works fine as long as you keep it low enough that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

It's easy to prove that it can have a negative impact. Just raise it to $100/hr and get rid of poverty, right? You say, no, that would be ridiculous and wouldn't work. Having a zero MW would result in many, many low paying jobs.

Obviously, a high MW can have a negative effect on jobs. The key is to find a balance that doesn't destroy jobs but raises pay. Hint: doubling it rapidly is not a good idea.

 

[danielpalos]

Tell us have you seen the books or spread sheets on company's you worked for?


I have..

So what? I do my own accounting, I don't need to read fiction generated by somebody else. You seem impressed by software, though. Another reason why you can't compete.

I do my own accounting

OMG. Hilarious.

The business can't be that large if the owner can do all the accounting.

Doesn't do away with the facts that you and your $12 an hour buddies here can't come up with any evidence you ever even filled out a tax return, much less ran a business, or know how to calculate labor costs, or can dream up a reason for not raising minimum wage to reflect real inflation, other than it would make you look like the low paid chumps you are and you don't like it. As we can see from the last couple of pages of posts, you're just about class warfare, and sniveling personal attacks. lol no surprise there.

I never claimed to be a business owner. I have, however, worked for small and large companies and have taken economics classes and can think logically. That's really all you need to understand the impact of a MW. It works fine as long as you keep it low enough that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

It's easy to prove that it can have a negative impact. Just raise it to $100/hr and get rid of poverty, right? You say, no, that would be ridiculous and wouldn't work. Having a zero MW would result in many, many low paying jobs.

Obviously, a high MW can have a negative effect on jobs. The key is to find a balance that doesn't destroy jobs but raises pay. Hint: doubling it rapidly is not a good idea.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, by comparison.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

 

[hadit]

So what? I do my own accounting, I don't need to read fiction generated by somebody else. You seem impressed by software, though. Another reason why you can't compete.

I do my own accounting

OMG. Hilarious.

The business can't be that large if the owner can do all the accounting.

Doesn't do away with the facts that you and your $12 an hour buddies here can't come up with any evidence you ever even filled out a tax return, much less ran a business, or know how to calculate labor costs, or can dream up a reason for not raising minimum wage to reflect real inflation, other than it would make you look like the low paid chumps you are and you don't like it. As we can see from the last couple of pages of posts, you're just about class warfare, and sniveling personal attacks. lol no surprise there.

I never claimed to be a business owner. I have, however, worked for small and large companies and have taken economics classes and can think logically. That's really all you need to understand the impact of a MW. It works fine as long as you keep it low enough that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

It's easy to prove that it can have a negative impact. Just raise it to $100/hr and get rid of poverty, right? You say, no, that would be ridiculous and wouldn't work. Having a zero MW would result in many, many low paying jobs.

Obviously, a high MW can have a negative effect on jobs. The key is to find a balance that doesn't destroy jobs but raises pay. Hint: doubling it rapidly is not a good idea.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, by comparison.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

Double the MW overnight and you'll have more on welfare, and you'll compassion that doesn't pay enough.

 

[danielpalos]

I do my own accounting

OMG. Hilarious.

The business can't be that large if the owner can do all the accounting.

Doesn't do away with the facts that you and your $12 an hour buddies here can't come up with any evidence you ever even filled out a tax return, much less ran a business, or know how to calculate labor costs, or can dream up a reason for not raising minimum wage to reflect real inflation, other than it would make you look like the low paid chumps you are and you don't like it. As we can see from the last couple of pages of posts, you're just about class warfare, and sniveling personal attacks. lol no surprise there.

I never claimed to be a business owner. I have, however, worked for small and large companies and have taken economics classes and can think logically. That's really all you need to understand the impact of a MW. It works fine as long as you keep it low enough that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

It's easy to prove that it can have a negative impact. Just raise it to $100/hr and get rid of poverty, right? You say, no, that would be ridiculous and wouldn't work. Having a zero MW would result in many, many low paying jobs.

Obviously, a high MW can have a negative effect on jobs. The key is to find a balance that doesn't destroy jobs but raises pay. Hint: doubling it rapidly is not a good idea.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, by comparison.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

Double the MW overnight and you'll have more on welfare, and you'll compassion that doesn't pay enough.

In the short run or the long run? Seattle and San Francisco are establishing metrics that gainsay current, accepted dogma. Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.

The right wing has no consistent explanation.

In any Case, in California, for example, we have a Board of Equalization that can stabilize markets not induce chaos in markets. Employers could simply get, Equalized, on the back-end. Employers have accounting departments to help them out.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The business can't be that large if the owner can do all the accounting.

Doesn't do away with the facts that you and your $12 an hour buddies here can't come up with any evidence you ever even filled out a tax return, much less ran a business, or know how to calculate labor costs, or can dream up a reason for not raising minimum wage to reflect real inflation, other than it would make you look like the low paid chumps you are and you don't like it. As we can see from the last couple of pages of posts, you're just about class warfare, and sniveling personal attacks. lol no surprise there.

I never claimed to be a business owner. I have, however, worked for small and large companies and have taken economics classes and can think logically. That's really all you need to understand the impact of a MW. It works fine as long as you keep it low enough that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

It's easy to prove that it can have a negative impact. Just raise it to $100/hr and get rid of poverty, right? You say, no, that would be ridiculous and wouldn't work. Having a zero MW would result in many, many low paying jobs.

Obviously, a high MW can have a negative effect on jobs. The key is to find a balance that doesn't destroy jobs but raises pay. Hint: doubling it rapidly is not a good idea.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, by comparison.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

Double the MW overnight and you'll have more on welfare, and you'll compassion that doesn't pay enough.

In the short run or the long run? Seattle and San Francisco are establishing metrics that gainsay current, accepted dogma. Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.

The right wing has no consistent explanation.

In any Case, in California, for example, we have a Board of Equalization that can stabilize markets not induce chaos in markets. Employers could simply get, Equalized, on the back-end. Employers have accounting departments to help them out.

Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.


And you think that proves that a higher MW doesn't harm MW workers? Dude!!

 

[danielpalos]

Doesn't do away with the facts that you and your $12 an hour buddies here can't come up with any evidence you ever even filled out a tax return, much less ran a business, or know how to calculate labor costs, or can dream up a reason for not raising minimum wage to reflect real inflation, other than it would make you look like the low paid chumps you are and you don't like it. As we can see from the last couple of pages of posts, you're just about class warfare, and sniveling personal attacks. lol no surprise there.

I never claimed to be a business owner. I have, however, worked for small and large companies and have taken economics classes and can think logically. That's really all you need to understand the impact of a MW. It works fine as long as you keep it low enough that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

It's easy to prove that it can have a negative impact. Just raise it to $100/hr and get rid of poverty, right? You say, no, that would be ridiculous and wouldn't work. Having a zero MW would result in many, many low paying jobs.

Obviously, a high MW can have a negative effect on jobs. The key is to find a balance that doesn't destroy jobs but raises pay. Hint: doubling it rapidly is not a good idea.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, by comparison.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

Double the MW overnight and you'll have more on welfare, and you'll compassion that doesn't pay enough.

In the short run or the long run? Seattle and San Francisco are establishing metrics that gainsay current, accepted dogma. Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.

The right wing has no consistent explanation.

In any Case, in California, for example, we have a Board of Equalization that can stabilize markets not induce chaos in markets. Employers could simply get, Equalized, on the back-end. Employers have accounting departments to help them out.

Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.


And you think that proves that a higher MW doesn't harm MW workers? Dude!!

Why should it? More pay and less unemployment.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I never claimed to be a business owner. I have, however, worked for small and large companies and have taken economics classes and can think logically. That's really all you need to understand the impact of a MW. It works fine as long as you keep it low enough that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

It's easy to prove that it can have a negative impact. Just raise it to $100/hr and get rid of poverty, right? You say, no, that would be ridiculous and wouldn't work. Having a zero MW would result in many, many low paying jobs.

Obviously, a high MW can have a negative effect on jobs. The key is to find a balance that doesn't destroy jobs but raises pay. Hint: doubling it rapidly is not a good idea.

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, by comparison.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

Double the MW overnight and you'll have more on welfare, and you'll compassion that doesn't pay enough.

In the short run or the long run? Seattle and San Francisco are establishing metrics that gainsay current, accepted dogma. Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.

The right wing has no consistent explanation.

In any Case, in California, for example, we have a Board of Equalization that can stabilize markets not induce chaos in markets. Employers could simply get, Equalized, on the back-end. Employers have accounting departments to help them out.

Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.


And you think that proves that a higher MW doesn't harm MW workers? Dude!!

Why should it? More pay and less unemployment.

More pay and less unemployment.

More pay and more unemployment.

 

[danielpalos]

We don't care if we lose low wage jobs. Social services cost around fourteen dollars an hour, by comparison.

Higher paid labor pays more in taxes and creates more in demand.

Double the MW overnight and you'll have more on welfare, and you'll compassion that doesn't pay enough.

In the short run or the long run? Seattle and San Francisco are establishing metrics that gainsay current, accepted dogma. Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.

The right wing has no consistent explanation.

In any Case, in California, for example, we have a Board of Equalization that can stabilize markets not induce chaos in markets. Employers could simply get, Equalized, on the back-end. Employers have accounting departments to help them out.

Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.


And you think that proves that a higher MW doesn't harm MW workers? Dude!!

Why should it? More pay and less unemployment.

More pay and less unemployment.

More pay and more unemployment.

Both jurisdictions have higher than national average minimum wages and have lower than national average unemployment rates.