Good News in the fight for 15.

[Slade3200]

When we switched from horse and buggy to automobiles, did that benefit America?

Hard on horse and buggy people doesn't mean bad for America. The nation wasn't founded as a safe space for fast food workers.

the government didnt force us to switch to automobiles, it happened on its own gradually. If they had made a decree that we all give up our horses and buggys and drive cars, it would have been a clusterfuck. Like we are going to have now, that the government is pretending to know economics

The government forced Wendy's to spend years developing their self-ordering and payment system? B period, S period.

That was always going to happen. It should have happened long ago. We want fast food, not time dealing with some moron who can't figure out how to make change.

No, but they want to force 15 $ minimumm wage. See now, they are pretending to care about the workers at the bottom, but what this is really about is union wages and perks for the Union bosses, the worst of which would be those union jobs paid for by tax payer dollars. as the minimum wage goes up , so goes Union wages.

Hillary doesnt seem concerned that a lot of the lower wage workers will be layed off their jobs while even more unskilled immigrants are coming to the country. If they were concerned they should try Growing the economy First.
What they will be attempting in California will be a Pull Back in economic growth when more businesses leave the state or scale back operations.

Its just too much too soon, IMHO

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

 

[healthmyths]

the government didnt force us to switch to automobiles, it happened on its own gradually. If they had made a decree that we all give up our horses and buggys and drive cars, it would have been a clusterfuck. Like we are going to have now, that the government is pretending to know economics

The government forced Wendy's to spend years developing their self-ordering and payment system? B period, S period.

That was always going to happen. It should have happened long ago. We want fast food, not time dealing with some moron who can't figure out how to make change.

No, but they want to force 15 $ minimumm wage. See now, they are pretending to care about the workers at the bottom, but what this is really about is union wages and perks for the Union bosses, the worst of which would be those union jobs paid for by tax payer dollars. as the minimum wage goes up , so goes Union wages.

Hillary doesnt seem concerned that a lot of the lower wage workers will be layed off their jobs while even more unskilled immigrants are coming to the country. If they were concerned they should try Growing the economy First.
What they will be attempting in California will be a Pull Back in economic growth when more businesses leave the state or scale back operations.

Its just too much too soon, IMHO

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

FOR WHO???
Again... how many people work at $7.25 per hour?
READ THE STATISTICS then tell me why it is necessary raise these people when half are 16 to 24 years old!
These are entry level jobs. Be there every day and on time and that's their FIRST skill set they learn.
But double the minimum wage: these 1,153,000 workers from 16 to 24 years old will be replaced as Wendy's is doing!
Do you understand?? It's a matter of percentages. Right now 25% of operating expenses are these types of workers.
Double their wages means 50% of operating expenses. Can't be done! So that's why Wendy's is replacing them.
People like you have little if any knowledge of what operating expenses these companies operate under!
And don't give this crap about "executives salaries" you idiots don't seem to understand THERE is only one CEO, ONE CFO,etc.
Not 10,000s as there workers that depend on these "executives " decision making! NO comparison folks!
Characteristics of minimum wage workers, 2015 : BLS Reports: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

 

[Slade3200]

The government forced Wendy's to spend years developing their self-ordering and payment system? B period, S period.

That was always going to happen. It should have happened long ago. We want fast food, not time dealing with some moron who can't figure out how to make change.

No, but they want to force 15 $ minimumm wage. See now, they are pretending to care about the workers at the bottom, but what this is really about is union wages and perks for the Union bosses, the worst of which would be those union jobs paid for by tax payer dollars. as the minimum wage goes up , so goes Union wages.

Hillary doesnt seem concerned that a lot of the lower wage workers will be layed off their jobs while even more unskilled immigrants are coming to the country. If they were concerned they should try Growing the economy First.
What they will be attempting in California will be a Pull Back in economic growth when more businesses leave the state or scale back operations.

Its just too much too soon, IMHO

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

FOR WHO???
Again... how many people work at $7.25 per hour?
READ THE STATISTICS then tell me why it is necessary raise these people when half are 16 to 24 years old!
These are entry level jobs. Be there every day and on time and that's their FIRST skill set they learn.
But double the minimum wage: these 1,153,000 workers from 16 to 24 years old will be replaced as Wendy's is doing!
Do you understand?? It's a matter of percentages. Right now 25% of operating expenses are these types of workers.
Double their wages means 50% of operating expenses. Can't be done! So that's why Wendy's is replacing them.
People like you have little if any knowledge of what operating expenses these companies operate under!
And don't give this crap about "executives salaries" you idiots don't seem to understand THERE is only one CEO, ONE CFO,etc.
Not 10,000s as there workers that depend on these "executives " decision making! NO comparison folks!
Characteristics of minimum wage workers, 2015 : BLS Reports: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
View attachment 74906

So that's yes you think 7.25 is a fair wage?

Per your arguements... You say 50% of min wage workers are 16-24... Well that leaves 50% or over 1 million people who are over 24 and trying to make a living. Many have children... Do you still think 7.25 is a fair and livable wage?

I don't think it needs to be 15... I think 10-12 would work just fine. But if you want 10-12 you gotta campaign on 15 in our world.

It's amuses me that most everybody in this country are upset that wages haven't increased yet when an increase of the minimum wage is proposed most on the right cry that everybody's going to lose their jobs and the machines are gonna take over.

A smart business owner doesn't downsize and decrease their output potential to to increased costs... They tighten the screws and find ways to make up for it.

 

[Yarddog]

the government didnt force us to switch to automobiles, it happened on its own gradually. If they had made a decree that we all give up our horses and buggys and drive cars, it would have been a clusterfuck. Like we are going to have now, that the government is pretending to know economics

The government forced Wendy's to spend years developing their self-ordering and payment system? B period, S period.

That was always going to happen. It should have happened long ago. We want fast food, not time dealing with some moron who can't figure out how to make change.

No, but they want to force 15 $ minimumm wage. See now, they are pretending to care about the workers at the bottom, but what this is really about is union wages and perks for the Union bosses, the worst of which would be those union jobs paid for by tax payer dollars. as the minimum wage goes up , so goes Union wages.

Hillary doesnt seem concerned that a lot of the lower wage workers will be layed off their jobs while even more unskilled immigrants are coming to the country. If they were concerned they should try Growing the economy First.
What they will be attempting in California will be a Pull Back in economic growth when more businesses leave the state or scale back operations.

Its just too much too soon, IMHO

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

If I never had a job before and wanted to prove to an employer I could show up on time, gain a work history, i would take it, It might be the easiest job i could get, If I needed something in a hurry. Its less of an investment for an employer and often times they will hire just about anybody who may have a harder time somewhere else.

NO! I would not want to live off of 7.25 per hr, but I know that at IN & Out burger for example, they pay their line workers and cooks up to 14 or 15 per hr, and the managers of those stores make like 45 K per year. There are better places to work who voluntarily pay more than the minimum, like Costco who gives their employees a raise every year plus accrued vacation and sick leave, maxing out over 20 per hr.
These are not ideal jobs, but still, only require showing up and learning on the job. there are many others I'm sure. Im for diversity in the pay scale I guess, Its not that I dont want everyone to make more money, but I think the sudden jump will just cost a lot of people their job , then the remaining jobs will have even more competition.

 

[Yarddog]

No, but they want to force 15 $ minimumm wage. See now, they are pretending to care about the workers at the bottom, but what this is really about is union wages and perks for the Union bosses, the worst of which would be those union jobs paid for by tax payer dollars. as the minimum wage goes up , so goes Union wages.

Hillary doesnt seem concerned that a lot of the lower wage workers will be layed off their jobs while even more unskilled immigrants are coming to the country. If they were concerned they should try Growing the economy First.
What they will be attempting in California will be a Pull Back in economic growth when more businesses leave the state or scale back operations.

Its just too much too soon, IMHO

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

FOR WHO???
Again... how many people work at $7.25 per hour?
READ THE STATISTICS then tell me why it is necessary raise these people when half are 16 to 24 years old!
These are entry level jobs. Be there every day and on time and that's their FIRST skill set they learn.
But double the minimum wage: these 1,153,000 workers from 16 to 24 years old will be replaced as Wendy's is doing!
Do you understand?? It's a matter of percentages. Right now 25% of operating expenses are these types of workers.
Double their wages means 50% of operating expenses. Can't be done! So that's why Wendy's is replacing them.
People like you have little if any knowledge of what operating expenses these companies operate under!
And don't give this crap about "executives salaries" you idiots don't seem to understand THERE is only one CEO, ONE CFO,etc.
Not 10,000s as there workers that depend on these "executives " decision making! NO comparison folks!
Characteristics of minimum wage workers, 2015 : BLS Reports: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
View attachment 74906

So that's yes you think 7.25 is a fair wage?

Per your arguements... You say 50% of min wage workers are 16-24... Well that leaves 50% or over 1 million people who are over 24 and trying to make a living. Many have children... Do you still think 7.25 is a fair and livable wage?

I don't think it needs to be 15... I think 10-12 would work just fine. But if you want 10-12 you gotta campaign on 15 in our world.

It's amuses me that most everybody in this country are upset that wages haven't increased yet when an increase of the minimum wage is proposed most on the right cry that everybody's going to lose their jobs and the machines are gonna take over.

A smart business owner doesn't downsize and decrease their output potential to to increased costs... They tighten the screws and find ways to make up for it.

Im thinking the economy could make it along with something like 10 minimum, there are still raises to be had as well. If they start at 15 per hr, its much harder to give people raises.

 

[Slade3200]

The government forced Wendy's to spend years developing their self-ordering and payment system? B period, S period.

That was always going to happen. It should have happened long ago. We want fast food, not time dealing with some moron who can't figure out how to make change.

No, but they want to force 15 $ minimumm wage. See now, they are pretending to care about the workers at the bottom, but what this is really about is union wages and perks for the Union bosses, the worst of which would be those union jobs paid for by tax payer dollars. as the minimum wage goes up , so goes Union wages.

Hillary doesnt seem concerned that a lot of the lower wage workers will be layed off their jobs while even more unskilled immigrants are coming to the country. If they were concerned they should try Growing the economy First.
What they will be attempting in California will be a Pull Back in economic growth when more businesses leave the state or scale back operations.

Its just too much too soon, IMHO

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

If I never had a job before and wanted to prove to an employer I could show up on time, gain a work history, i would take it, It might be the easiest job i could get, If I needed something in a hurry. Its less of an investment for an employer and often times they will hire just about anybody who may have a harder time somewhere else.

NO! I would not want to live off of 7.25 per hr, but I know that at IN & Out burger for example, they pay their line workers and cooks up to 14 or 15 per hr, and the managers of those stores make like 45 K per year. There are better places to work who voluntarily pay more than the minimum, like Costco who gives their employees a raise every year plus accrued vacation and sick leave, maxing out over 20 per hr.
These are not ideal jobs, but still, only require showing up and learning on the job. there are many others I'm sure. Im for diversity in the pay scale I guess, Its not that I dont want everyone to make more money, but I think the sudden jump will just cost a lot of people their job , then the remaining jobs will have even more competition.

the $15 movement isn't a jump it's a progressive increase over a few years. I also think it's should be 10-12... 15 is too high. I do not think that an additional expense/cost with higher labor is something that means automatic firing... Most business owners want to keep their work force so they can keep up the same production. The less workers the less income is generally how businesses work. The cuts will come out of the profit share or other budgets and businesses will be pushed to be more efficient.

7.25 might work for a highschool student working a summer job, but for anybody trying to make a living or raise a family, that is a joke and there are many many people who are in that position. How can you feel right about that?

 

[Slade3200]

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

FOR WHO???
Again... how many people work at $7.25 per hour?
READ THE STATISTICS then tell me why it is necessary raise these people when half are 16 to 24 years old!
These are entry level jobs. Be there every day and on time and that's their FIRST skill set they learn.
But double the minimum wage: these 1,153,000 workers from 16 to 24 years old will be replaced as Wendy's is doing!
Do you understand?? It's a matter of percentages. Right now 25% of operating expenses are these types of workers.
Double their wages means 50% of operating expenses. Can't be done! So that's why Wendy's is replacing them.
People like you have little if any knowledge of what operating expenses these companies operate under!
And don't give this crap about "executives salaries" you idiots don't seem to understand THERE is only one CEO, ONE CFO,etc.
Not 10,000s as there workers that depend on these "executives " decision making! NO comparison folks!
Characteristics of minimum wage workers, 2015 : BLS Reports: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
View attachment 74906

So that's yes you think 7.25 is a fair wage?

Per your arguements... You say 50% of min wage workers are 16-24... Well that leaves 50% or over 1 million people who are over 24 and trying to make a living. Many have children... Do you still think 7.25 is a fair and livable wage?

I don't think it needs to be 15... I think 10-12 would work just fine. But if you want 10-12 you gotta campaign on 15 in our world.

It's amuses me that most everybody in this country are upset that wages haven't increased yet when an increase of the minimum wage is proposed most on the right cry that everybody's going to lose their jobs and the machines are gonna take over.

A smart business owner doesn't downsize and decrease their output potential to to increased costs... They tighten the screws and find ways to make up for it.

Im thinking the economy could make it along with something like 10 minimum, there are still raises to be had as well. If they start at 15 per hr, its much harder to give people raises.

I agree, I think if you want 10-12 then you scream 15. That's what's happening now

 

[Yarddog]

No, but they want to force 15 $ minimumm wage. See now, they are pretending to care about the workers at the bottom, but what this is really about is union wages and perks for the Union bosses, the worst of which would be those union jobs paid for by tax payer dollars. as the minimum wage goes up , so goes Union wages.

Hillary doesnt seem concerned that a lot of the lower wage workers will be layed off their jobs while even more unskilled immigrants are coming to the country. If they were concerned they should try Growing the economy First.
What they will be attempting in California will be a Pull Back in economic growth when more businesses leave the state or scale back operations.

Its just too much too soon, IMHO

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

If I never had a job before and wanted to prove to an employer I could show up on time, gain a work history, i would take it, It might be the easiest job i could get, If I needed something in a hurry. Its less of an investment for an employer and often times they will hire just about anybody who may have a harder time somewhere else.

NO! I would not want to live off of 7.25 per hr, but I know that at IN & Out burger for example, they pay their line workers and cooks up to 14 or 15 per hr, and the managers of those stores make like 45 K per year. There are better places to work who voluntarily pay more than the minimum, like Costco who gives their employees a raise every year plus accrued vacation and sick leave, maxing out over 20 per hr.
These are not ideal jobs, but still, only require showing up and learning on the job. there are many others I'm sure. Im for diversity in the pay scale I guess, Its not that I dont want everyone to make more money, but I think the sudden jump will just cost a lot of people their job , then the remaining jobs will have even more competition.

the $15 movement isn't a jump it's a progressive increase over a few years. I also think it's should be 10-12... 15 is too high. I do not think that an additional expense/cost with higher labor is something that means automatic firing... Most business owners want to keep their work force so they can keep up the same production. The less workers the less income is generally how businesses work. The cuts will come out of the profit share or other budgets and businesses will be pushed to be more efficient.

7.25 might work for a highschool student working a summer job, but for anybody trying to make a living or raise a family, that is a joke and there are many many people who are in that position. How can you feel right about that?

Like I said, its not that I dont want everyone to make more money, I just dont want businesses to leave California and relocate in Nevada as they have already done. It will happen more. Obviously there is a balance that needs to be found. Not every employee is a slave driver either, many of them reward employees with raises and benefits. If your stuck in a job that keeps you at 7. 25? I think you can find something better if you look. I would agree that maybe somewhere north of 10 might be fair. Many community colleges have jobs programs, and will help you find work in semi-skilled or skilled positions. I know. I went to Laney college in Oakland CA. and have seen this personally. A lot of people stuck at 7.25 arnt' trying

 

[healthmyths]

No, but they want to force 15 $ minimumm wage. See now, they are pretending to care about the workers at the bottom, but what this is really about is union wages and perks for the Union bosses, the worst of which would be those union jobs paid for by tax payer dollars. as the minimum wage goes up , so goes Union wages.

Hillary doesnt seem concerned that a lot of the lower wage workers will be layed off their jobs while even more unskilled immigrants are coming to the country. If they were concerned they should try Growing the economy First.
What they will be attempting in California will be a Pull Back in economic growth when more businesses leave the state or scale back operations.

Its just too much too soon, IMHO

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

If I never had a job before and wanted to prove to an employer I could show up on time, gain a work history, i would take it, It might be the easiest job i could get, If I needed something in a hurry. Its less of an investment for an employer and often times they will hire just about anybody who may have a harder time somewhere else.

NO! I would not want to live off of 7.25 per hr, but I know that at IN & Out burger for example, they pay their line workers and cooks up to 14 or 15 per hr, and the managers of those stores make like 45 K per year. There are better places to work who voluntarily pay more than the minimum, like Costco who gives their employees a raise every year plus accrued vacation and sick leave, maxing out over 20 per hr.
These are not ideal jobs, but still, only require showing up and learning on the job. there are many others I'm sure. Im for diversity in the pay scale I guess, Its not that I dont want everyone to make more money, but I think the sudden jump will just cost a lot of people their job , then the remaining jobs will have even more competition.

the $15 movement isn't a jump it's a progressive increase over a few years. I also think it's should be 10-12... 15 is too high. I do not think that an additional expense/cost with higher labor is something that means automatic firing... Most business owners want to keep their work force so they can keep up the same production. The less workers the less income is generally how businesses work. The cuts will come out of the profit share or other budgets and businesses will be pushed to be more efficient.

7.25 might work for a highschool student working a summer job, but for anybody trying to make a living or raise a family, that is a joke and there are many many people who are in that position. How can you feel right about that?

FACTS!!! Please... How many is "many"???

Note:Total minimum wage: 2.5 million.
NOTE total age 16 to 24 1.15 almost 50%
NOTE: Over half are 25 and older.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/min...racteristics-of-minimum-wage-workers-2014.pdf

FACTS from the above source:
571,000 of the 2,992,000 or 19% of males married i.e. head of family?? age 25 to 54
And guess what??? At that income they qualify for :
EARNED INCOME CREDIT... pay NO taxes but GET money in return...
They

 

[Geaux4it]

Only an idiot would think the move to automation has anything to do with wages.

Well it does.

-Geaux

 

[dannyboys]

Wendy's International, Inc. Employer Wages, Hourly Wage Rate | PayScale Canada
Oh, really? Average crew hourly pay is between $9.79 and $11.55 per hour- not $7.50, as you stated.

Simple-minded liberals - "Lets force business to pay people at least $15 an hour and we'll all be rich".

They're doing this with the minimum wage at 7.25, not 15.

True, which means their average pay is well within what most people think should be the minimum wage only, making your claims that raising the minimum wage would cause loss of jobs ludicrous on the face of them.

So you think that automation has no connection with labor costs?

They automated crop harvesting in many ways when the alternative was to hire human pickers who were working for extremely low wages.

Another example of your very limited ability to EVER get anything right.
It's like your mental maturity suddenly came to a halt when you were six years old.
You NEVER think beyond the first move in checkers.
Here are the FACTS for those of us who can play chess:
Automation was and is partly the result of our innate human drive to move forward in all areas of life......at least for some races.
At the beginning of the industrial revolution automation was a reaction, not to having to pay a thousand workers to put ******* cotton seed pods into a ******* bag while paying them **** all to do it.
Read this part especially carefully: The main problem wasn't the cost of the labor it was the ******* hassle having to provide food and water and transportation to and from the cotton fields and having somewhere where the workers could sleep and shit as close to the fields as possible. To have to deal with all the 'human relations', the child births, the sickness, the fights, the injuries, the laziness, the theft and on and ******* on and on! You can 'pass the extra labor cost on to the consumer' but you can't pass the ******* hassle of employing people onto the consumer. All the 'hidden costs' involved with dealing with humans are what's driving the advancement of robotics in the workplace.
You have a work supervisor being called at midnight by an employee whose wife just left him telling the supervisor he can't come into work in the morning. Multiply that by hundreds of late night phone calls and you have to deal with an unhappy, but valuable supervisor. Then you have an unhappy manager then you have an unhappy owner. The cycle of unhappiness can never be compensated for by increasing salaries. Anyone who thinks that is stupid and never worked in a supervisory position.
Today it's the same issues in small business in microcosm.
Today's FF robotics are yesterday's cotton gins.
Most small business must put up with all the bullshit having employees means.
Now to compound the problem the employees want to be paid more than the business can afford in the vast majority of cases.
Buy the robot burger maker and tell the lazy, stoner, drunk, semi illiterate 'activist' thieves to piss off. Keep the fifty-something ex forklift operator with a small pension and a work-ethic to look for an increase in their hourly rate.

 

[healthmyths]

Only an idiot would think the move to automation has anything to do with wages.

Evidently you didn't read the articles as to WHY Wendy's is going to kiosks.

Wendy's has placed an increasing emphasis on tech as wages have begun rising in regions across the country. Last year, the company opened a technology and innovation center called 90° Labs in Ohio, which it said would be used to "develop differentiating, interactive digital experiences for our customers, employees and franchise system."

Other restaurants are making similar moves to combat rising wages. McDonald's is testing self-serve kiosks in some of its stores, which CEO Steve Easterbrook called "progress" in the company's most recent earnings call. Some have speculated that the greater use of tablets — and even robots — could also be on the horizon. Other restaurants, like Shake Shack, are choosing instead to offset higher-wages the old-fashioned way: by raising prices.

Wendy's Turns to Self-Serve Kiosks to Offset Higher Labor Costs

 

[Iceweasel]

7.25 might work for a highschool student working a summer job, but for anybody trying to make a living or raise a family, that is a joke and there are many many people who are in that position. How can you feel right about that?

I think they are stupid. Used to be you waited until you could afford a house and family noiw idiots think they are entitled to it. Liberalism harms the economy and liberals think more of the same will fix it.

 

[dannyboys]

Heaven forbid if the owners and execs of Wendy's have to lose a point out of their profit share.

Again, you live in a fantasy where Scrooge McDuck swims in a pool of gold coins.

You have no grasp of reality.

rices wouldn't go to $12 a burger because they need to remain competitive im their market.

So they will happily lose money. Figuring that losing a couple of bucks per order will even out, they can make it up with volume, right?

Fast food companies like in and out have shown that they can run a successful business model while taking good care of their employees.

Interesting note that even In&Out was stung by the California hike. Though already starting at a relative high way, $9.60, the jump to $10.50 (and eventually to $15) punishes the Seasoned workers the most. Those who have worked hard for raises are now at minimum. Perhaps the biggest problem is that In&Out workers now make no more than those at Taco Bell or McDonalds. The incentive to work in the high productivity, high stress environment of In&Out has been destroyed.

We are the USA,

But you're working hard to turn it into the USSR.

we hold our country and businesses to higher standards which means we don't allow child labor, sweatshops or companies to pay their employees wages that keeps them under poverty level.

I'd think getting more people on a livable wage and off of welfare would be of interest to you.

The problem is that you are abjectly ignorant. You have no grasp at all of the concepts at play. You don't know what marginal contribution is, no doubt you think EBIT is a cockney wrestler....

Well thank you for calling me ignorant and defining for me what I know and don't know in the most arrogant of ways. Reread you post to me and see how much of a dipshit you are please.
I've started 6 companies in my lifetime and am very familiar with company operations at all levels. Don't lecture me with your half cocked theories and don't dictate to me what I know and don't know. I've stated before that I think $15 is too high for a nationwide mandate and think each state should be left to set the minimum that is appropriate for their SOL. $7.25 is a joke and I would support a $10-$12 an hour minimum wage as a national base and let the states that want $15 take it from there.

Your regurgitated talking points are full of flaws. You act like you are trying to protect the workers but what you are really doing is sticking up for the richies at the top.
With smart budgeting and tweaking their business plan they can easily increase the wages they pay their workers. Competition forces companies to do this all the time. This is not much different.

So mr. Know it all I have started six businesses, tell us how a small business with maybe a few employees and a small profit margin is going to meet the expectations of a fifteen dollar an hour wage? Should the owner work for nothing?

Small business is a tough situation. I'd say if wages are below minimum standards, which they mostly are in the start up phase, then workers would receive a profit share, equity, or bonus plan. I never claimed to know it all, but I get tired of dumbshits in this forum calling me ignorant while they spout off mindless talking points. I listen to everybody's ideas objectively.

And yes, as a biz owner I've worked many years for no pay

If you have worked as a business owner for "many years" for no pay you are a seriously one of the stupidest people ever to be born.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Heaven forbid if the owners and execs of Wendy's have to lose a point out of their profit share.

Again, you live in a fantasy where Scrooge McDuck swims in a pool of gold coins.

You have no grasp of reality.

rices wouldn't go to $12 a burger because they need to remain competitive im their market.

So they will happily lose money. Figuring that losing a couple of bucks per order will even out, they can make it up with volume, right?

Fast food companies like in and out have shown that they can run a successful business model while taking good care of their employees.

Interesting note that even In&Out was stung by the California hike. Though already starting at a relative high way, $9.60, the jump to $10.50 (and eventually to $15) punishes the Seasoned workers the most. Those who have worked hard for raises are now at minimum. Perhaps the biggest problem is that In&Out workers now make no more than those at Taco Bell or McDonalds. The incentive to work in the high productivity, high stress environment of In&Out has been destroyed.

We are the USA,

But you're working hard to turn it into the USSR.

we hold our country and businesses to higher standards which means we don't allow child labor, sweatshops or companies to pay their employees wages that keeps them under poverty level.

I'd think getting more people on a livable wage and off of welfare would be of interest to you.

The problem is that you are abjectly ignorant. You have no grasp at all of the concepts at play. You don't know what marginal contribution is, no doubt you think EBIT is a cockney wrestler....

Well thank you for calling me ignorant and defining for me what I know and don't know in the most arrogant of ways. Reread you post to me and see how much of a dipshit you are please.
I've started 6 companies in my lifetime and am very familiar with company operations at all levels. Don't lecture me with your half cocked theories and don't dictate to me what I know and don't know. I've stated before that I think $15 is too high for a nationwide mandate and think each state should be left to set the minimum that is appropriate for their SOL. $7.25 is a joke and I would support a $10-$12 an hour minimum wage as a national base and let the states that want $15 take it from there.

Your regurgitated talking points are full of flaws. You act like you are trying to protect the workers but what you are really doing is sticking up for the richies at the top.
With smart budgeting and tweaking their business plan they can easily increase the wages they pay their workers. Competition forces companies to do this all the time. This is not much different.

So mr. Know it all I have started six businesses, tell us how a small business with maybe a few employees and a small profit margin is going to meet the expectations of a fifteen dollar an hour wage? Should the owner work for nothing?

Small business is a tough situation. I'd say if wages are below minimum standards, which they mostly are in the start up phase, then workers would receive a profit share, equity, or bonus plan. I never claimed to know it all, but I get tired of dumbshits in this forum calling me ignorant while they spout off mindless talking points. I listen to everybody's ideas objectively.

And yes, as a biz owner I've worked many years for no pay

If you have worked as a business owner for "many years" for no pay you are a seriously one of the stupidest people ever to be born.

In other words, a Democrat.

This is one of the dumbest issues to ever hit the political scene though. OF COURSE the minimum wage needs to rise, why Republicans are fighting that is just beyond me. OF COURSE $15 an hour is ridiculous, but we already know that those who support $15 an hour are stupid.

 

[dannyboys]

This may backfire on Wendys. Many Americans aren't gonna appreciate it eliminating American jobs. Many will stop eating there. And also, never estimate how fat, greedy, and lazy most Americans are. They feel entitled, they want the service.

Now they'll be doing the work themselves. Moving towards self-serve service is gonna be a bitter pill to swallow for most fat lazy Americans. So calm down greedy white Republican dude, don't go celebrating this too much just yet.

Ya, just like "many Americans" aren't going to buy a jacket made in China from WalMart right?
You really need to wise up pal. "Many Americans" are going to continue to go were the burger is the cheapest. That means going to FF outlets with robot burger makers in the back.

 

[dannyboys]

This may backfire on Wendys. Many Americans aren't gonna appreciate it eliminating American jobs. Many will stop eating there. And also, never estimate how fat, greedy, and lazy most Americans are. They feel entitled, they want the service.

Now they'll be doing the work themselves. Moving towards self-serve service is gonna be a bitter pill to swallow for most fat lazy Americans. So calm down greedy white Republican dude, don't go celebrating this too much just yet.

Who's celebrating it?

The point here to the chagrin of the minimum wage pushers is that there is a price to pay when you attack industry. Everybody on the left thinks that when you increase costs to a manufacturer or service outlet, they simply dig deeper in their pockets.

There is no truth to that because automation has been happening in manufacturing for decades, it's just that few knew about it.

As for fat lazy Americans, those fat lazy Americans will do anything for a cheaper price. I remember when this started with self-serve gasoline pumps. The idea was for the garages to keep their mechanics working on cars instead of pumping gas for customers. They all started off with perhaps one pump. As that pump became increasingly popular, they added another self-serve pump, then another one.

It didn't take long before all gas stations were self-serve. Now they are doing the same in grocery stores and places like Sam's Club.

Same thing will happen to trucking industry you know. Auto drive trucks and all.

This is going to be a far bigger impact than fast food. Transportation is the largest employment sector in the nation and auto vehicles will all but eliminate one of the massive expenditures there - liability.

The major problem with automated trucks/cars are the painted lines on the highways.
The entire 'automated' vehicles industry has come to a grinding halt. Seems the cameras in the vehicles can't 100% pick up the painted lines. This because millions of miles of roads have painted lines barely visible even to human operators. In europe there have been hundreds of cases were the driverless vehicle suddenly stops in the middle of the road because the computer can't figure out where the line is or isn't.
The automated vehicle driving itself down a road full of potholes that remove the painted lines can't go very far.
Causing some very serious accidents.
First all the lines need repainting. If even one line is missed causing an accident someone is going to get their ass sued off.
So fix all the potholes and repaint all the lines then these vehicles will become viable. The next US President will need to come up with a few trillion bucks to repair the highway system. Don't anyone hold their breath.

 

[WillowTree]

Heaven forbid if the owners and execs of Wendy's have to lose a point out of their profit share.

Again, you live in a fantasy where Scrooge McDuck swims in a pool of gold coins.

You have no grasp of reality.

rices wouldn't go to $12 a burger because they need to remain competitive im their market.

So they will happily lose money. Figuring that losing a couple of bucks per order will even out, they can make it up with volume, right?

Fast food companies like in and out have shown that they can run a successful business model while taking good care of their employees.

Interesting note that even In&Out was stung by the California hike. Though already starting at a relative high way, $9.60, the jump to $10.50 (and eventually to $15) punishes the Seasoned workers the most. Those who have worked hard for raises are now at minimum. Perhaps the biggest problem is that In&Out workers now make no more than those at Taco Bell or McDonalds. The incentive to work in the high productivity, high stress environment of In&Out has been destroyed.

We are the USA,

But you're working hard to turn it into the USSR.

we hold our country and businesses to higher standards which means we don't allow child labor, sweatshops or companies to pay their employees wages that keeps them under poverty level.

I'd think getting more people on a livable wage and off of welfare would be of interest to you.

The problem is that you are abjectly ignorant. You have no grasp at all of the concepts at play. You don't know what marginal contribution is, no doubt you think EBIT is a cockney wrestler....

Well thank you for calling me ignorant and defining for me what I know and don't know in the most arrogant of ways. Reread you post to me and see how much of a dipshit you are please.
I've started 6 companies in my lifetime and am very familiar with company operations at all levels. Don't lecture me with your half cocked theories and don't dictate to me what I know and don't know. I've stated before that I think $15 is too high for a nationwide mandate and think each state should be left to set the minimum that is appropriate for their SOL. $7.25 is a joke and I would support a $10-$12 an hour minimum wage as a national base and let the states that want $15 take it from there.

Your regurgitated talking points are full of flaws. You act like you are trying to protect the workers but what you are really doing is sticking up for the richies at the top.
With smart budgeting and tweaking their business plan they can easily increase the wages they pay their workers. Competition forces companies to do this all the time. This is not much different.

So mr. Know it all I have started six businesses, tell us how a small business with maybe a few employees and a small profit margin is going to meet the expectations of a fifteen dollar an hour wage? Should the owner work for nothing?

Small business is a tough situation. I'd say if wages are below minimum standards, which they mostly are in the start up phase, then workers would receive a profit share, equity, or bonus plan. I never claimed to know it all, but I get tired of dumbshits in this forum calling me ignorant while they spout off mindless talking points. I listen to everybody's ideas objectively.

And yes, as a biz owner I've worked many years for no pay

If you have worked as a business owner for "many years" for no pay you are a seriously one of the stupidest people ever to be born.

No stupid. I asked the question "What do you expect small business to do? Work without profit?"

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Again, you live in a fantasy where Scrooge McDuck swims in a pool of gold coins.

You have no grasp of reality.

So they will happily lose money. Figuring that losing a couple of bucks per order will even out, they can make it up with volume, right?

Interesting note that even In&Out was stung by the California hike. Though already starting at a relative high way, $9.60, the jump to $10.50 (and eventually to $15) punishes the Seasoned workers the most. Those who have worked hard for raises are now at minimum. Perhaps the biggest problem is that In&Out workers now make no more than those at Taco Bell or McDonalds. The incentive to work in the high productivity, high stress environment of In&Out has been destroyed.

But you're working hard to turn it into the USSR.

The problem is that you are abjectly ignorant. You have no grasp at all of the concepts at play. You don't know what marginal contribution is, no doubt you think EBIT is a cockney wrestler....

Well thank you for calling me ignorant and defining for me what I know and don't know in the most arrogant of ways. Reread you post to me and see how much of a dipshit you are please.
I've started 6 companies in my lifetime and am very familiar with company operations at all levels. Don't lecture me with your half cocked theories and don't dictate to me what I know and don't know. I've stated before that I think $15 is too high for a nationwide mandate and think each state should be left to set the minimum that is appropriate for their SOL. $7.25 is a joke and I would support a $10-$12 an hour minimum wage as a national base and let the states that want $15 take it from there.

Your regurgitated talking points are full of flaws. You act like you are trying to protect the workers but what you are really doing is sticking up for the richies at the top.
With smart budgeting and tweaking their business plan they can easily increase the wages they pay their workers. Competition forces companies to do this all the time. This is not much different.

So mr. Know it all I have started six businesses, tell us how a small business with maybe a few employees and a small profit margin is going to meet the expectations of a fifteen dollar an hour wage? Should the owner work for nothing?

Small business is a tough situation. I'd say if wages are below minimum standards, which they mostly are in the start up phase, then workers would receive a profit share, equity, or bonus plan. I never claimed to know it all, but I get tired of dumbshits in this forum calling me ignorant while they spout off mindless talking points. I listen to everybody's ideas objectively.

And yes, as a biz owner I've worked many years for no pay

If you have worked as a business owner for "many years" for no pay you are a seriously one of the stupidest people ever to be born.

No stupid. I asked the question "What do you expect small business to do? Work without profit?"

If you can't afford $10-11 an hour for an employee, you need to ask yourself if you NEED that employee.

 

[Slade3200]

The number of jobs that do not pay a living wage, should be too few to count.

theres a lot of businesses that need to bring people in at theh bottom and train them slowly, doing menial things at first. Maybe a body shop for example. If you start everyone at 15, the owner is going to cut the kid a lot less slack and he'll probably only be able to hire one person instead of two. whats actually going to happen is , in the name of making life better for everyone, life is going to be made harder for everyone. there are also older seniors who cant move around very well, but once in a while you see them go out and get some little side job to supplement their income, put a little extra food on the table? You can just kick all that out the door now. No one is going to hire them for 15 bucks an hour. not everyone can work that hard. Again, they will make life worse for people by screwing with the economy artificially. A slight increase might be absorbed better but this will be drastic. its not just the extra 7 or so dollars an hour that cost an employer , there are other related costs that also go up for each employee as the wage goes up

Do you really think 7.25 is a fair wage?

If I never had a job before and wanted to prove to an employer I could show up on time, gain a work history, i would take it, It might be the easiest job i could get, If I needed something in a hurry. Its less of an investment for an employer and often times they will hire just about anybody who may have a harder time somewhere else.

NO! I would not want to live off of 7.25 per hr, but I know that at IN & Out burger for example, they pay their line workers and cooks up to 14 or 15 per hr, and the managers of those stores make like 45 K per year. There are better places to work who voluntarily pay more than the minimum, like Costco who gives their employees a raise every year plus accrued vacation and sick leave, maxing out over 20 per hr.
These are not ideal jobs, but still, only require showing up and learning on the job. there are many others I'm sure. Im for diversity in the pay scale I guess, Its not that I dont want everyone to make more money, but I think the sudden jump will just cost a lot of people their job , then the remaining jobs will have even more competition.

the $15 movement isn't a jump it's a progressive increase over a few years. I also think it's should be 10-12... 15 is too high. I do not think that an additional expense/cost with higher labor is something that means automatic firing... Most business owners want to keep their work force so they can keep up the same production. The less workers the less income is generally how businesses work. The cuts will come out of the profit share or other budgets and businesses will be pushed to be more efficient.

7.25 might work for a highschool student working a summer job, but for anybody trying to make a living or raise a family, that is a joke and there are many many people who are in that position. How can you feel right about that?

FACTS!!! Please... How many is "many"???

Note:Total minimum wage: 2.5 million.
NOTE total age 16 to 24 1.15 almost 50%
NOTE: Over half are 25 and older.

View attachment 74947

http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/min...racteristics-of-minimum-wage-workers-2014.pdf

FACTS from the above source:
571,000 of the 2,992,000 or 19% of males married i.e. head of family?? age 25 to 54
And guess what??? At that income they qualify for :
EARNED INCOME CREDIT... pay NO taxes but GET money in return...
They

View attachment 74948

You just stated all the facts to make my point. Look at the numbers in your chart, we aren't talking about high schoolers working summer jobs. The fact that their wage keeps them below poverty level and they receive gov assistance is proof that the min wage doesn't cut it. So we the tax payers make up for what their companies are failing to provide. Another reason why I'd think the right would support a wage hike.