Poll: Solid majority (71%) of Americans support Obama’s increase of the minimum wage

[Dubya]

How many times does it have to be explained to a fool that the business needs every one of those employees to survive?

Not if it's more cost effective to replace that minimum wage employee with technology.
Not if it's more cost effective to outsource those jobs to countries without a minimum wage.

That's why employers never downsize their workforce, right?

Dumya might just be the most clueless poster since Chris left.

A business that is in production can find itself needing less production and downsize it's workforce, but small businesses only hire the people they need. Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

 

[eflatminor]

I don't see technology replacing someone running a cash register for small business and it's already replaced what labor it can replace.

Has it replaced workers making a higher minimum wage?

You've never heard of self check out?

What you "don't see" is happening right under your nose. Technology is increasingly likely to replace workers as the minimum wage rises. It's common sense and it's well documented:


Could Fast Food Automation Replace Low Wage Workers? | econfuture | Future Economics and Technology

...firms faced with higher and higher minimum wages would replace actual workers with technology, things like smart cash registers and devices like that.

Friend or Foe: Does the Minimum Wage Hurt the Workers It's Intended to Help?

Have you ever heard of reading comphrehension?

Right, when you can't argue with logic or reason, go for the ad hominem. Works every time...

Can you self check out in small businesses that haven't replaced self checkout where they can?

Read that statement again and get back to us.

No, you can't self check out in business that have NOT replaced low wage workers with the technology. Duh. Yes, you can where the business has. Raising the MW only ensures more workers will be replaced with such technology.

The places that use touch-screen ordering systems aren't what I call fast food.

McDonalds is replacing 7000 workers with this technology. McDonalds isn't fast food?

 

[eflatminor]

Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

Is this really Truthmatters?

I ask because that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. But you go with that...companies will hire people regardless of how the business is performing. Yea, you go with that.

Wow. Just wow.

 

[Dubya]

You've never heard of self check out?

What you "don't see" is happening right under your nose. Technology is increasingly likely to replace workers as the minimum wage rises. It's common sense and it's well documented:


Could Fast Food Automation Replace Low Wage Workers? | econfuture | Future Economics and Technology


Friend or Foe: Does the Minimum Wage Hurt the Workers It's Intended to Help?

Have you ever heard of reading comphrehension?

Right, when you can't argue with logic or reason, go for the ad hominem. Works every time...

Can you self check out in small businesses that haven't replaced self checkout where they can?

Read that statement again and get back to us.

No, you can't self check out in business that have NOT replaced low wage workers with the technology. Duh. Yes, you can where the business has. Raising the MW only ensures more workers will be replaced with such technology.

The places that use touch-screen ordering systems aren't what I call fast food.

McDonalds is replacing 7000 workers with this technology. McDonalds isn't fast food?

There are McDonald's all over the world, but I'm not going to go into a McDonald's and waste my time touch-sceening, if it's anything like other versions of touch-screen. The person running the register is also filling the orders. Have you ever noticed how slow people are using touch-screens?

 

[eflatminor]

Have you ever heard of reading comphrehension?

Right, when you can't argue with logic or reason, go for the ad hominem. Works every time...



Read that statement again and get back to us.

No, you can't self check out in business that have NOT replaced low wage workers with the technology. Duh. Yes, you can where the business has. Raising the MW only ensures more workers will be replaced with such technology.

The places that use touch-screen ordering systems aren't what I call fast food.

McDonalds is replacing 7000 workers with this technology. McDonalds isn't fast food?

There are McDonald's all over the world, but I'm not going to go into a McDonald's and waste my time touch-sceening, if it's anything like other versions of touch-screen.

Your choice. Others are happy to transact more efficiently in an effort to keep prices down.

The person running the register is also filling the orders.

Duh.

Have you ever noticed how slow people are using touch-screens?

Not so slow as to nullify the fiscal justification of using those screens over MW workers, which is why we see them in use.

 

[Dubya]

Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

Is this really Truthmatters?

I ask because that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. But you go with that...companies will hire people regardless of how the business is performing. Yea, you go with that.

Wow. Just wow.

I don't know of any small business around my location that doesn't just have the essential people working for them and there are many businesses here. Many of those small businesses are largely owner operated, but let's face reality, how many hours per week does an owner want to spend operating his business? There are also times during rush periods that the business will lose business with only the owner there.

You keep acting like these minimum wage jobs are in production that can be downsized. You can't downsize a fast food restaurant, because business is slow. If you downsize, you can't function during the rush hours.

 

[eflatminor]

Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

Is this really Truthmatters?

I ask because that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. But you go with that...companies will hire people regardless of how the business is performing. Yea, you go with that.

Wow. Just wow.

I don't know of any small business around my location that doesn't just have the essential people working for them

Well that settles it...

Many of those small businesses are largely owner operated, but let's face reality, how many hours per week does an owner want to spend operating his business?

That would depend on the business owner and the business he's in.

There are also times during rush periods that the business will lose business with only the owner there.

Which is his job to manage, not yours and certainly not the central planners that are just sure they know what's best for other people.

You keep acting like these minimum wage jobs are in production that can be downsized.

McDonalds can't be downsized? Hmm.

Again, even if MW workers were only in small, independently owned operations, that doesn't mean they couldn't do more with less, just like everyone faces with competition.

You can't downsize a fast food restaurant, because business is slow. If you downsize, you can't function during the rush hours.

Not your decision to make. And McDonalds disagrees. 7000 McDonalds workers understand this because they're loosing their job to technology, but it's apparently beyond your comprehension.

 

[Oldstyle]

A solid majority of Americans support President Obama’s proposal ...

so where is the legislation ? Rather than have dinner with Republicans its about time for Obama to insist on something for those who put him in office.

Relax, Obama sprung for the dinner tab. Obama is courting the Republicans and they love it!

The fact that you think Barack Obama picked up the tab reveals how ignorant you are, Kid. We the taxpayers picked up the tab for that...just as we pick up the tab for Barry's jaunts around the country on Air Force One.

After four years of being blamed by Obama for his own failures...I'm SURE the Republicans he invited to one dinner are blown away by his generosity. (eye-roll)

 

[Katzndogz]

Not if it's more cost effective to replace that minimum wage employee with technology.
Not if it's more cost effective to outsource those jobs to countries without a minimum wage.

That's why employers never downsize their workforce, right?

Dumya might just be the most clueless poster since Chris left.

A business that is in production can find itself needing less production and downsize it's workforce, but small businesses only hire the people they need. Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

They certainly do not. They hire people they don't really need because it relieves the small business owner of a burden and they can afford it. The small businessman might hire someone to sweep floors instead of them sweeping the floors themselves. Make it expensive enough and they'll start pushing that broom once again. A restaurant might have a dishwasher, or just rotate the service staff having each one wash dishes for an hour. Or, instead of hiring a bus boy, have the service staff bus their own tables. A small trucking company might have a two man crew per truck. A driver and a loader. They will fire the loader and have the driver do loading an unloading then reconfigure delivery dates to accommodate the slower times.

When faced with an economic tough time, the small business owner lets non essential people go much faster than a larger company.

 

[Dubya]

Is this really Truthmatters?

I ask because that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. But you go with that...companies will hire people regardless of how the business is performing. Yea, you go with that.

Wow. Just wow.

I don't know of any small business around my location that doesn't just have the essential people working for them

Well that settles it...



That would depend on the business owner and the business he's in.



Which is his job to manage, not yours and certainly not the central planners that are just sure they know what's best for other people.

You keep acting like these minimum wage jobs are in production that can be downsized.

McDonalds can't be downsized? Hmm.

Again, even if MW workers were only in small, independently owned operations, that doesn't mean they couldn't do more with less, just like everyone faces with competition.

You can't downsize a fast food restaurant, because business is slow. If you downsize, you can't function during the rush hours.

Not your decision to make. And McDonalds disagrees. 7000 McDonalds workers understand this because they're loosing their job to technology, but it's apparently beyond your comprehension.

You want to play bullsht games, name the businesses in your area that can just lay off people because the minimum wage increases?

Can the liquor stores, sub shops, fast food, you name it, get by without those people and if they can why do they have those minimum wage workers working there now? If the business doesn't need them, why not get rid of them now and save $290 per week for a 40 hour week? Saving the business $14,500 per year plus $1,109.25 for the payroll taxes is a smart thing to do at any time. That's the cost of one full time minimum wage worker, just on those two items and workers have other costs associated with them.

 

[Oldstyle]

Do really not grasp what happens when you raise minimum wage? If I've been paying my dishwasher $7 an hour and I now have to pay him $9...then the prep cook that I paid $9 an hour to I will now have to pay $11...and the line cook that was making $11 an hour will demand $13. So by raising the minimum wage you essentially artificially raise ALL wages. Those costs cannot be absorbed. They get passed onto the consumer in higher prices. MUCH HIGHER PRICES!!!

The only "winner" out of this whole scenario is government because they collect more in taxes. Gee, wonder why liberals love a higher minimum wage so much!!!

 

[The Rabbi]

Not if it's more cost effective to replace that minimum wage employee with technology.
Not if it's more cost effective to outsource those jobs to countries without a minimum wage.

That's why employers never downsize their workforce, right?

Dumya might just be the most clueless poster since Chris left.

A business that is in production can find itself needing less production and downsize it's workforce, but small businesses only hire the people they need. Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

You clearly have no experience with small business, hiring, or running anything other than your mouth.

The owner may decide to work longer hours to compensate for an employee he can no longer afford. He may decide an expansion in personnel isn't cost justified right now, even though he has more business. He may work his existing staff longer hours on overtime rather than hire someone else.
There are myriad possibilities. But one certainty: raise the price of something you'll sell less of it.

 

[Dubya]

That's why employers never downsize their workforce, right?

Dumya might just be the most clueless poster since Chris left.

A business that is in production can find itself needing less production and downsize it's workforce, but small businesses only hire the people they need. Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

They certainly do not. They hire people they don't really need because it relieves the small business owner of a burden and they can afford it. The small businessman might hire someone to sweep floors instead of them sweeping the floors themselves. Make it expensive enough and they'll start pushing that broom once again. A restaurant might have a dishwasher, or just rotate the service staff having each one wash dishes for an hour. Or, instead of hiring a bus boy, have the service staff bus their own tables. A small trucking company might have a two man crew per truck. A driver and a loader. They will fire the loader and have the driver do loading an unloading then reconfigure delivery dates to accommodate the slower times.

When faced with an economic tough time, the small business owner lets non essential people go much faster than a larger company.

Do you live in a dream world? A business like a liquor store isn't going to hire someone to sweep the floors. The liquor store is probably going to be open about 12 hours per day and only 9 on Sunday. The owner is going to look for someone to fill in those extra hours during the evenings so he can do the business like accepting supplies during the day. They may even be willing to hire someone at more than minimum wage if they are responsible. They'll tell them to do things like stock shelves or sweep during down times and they can tell by the sales volume if there are down times. The owner might have to come back to close the store, but how many hours per week does an owner want to spend working?

Businesses like that are your smallest kinds of small business. Tobacco stores are similar. The owner may hire an additional 32 hours or so per week, so he isn't constantly working, but even then it isn't easy for the owner. If it cost the owner an extra $7 per week to get 4 more hours away from that store, it's worth it. The owner is already working 56 hours per week and has to be there everyday to open and close.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Not many people at all will lose their jobs. San Francisco pays $10 an hour min-wage and the are flourishing. Ditto for Sante Fe NM which also pays $10/hour minimum wage.

So you think that increasing the cost of labor will somehow produce more of it?

Workers are very grateful for their increase thus turnover is dramatically reduced. Workers have more to spend and the local economy benefits greatly. Everyone is happy!

Pathetic idiocy........

 

[The Rabbi]

A business that is in production can find itself needing less production and downsize it's workforce, but small businesses only hire the people they need. Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

They certainly do not. They hire people they don't really need because it relieves the small business owner of a burden and they can afford it. The small businessman might hire someone to sweep floors instead of them sweeping the floors themselves. Make it expensive enough and they'll start pushing that broom once again. A restaurant might have a dishwasher, or just rotate the service staff having each one wash dishes for an hour. Or, instead of hiring a bus boy, have the service staff bus their own tables. A small trucking company might have a two man crew per truck. A driver and a loader. They will fire the loader and have the driver do loading an unloading then reconfigure delivery dates to accommodate the slower times.

When faced with an economic tough time, the small business owner lets non essential people go much faster than a larger company.

Do you live in a dream world? A business like a liquor store isn't going to hire someone to sweep the floors. The liquor store is probably going to be open about 12 hours per day and only 9 on Sunday. The owner is going to look for someone to fill in those extra hours during the evenings so he can do the business like accepting supplies during the day. They may even be willing to hire someone at more than minimum wage if they are responsible. They'll tell them to do things like stock shelves or sweep during down times and they can tell by the sales volume if there are down times. The owner might have to come back to close the store, but how many hours per week does an owner want to spend working?

Businesses like that are your smallest kinds of small business. Tobacco stores are similar. The owner may hire an additional 32 hours or so per week, so he isn't constantly working, but even then it isn't easy for the owner. If it cost the owner an extra $7 per week to get 4 more hours away from that store, it's worth it. The owner is already working 56 hours per week and has to be there everyday to open and close.

You bring the phrase "talking out of your ass" to new levels. The smallest businesses will hire people under the table to do those things.

 

[Dubya]

That's why employers never downsize their workforce, right?

Dumya might just be the most clueless poster since Chris left.

A business that is in production can find itself needing less production and downsize it's workforce, but small businesses only hire the people they need. Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

You clearly have no experience with small business, hiring, or running anything other than your mouth.

The owner may decide to work longer hours to compensate for an employee he can no longer afford. He may decide an expansion in personnel isn't cost justified right now, even though he has more business. He may work his existing staff longer hours on overtime rather than hire someone else.
There are myriad possibilities. But one certainty: raise the price of something you'll sell less of it.

I was born and raised in small business, fool! I know what it's like to open a store way before people go to work and stay open until dark.

You think only in terms of microeconomics as if that is the only business doing wage changes. The fact is there will be more business even if the price is slightly higher, because the people will have more money to spend.

I gave you examples of it working in other countries, so how is it possible there?

I gave you the common sense prognosis of what happens to small businesses when consumer purchasing power declines, because wages decline. The money saved by that business paying less in wages will be more than lost with consumers buy less of their product. Lowering the wages is a sure way to put businesses out of business. People aren't going to have their other expenses lowered with lower wages. The person's mortgage isn't going to become lower and neither are their other expenses to live. The person will cut back on spending and that means the businesses that depend on consumer spending will eventually fail.

 

[Dubya]

They certainly do not. They hire people they don't really need because it relieves the small business owner of a burden and they can afford it. The small businessman might hire someone to sweep floors instead of them sweeping the floors themselves. Make it expensive enough and they'll start pushing that broom once again. A restaurant might have a dishwasher, or just rotate the service staff having each one wash dishes for an hour. Or, instead of hiring a bus boy, have the service staff bus their own tables. A small trucking company might have a two man crew per truck. A driver and a loader. They will fire the loader and have the driver do loading an unloading then reconfigure delivery dates to accommodate the slower times.

When faced with an economic tough time, the small business owner lets non essential people go much faster than a larger company.

Do you live in a dream world? A business like a liquor store isn't going to hire someone to sweep the floors. The liquor store is probably going to be open about 12 hours per day and only 9 on Sunday. The owner is going to look for someone to fill in those extra hours during the evenings so he can do the business like accepting supplies during the day. They may even be willing to hire someone at more than minimum wage if they are responsible. They'll tell them to do things like stock shelves or sweep during down times and they can tell by the sales volume if there are down times. The owner might have to come back to close the store, but how many hours per week does an owner want to spend working?

Businesses like that are your smallest kinds of small business. Tobacco stores are similar. The owner may hire an additional 32 hours or so per week, so he isn't constantly working, but even then it isn't easy for the owner. If it cost the owner an extra $7 per week to get 4 more hours away from that store, it's worth it. The owner is already working 56 hours per week and has to be there everyday to open and close.

You bring the phrase "talking out of your ass" to new levels. The smallest businesses will hire people under the table to do those things.

The smallest businesses are owner operated, fool!

 

[Redfish]

A business that is in production can find itself needing less production and downsize it's workforce, but small businesses only hire the people they need. Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

You clearly have no experience with small business, hiring, or running anything other than your mouth.

The owner may decide to work longer hours to compensate for an employee he can no longer afford. He may decide an expansion in personnel isn't cost justified right now, even though he has more business. He may work his existing staff longer hours on overtime rather than hire someone else.
There are myriad possibilities. But one certainty: raise the price of something you'll sell less of it.

I was born and raised in small business, fool! I know what it's like to open a store way before people go to work and stay open until dark.

You think only in terms of microeconomics as if that is the only business doing wage changes. The fact is there will be more business even if the price is slightly higher, because the people will have more money to spend.

I gave you examples of it working in other countries, so how is it possible there?

I gave you the common sense prognosis of what happens to small businesses when consumer purchasing power declines, because wages decline. The money saved by that business paying less in wages will be more than lost with consumers buy less of their product. Lowering the wages is a sure way to put businesses out of business. People aren't going to have their other expenses lowered with lower wages. The person's mortgage isn't going to become lower and neither are their other expenses to live. The person will cut back on spending and that means the businesses that depend on consumer spending will eventually fail.

the flaw in your logic is that you assume that the employees spend their money at their employer's store or at the stores of others paying minimum wage.

What's actually happening is that employers are having to cut hours to avoid paying the obamacare taxes and penalties so even if minumum wage is raised, workers will be taking home less because of obozo's stupid policies.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

A business that is in production can find itself needing less production and downsize it's workforce, but small businesses only hire the people they need. Those small businesses need all their people whether business is good or not.

You clearly have no experience with small business, hiring, or running anything other than your mouth.

The owner may decide to work longer hours to compensate for an employee he can no longer afford. He may decide an expansion in personnel isn't cost justified right now, even though he has more business. He may work his existing staff longer hours on overtime rather than hire someone else.
There are myriad possibilities. But one certainty: raise the price of something you'll sell less of it.

I was born and raised in small business, fool! I know what it's like to open a store way before people go to work and stay open until dark.

You think only in terms of microeconomics as if that is the only business doing wage changes. The fact is there will be more business even if the price is slightly higher, because the people will have more money to spend.

I gave you examples of it working in other countries, so how is it possible there?

I gave you the common sense prognosis of what happens to small businesses when consumer purchasing power declines, because wages decline. The money saved by that business paying less in wages will be more than lost with consumers buy less of their product. Lowering the wages is a sure way to put businesses out of business. People aren't going to have their other expenses lowered with lower wages. The person's mortgage isn't going to become lower and neither are their other expenses to live. The person will cut back on spending and that means the businesses that depend on consumer spending will eventually fail.

Just imagine how much new business there would be if the kiddies were paid a100 dollar minimum wage !

 

[Redfish]

You clearly have no experience with small business, hiring, or running anything other than your mouth.

The owner may decide to work longer hours to compensate for an employee he can no longer afford. He may decide an expansion in personnel isn't cost justified right now, even though he has more business. He may work his existing staff longer hours on overtime rather than hire someone else.
There are myriad possibilities. But one certainty: raise the price of something you'll sell less of it.

I was born and raised in small business, fool! I know what it's like to open a store way before people go to work and stay open until dark.

You think only in terms of microeconomics as if that is the only business doing wage changes. The fact is there will be more business even if the price is slightly higher, because the people will have more money to spend.

I gave you examples of it working in other countries, so how is it possible there?

I gave you the common sense prognosis of what happens to small businesses when consumer purchasing power declines, because wages decline. The money saved by that business paying less in wages will be more than lost with consumers buy less of their product. Lowering the wages is a sure way to put businesses out of business. People aren't going to have their other expenses lowered with lower wages. The person's mortgage isn't going to become lower and neither are their other expenses to live. The person will cut back on spending and that means the businesses that depend on consumer spending will eventually fail.

Just imagine how much new business there would be if the kiddies were paid a100 dollar minimum wage !

right, $500/hour for burger flippers, the economy would soar, everyone would be rich, gold would be falling off trees, diamonds would be raining from the sky,

Oh glorious day when liberalism prevails----------Duh---nope