Subway founder: Obama has created oppresive regulatory environment

[Quantum Windbag]

What do you right-wingers think you accomplish by proving you are stupid about business?

Still no actual data.

I'm not wasting my time providing data to idiots to prove something so obvious. You fools lose again, because you always have to claim something exists that anyone with a brain would see can't exist. A McDonald's is going to run you around $3 million, so tell me how much labor has to cost to make it a 100% of doing business!

Would it help if I gave you a hint?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Subways around here usually have 2 people working at a time. You raise their wages by a dollar an hour,

that's about 16 dollars per shift in additional labor cost.

How many subs does a Subway sell in 8 hours?

Thanks for proving you don't know jack about payroll.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Subways around here usually have 2 people working at a time. You raise their wages by a dollar an hour,

that's about 16 dollars per shift in additional labor cost.

How many subs does a Subway sell in 8 hours?

My guess is most are open from 10 AM to 9 PM and vary their personnel. Someone would have to start making the bread before they open and a couple of people would be needed to clean up after they close. I don't think they would be paying good cooks minimum wage and would pay that for cash register operators and preps who make sandwiches.

6 minutes to make a sub is about 6 times more than it takes.

I find it remarkable that, after spending half the thread jumping down people's throats claiming they don't know anything about business, you allow a blatant misrepresentation of how payroll works to stand uncorrected.

By the way, you just described a shop that works nothing like Subway.

 

[Grandma]

Listen clearly, fool! 100% of the cost of doing business at Subway is not labor costs, so those other costs don't go up just because labor costs go up. Are you right-wingers totally stupid people to even make such a ridiculous claim?

You call such stupidity basic economics and even a child should know more than you know. You have the opinion of the billionaire who makes his living off of selling shit sandwich franchises and right now is expanding operations in Europe, where there is higher minimum wages, universal health care and a recession. What more proof do you need? Why wouldn't the sales volume for Subway shit sandwiches increase in America if minimum wage increased?

So you say 100% of the costs are not labor costs. However, they are labor related. All that goes into producing the product involves labor.

And a subway sandwich in Europe costs 2.90 euros for a 5 inch sandwich. which is $3.77 in American currency.

A 6 inch sandwich in California costs 2.50. So in Europe you get a smaller sandwich for $1.27 more money.

Saying that increases in minimum wage doesn't affect production costs is what is stupid. It will cost more to produce the sandwich so therefore the consumer will end up paying a higher price for the sandwich.

Or they will get a smaller sandwich with less meat for the same price or maybe even a higher price.

The poor will suffer the most once again.
Something that the democrats keep claiming will not happen.
Everytime the government raises taxes on products or the minimum wage the biggest impact will be on the poor.

Umm... not exactly, but nice try. The fact is that gasoline is about $8.00 per gallon in Europe. That means that transporting materials to the stores costs more. Plus, in Europe the freight trains are much smaller than they are here, meaning more are needed, using more fuel, costing more.

 

[P@triot]

Let's take the UK for example. The minimum wage in the UK is 22.2% higher than ours

If the minimum wage is increased 22.2%, then the cost of the sandwhiches go up 22.2%. Which means the truck drive who wants to buy them increases his fees 22.2%. Which means the gas stations which have their fuels delivered via trucks raise their fees 22.2%. It continues until the "increase" for the minimum wage worker is no more useful to them than their wage before the increase.

Why do you think a worker today cannot survive off of the $0.25 per hour the original minimum wage was set at in 1938? Because every time you idiots try to artificially prop-up a low income worker, the market has a natural reaction of raising their prices to cover the new costs.

It's basic economics and it's a damn shame you need someone to explain it to you.

Listen clearly, fool! 100% of the cost of doing business at Subway is not labor costs, so those other costs don't go up just because labor costs go up. Are you right-wingers totally stupid people to even make such a ridiculous claim?

You call such stupidity basic economics and even a child should know more than you know. You have the opinion of the billionaire who makes his living off of selling shit sandwich franchises and right now is expanding operations in Europe, where there is higher minimum wages, universal health care and a recession. What more proof do you need? Why wouldn't the sales volume for Subway shit sandwiches increase in America if minimum wage increased?

Because Subway is not going to eat that 22.2% increase to the minimum wage. For each minimum wage worker they have, they will calculate the total cost for the entire year, then raise their prices to cover that cost. So will every other business in America (Walmart, Home Depot, etc.) - so it has a ripple effect through out the entire economy. And at the end of the day, the minimum wage worker is no further ahead because they have to pay more for everything to cover the cost of their increase.

I'm seriously stunned that you need this explained to you. No wonder you're a liberal...

 

[P@triot]

How come we aren't talking about how overvalued and overpaid CEO's are?

Remind me again, who are you to decide when someone is "overpaid"? Obviously, they are NOT "overpaid" or the board of directors would not be compensating them on that level. The market will bear exactly what you are worth - nothing less, nothing more (well, except in the case of unions of course - where coercion and extortion set the prices).

 

[P@triot]

Listen clearly, fool! 100% of the cost of doing business at Subway is not labor costs, so those other costs don't go up just because labor costs go up. Are you right-wingers totally stupid people to even make such a ridiculous claim?

I truly feel sorry for you. Nobody said or even implied that "100% of the cost of doing business is labor costs". Nobody. It's really sad that you don't even understand the basics of economics.

See, we are talking about labor costs - and no business is going to eat the cost of an increase. Their prices now cover the costs of the labor (as well as ALL other costs of doing the business). So if you increase the labor costs, they increase their prices to cover those costs.

This is extremely simple. If you can't grasp this - well, God help you son.

 

[JoeB131]

How come we aren't talking about how overvalued and overpaid CEO's are?

Remind me again, who are you to decide when someone is "overpaid"? Obviously, they are NOT "overpaid" or the board of directors would not be compensating them on that level. The market will bear exactly what you are worth - nothing less, nothing more (well, except in the case of unions of course - where coercion and extortion set the prices).

So you are for the CEO's appointing guys who will give THEM a raise, but not the government or unions demanding wage increases for the people actually doing the work.

You do realize Plutocracy was on the ballot last November and it lost, right?

 

[P@triot]

Dubya's belief on how the world works: raise the minimum wage, and the people who pay those wages will just eat the cost and accept the loss in profits. They will not raise their prices to cover those costs.

And yes, he actually gets a vote, America. Is it a wonder that we're $16+ trillion in debt and have incompetent buffoon's like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid in office?

 

[P@triot]

How come we aren't talking about how overvalued and overpaid CEO's are?

Remind me again, who are you to decide when someone is "overpaid"? Obviously, they are NOT "overpaid" or the board of directors would not be compensating them on that level. The market will bear exactly what you are worth - nothing less, nothing more (well, except in the case of unions of course - where coercion and extortion set the prices).

So you are for the CEO's appointing guys who will give THEM a raise, but not the government or unions demanding wage increases for the people actually doing the work.

You do realize Plutocracy was on the ballot last November and it lost, right?

You do realize that in one scenario you listed (CEO's) the raise increase come as a result of freedom, choice, independence, and free markets.

While the other scenario you mentioned (government), the raise increase come as a result of force, coercion, and at the barrel of a gun? Hell, you even used the word DEMANDING (really says it all, doesn't it?)

And....you don't see a difference here?!?!

Of course you would prefer option #2..... communists always prefer the decisions to come by force at the barrel of a gun

Who's next?

 

[P@triot]

And since we're on the topic of minimum wage:

Myth #1: Hordes of Minimum-Wage Workers

Very few Americans are actually working for the federal minimum wage—it’s just 2.9% of all workers in the United States.

In other words, 97 percent of American workers make more than minimum wage.

Myth #2: The “Working Poor” Getting By on Minimum Wage

More than half of minimum-wage workers are between the ages of 16 and 24. These young people tend to work part-time, and a majority of them are enrolled in school at the same time—so the after-school burger flipper or college student with a part-time job is the real deal. A hike in the minimum wage primarily raises pay for suburban teenagers, not the working poor.

In fact, America’s poor aren’t the “working poor” at all. Sherk explains that “Contrary to what many assume, low wages are not their primary problem, because most poor Americans do not work for the minimum wage. The problem is that most poor Americans do not work at all.” Cutting down the number of entry-level jobs by raising the minimum wage surely isn’t going to help these people who need jobs.

Myth #3: Minimum-Wage Workers Trapped in Poverty

The average family income of a minimum-wage worker is more than $53,000 a year. How is this possible at $7.25 an hour? Few workers with minimum-wage jobs are the primary earners in their families. This is also true of older minimum-wage earners. Three-fourths of workers 25 and older earning the minimum wage live above the poverty line. In fact, 62 percent have incomes over 150 percent of the poverty line.

Myth #4: Lifelong Minimum-Wage Earners

Minimum-wage earners don’t stay in those jobs forever. It’s easy to get the idea from politicians that “minimum-wage workers” are a permanent class of people. But in fact, two-thirds of minimum-wage workers earn a raise within a year. As they gain experience and employment skills, they become more productive and can command higher wages. Entry-level, minimum-wage jobs are the first rung on many workers’ career ladders.

Myth #5: More Single Parents on Minimum Wage

Very few single parents are working full-time in minimum-wage jobs. Unfortunately, politicians overuse that example. A greater proportion of employees in the overall workforce (5.6 percent) are single parents working full-time jobs, while for minimum-wage workers that proportion is 4 percent—because so many minimum-wage workers are secondary earners.

Busting 5 Myths About the Minimum Wage