The Fight for 15 dollars an hour...the computer that just took my order is laughing at you......

[Canon Shooter]

You can say it should be a living wage all you want; doesn't make it so.

Back in '78, I was making $2.85 an hour. If I worked a 40 hour week (which I never did) I'd be making $114 a week; $456 a month before taxes. I don't recall the tax rates from back then, but it's a fair bet my take home was less than $400 a month.

That was the point. IN 1978, we had had a decade of hyperinflation and the minimum wage didn't keep up.

That's why it needs to be fixed now.

You conveniently left out the part that, when minimum wage was first instituted in 1938, it wasn't even a living wage then. So, saying it's supposed to be a living wage now is ludicrous, considering that it wasn't when it was first instituted...

Black codes were still happening back then.

So what?

That has no impact on a federally mandated minimum wage.

I swear to God, you're about the dumbest sonofabitch on this forum...

 

[danielpalos]

You can say it should be a living wage all you want; doesn't make it so.

Back in '78, I was making $2.85 an hour. If I worked a 40 hour week (which I never did) I'd be making $114 a week; $456 a month before taxes. I don't recall the tax rates from back then, but it's a fair bet my take home was less than $400 a month.

That was the point. IN 1978, we had had a decade of hyperinflation and the minimum wage didn't keep up.

That's why it needs to be fixed now.

You conveniently left out the part that, when minimum wage was first instituted in 1938, it wasn't even a living wage then. So, saying it's supposed to be a living wage now is ludicrous, considering that it wasn't when it was first instituted...

Black codes were still happening back then.

So what?

That has no impact on a federally mandated minimum wage.

I swear to God, you're about the dumbest sonofabitch on this forum...

Equal protection of the laws is in our several Constitutions.

 

[Canon Shooter]

No, but it was slowly built up to be close to a living wage, by 1968, it was worth 11.68 in today's dollars.

You're missing the most basic point here. You said that minimum wage was intended to be a living wage. If that were true, then it would've represented a living wage when it was first pout in place, and it wasn't.

You can't intelligently argue that point.

You're basically saying that an employer can tell an employee that he'll pay him $15 an hour, and then pay him $10 an hour. When questioned about that, using your logic, you can simply say "I meant I'll pay you $15 an hour 30 years from now"...

Now, being a complete fucking retard, what you don't get is that if people don't have any money because they aren't making a living wage, they aren't going to be patronizing your business. Most businesses would be considered a luxury.

And if I have to pay my employees $15 an hour instead of $10 an hour, I'm going to have to raise my prices to maintain revenue, so they're not coming into my business anyway. My overhead's not going down. In fact, it'll likely increase.

Being a complete fucking retard, I'm sure you understand that...

 

[westwall]

Just went through McDonald's drive thru.......a computer took my order........
The Fight for 15 just forced even more people out of work.......good job democrats.... But serfs just need to vote every 2 years........they don't need jobs.

2aGuy, I’m among the proponents for gradually increasing the federal minimum wage rate until it achieves no less than 125% OF ITS February-1968 peak purchasing power: thereafter it should be annually monitoring and updated to retain no less than that value. I’;m also a proponent for automation when it reduces costs and/or improve quality of goods and service products.

Economics of the poorest, market determined minimum wage rates that do not encourage the costs of investing to automate are characteristic of the poorest economies. Is that what you aspire for our nation? Respectfully, Supposn

All raising the minimum wage does is cause inflation. If you truly want to raise wages, you have to get rid of illegal immigration which keeps wages low by insuring a constant supply of cheap labor.

 

[danielpalos]

I can understand that business is required to be for-profit if incorporated that way from inception.

Government moving the goalposts is par for the course. Capitalists merely need a Good excuse for tax breaks.

 

[danielpalos]

Just went through McDonald's drive thru.......a computer took my order........
The Fight for 15 just forced even more people out of work.......good job democrats.... But serfs just need to vote every 2 years........they don't need jobs.

2aGuy, I’m among the proponents for gradually increasing the federal minimum wage rate until it achieves no less than 125% OF ITS February-1968 peak purchasing power: thereafter it should be annually monitoring and updated to retain no less than that value. I’;m also a proponent for automation when it reduces costs and/or improve quality of goods and service products.

Economics of the poorest, market determined minimum wage rates that do not encourage the costs of investing to automate are characteristic of the poorest economies. Is that what you aspire for our nation? Respectfully, Supposn

All raising the minimum wage does is cause inflation. If you truly want to raise wages, you have to get rid of illegal immigration which keeps wages low by insuring a constant supply of cheap labor.

Markets have to adjust to a new equilibrium, like usual.

 

[toobfreak]

Just went through McDonald's drive thru.......a computer took my order........

The Fight for 15 just forced even more people out of work.......good job democrats....

But serfs just need to vote every 2 years........they don't need jobs.

I see the usual mindless drips disliked your post. Truth be told, they could automate the entire McDonalds without a single human being. A machine to take your order, another to cook the food, another to fill the order and bring to the the window and a last one to process the payment.

This is what the $15 min wage will drive companies to do.

The food prices will stay the same but their costs will go DOWN and ultimately, they'll pocket more cash.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Markets have to adjust to a new equilibrium, like usual.

 

[danielpalos]

Markets have to adjust to a new equilibrium, like usual.

Congress commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Markets have to adjust to a new equilibrium, like usual.

Congress commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy.

And that has exactly nothing to do with an employer shit-canning you instead of paying you $15 an hour because he's told to.

The government can mandate that an employer pay a $15 an hour minimum wage. That's pretty silly, though, since government cannot mandate that an employer keep you employed...

 

[2aguy]

Markets have to adjust to a new equilibrium, like usual.

Congress commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy.

And that has exactly nothing to do with an employer shit-canning you instead of paying you $15 an hour because he's told to.

The government can mandate that an employer pay a $15 an hour minimum wage. That's pretty silly, though, since government cannot mandate that an employer keep you employed...

You forgot........."Yet."

 

[danielpalos]

Markets have to adjust to a new equilibrium, like usual.

Congress commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy.

And that has exactly nothing to do with an employer shit-canning you instead of paying you $15 an hour because he's told to.

The government can mandate that an employer pay a $15 an hour minimum wage. That's pretty silly, though, since government cannot mandate that an employer keep you employed...

So what. Equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation means I should be able to quit and collect unemployment.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Markets have to adjust to a new equilibrium, like usual.

Congress commands fiscal policy and the Fed commands monetary policy.

And that has exactly nothing to do with an employer shit-canning you instead of paying you $15 an hour because he's told to.

The government can mandate that an employer pay a $15 an hour minimum wage. That's pretty silly, though, since government cannot mandate that an employer keep you employed...

So what. Equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation means I should be able to quit and collect unemployment.

My God, you're retarded.

It means no such thing. You can get unemployment compensation if you're fired. If your lazy ass quits, well, fuck you. You get nothing...

 

[danielpalos]

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

 

[JoeB131]

You're missing the most basic point here.

No, I'm not. But arguing with wingnuts is often tiring.

And if I have to pay my employees $15 an hour instead of $10 an hour, I'm going to have to raise my prices to maintain revenue, so they're not coming into my business anyway. My overhead's not going down. In fact, it'll likely increase.

Actually, the cost of labor is only a minor factor in most businesses.

For instance, going back to our wonderful example of McDonalds, the cost of a Big Mac would increase by a whopping seventeen cents. If that 17 cents was going to break you, then you probably shouldn't be eating a big mac.

Raising fast-food hourly wages to $15 would raise prices by 4%, study finds

The current federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Raising it to $15 (a 107% increase) would cause prices to rise an estimated 4.3%.

www.marketwatch.com

I should also point out that the cost of a McDonald's labor is ALREADY being subsidized by the taxpayers.

52 Percent of Fast Food Workers Need Government Assistance to Make Ends Meet

It costs tax payers nearly $153 billion each year.

www.eater.com

For many restaurant employees, having a full-time job doesn't mean they can make ends meet. Not only do 40 percent of fast food workers live in poverty, a new study by the Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education shows that nearly 52 percent of all fast food workers are dependent upon public assistance programs such as food stamps, Medicaid, and child care subsidies. The report adds that some states like California and New York spend over $3 billion on public assistance a year.

 

[Canon Shooter]

You're missing the most basic point here.

No, I'm not. But arguing with wingnuts is often tiring.

And if I have to pay my employees $15 an hour instead of $10 an hour, I'm going to have to raise my prices to maintain revenue, so they're not coming into my business anyway. My overhead's not going down. In fact, it'll likely increase.

Actually, the cost of labor is only a minor factor in most businesses.

For instance, going back to our wonderful example of McDonalds, the cost of a Big Mac would increase by a whopping seventeen cents. If that 17 cents was going to break you, then you probably shouldn't be eating a big mac.

Raising fast-food hourly wages to $15 would raise prices by 4%, study finds

The current federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Raising it to $15 (a 107% increase) would cause prices to rise an estimated 4.3%.

www.marketwatch.com

I should also point out that the cost of a McDonald's labor is ALREADY being subsidized by the taxpayers.

52 Percent of Fast Food Workers Need Government Assistance to Make Ends Meet

It costs tax payers nearly $153 billion each year.

www.eater.com

For many restaurant employees, having a full-time job doesn't mean they can make ends meet. Not only do 40 percent of fast food workers live in poverty, a new study by the Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education shows that nearly 52 percent of all fast food workers are dependent upon public assistance programs such as food stamps, Medicaid, and child care subsidies. The report adds that some states like California and New York spend over $3 billion on public assistance a year.

Well, duh.

If people would understand that their minimum wage job is insufficient to provide for a family, maybe the taxpayer could be let off the hook.

I also dismiss that study.

Every single company which has dealings with a McDonald's franchisee is going to have to raise their prices in order to cover increased wage costs. Landscaping, for instance, is already a big expense for franchisees. They don't mow their own grass nor do they plant and maintain their own flowerbeds. This constitutes a regularly recurring expense (usually weekly). The owner of that landscape company is going to raise his rates because he has increased costs. He's going to pass that cost on along to the franchisee, and rightly so. Let's say the cost goes from $750 a month to $1,000 a month.

That extra $250 has to come from somewhere, and I promise you it won't be from the franchisee's pocket.

The franchisee isn't going to thumb through some "study", he's gonna' say "fuck it" and raise the price of a Big Mac from $3.99 to $4.49 and call it a day. He'll make similar adjustments across the menu, and he'll do it knowing that McDonald's customers won't bat an eye at the increase, because they want what the want and, goddammit, they want a Big Mac. All of those price increases will add up quickly and cover that extra expense and, at the same time, generate the revenue he's going to need to pay his increased wage costs.

I use the landscaper example because I have a friend who actually maintains the properties for our local McDonald's restaurants. There are several restaurants held by one franchisee, and my buddy is paid much more than $750 a month to maintain them, but he's already started raising his price for maintaining the properties.

You can cite all the "studies" you want, but it's not ever going to change the fact that if the owner of a business has an increase in his costs of doing business, he will pass those costs onto his customers...

 

[JoeB131]

Well, duh.

If people would understand that their minimum wage job is insufficient to provide for a family, maybe the taxpayer could be let off the hook.

Yeah, those poor people should dutifully starve.

Of course, as stated, McDonald's encourages it's employees how to apply for welfare. So I guess you are happy subsidizing the workforce of a big corporation, I'm really not.

Every single company which has dealings with a McDonald's franchisee is going to have to raise their prices in order to cover increased wage costs. Landscaping, for instance, is already a big expense for franchisees. They don't mow their own grass nor do they plant and maintain their own flowerbeds. This constitutes a regularly recurring expense (usually weekly). The owner of that landscape company is going to raise his rates because he has increased costs. He's going to pass that cost on along to the franchisee, and rightly so. Let's say the cost goes from $750 a month to $1,000 a month.

Okay, that's also a minimal expense. A whole whopping $250 a month?

I use the landscaper example because I have a friend who actually maintains the properties for our local McDonald's restaurants. There are several restaurants held by one franchisee, and my buddy is paid much more than $750 a month to maintain them, but he's already started raising his price for maintaining the properties.

Oh, the poor baby, he's actually having to pay his employees (whom I suspect are mostly immigrants) a fair wage? That's terrible!!!

Why do you hate working people so much? It's this bizarre mentality of Republicans I've never quite understood.

 

[danielpalos]

If Capitalists can only make it on the back of Cheap Labor, they should fail in our first world economy.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Yeah, those poor people should dutifully starve.

I never made any such comment, so stop putting words in my mouth you fucking lying douchebag...

Of course, as stated, McDonald's encourages it's employees how to apply for welfare. So I guess you are happy subsidizing the workforce of a big corporation, I'm really not.

Nor am I.

The difference between us, though, is that you're stupid enough to believe that simply increasing the minimum wage will solve the problem. It won't. Not by a long shot...

Okay, that's also a minimal expense. A whole whopping $250 a month?

Doesn't really matter how much it is. The fact of the matter is that extra expense will be passed on to the consumer. The franchisee's not going to eat that.

Oh, and that $1,000 per month is per restaurant. So, the franchisee who owns seven restaurants is no longer paying $5,250 per month to have his properties maintained, he's paying $7,000 a month.

Methinks you overestimate his altruism if you think he's just going to absorb that...

Oh, the poor baby, he's actually having to pay his employees (whom I suspect are mostly immigrants) a fair wage? That's terrible!!!

Actually, it's all white guys on my buddy's crews, many with longtime roots here in St. John's County. Why would you assume they were immigrants?

And my buddy already pays his landscaping crews pretty well as it is.

Why do you hate working people so much? It's this bizarre mentality of Republicans I've never quite understood.

Maybe the reason you've never understood it is because you're not smart enough to actually recognize a Republican. I've never been a Republican. Ever.

How's the fail taste?

 

[JoeB131]

Nor am I.

The difference between us, though, is that you're stupid enough to believe that simply increasing the minimum wage will solve the problem. It won't. Not by a long shot...

Sure it would. If you can make enough to pay for your rent and food, that would be a lot less government dependence.

Actually, it's all white guys on my buddy's crews, many with longtime roots here in St. John's County. Why would you assume they were immigrants?

Because I've never seen landscapers who weren't.. Including the jackass who comes by my Condo every Tuesday morning with the leafblower...

Maybe the reason you've never understood it is because you're not smart enough to actually recognize a Republican. I've never been a Republican. Ever.

Naw for a while I deluded myself into thinking I was better than the working stiffs because I was white and had more education... Eventually I realized I was in the same boat as the Hispanic Lesbian I worked with, the one the One Percenters are trying to sink. . Then a guy with a nicer suit screwed me over professionally and announced, "This is why I'm glad I don't have to deal with a union."

Stopped voting Republican after that.

Frankly, I should have stopped voting Republican two recessions earlier, but I didn't.