User Tag List

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 217

Thread: Minimum Wage Backfire

  1. #1
    Bad-ass Member guts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    667
    Points
    84 (439,010 Banked)

    Minimum Wage Backfire

    If there’s a silver lining for McDonald’s in Tuesday’s dreadful earnings report, it is that perhaps union activists will begin to understand that the fast-food chain cannot solve the problems of the Obama economy. The world’s largest restaurant company reported a 30% decline in quarterly profits on a 5% drop in revenues. Problems under the golden arches were global—sales were weak in China, Europe and the United States.

    So even one of the world’s most ubiquitous consumer brands cannot print money at its pleasure. This may be news to liberal pressure groups that have lately been demanding that government order the chain known for cheap food to somehow pay higher wages.

    Unions have made McDonald’s a particular target of their campaign for a $15 an hour minimum wage and have even protested at corporate headquarters in Oak Brook, Ill. The pressure was enough to cause CEO Don Thompson this summer to capitulate and endorse President Obama’s call to raise the federal minimum to $10.10 an hour from $7.25. Many states have already enacted wage floors above the federal minimum.

    If higher wages force higher prices on the menu, will union-backed activist groups agree to compensate McDonald’s franchisees for futures sales declines? We’re guessing not. So we’ll offer the chain some free consulting and suggest that with sales slipping lately, higher prices probably aren’t the way to draw more customers. Alternatively, McDonald’s could cut its beef costs by changing its popular burger to a fifth-of-a-pounder and hope nobody notices.

    The McDonald’s earnings report on Tuesday gave a hint at how the fast-food chain really plans to respond to its wage and profit pressure—automate. As many contributors to these pages have warned, forcing businesses to pay people out of proportion to the profits they generate will provide those businesses with a greater incentive to replace employees with machines.

    By the third quarter of next year, McDonald’s plans to introduce new technology in some markets “to make it easier for customers to order and pay for food digitally and to give people the ability to customize their orders,” reports the Journal. Mr. Thompson, the CEO, said Tuesday that customers “want to personalize their meals” and “to enjoy eating in a contemporary, inviting atmosphere. And they want choices in how they order, choices in what they order and how they’re served.”

    That is no doubt true, but it’s also a convenient way for Mr. Thompson to justify a reduction in the chain’s global workforce. It’s also a way to send a message to franchisees about the best way to reduce their costs amid slow sales growth. In any event, consumers better get used to the idea of ordering their Big Macs on a touchscreen.

    Entry-level fast-food jobs have never been intended to support an entire family. So-called quick-service restaurants provide opportunities to lots of young people with few skills and limited experience. Across all industries, about two-thirds of minimum-wage workers who stay employed get a raise in the first year.

    Amid a historically slow economic recovery, 1970s labor-participation rates and stagnant middle-class incomes, we understand that people are frustrated. Harder to understand is how so many of our media brethren have been persuaded that suddenly it’s the job of America’s burger joints to provide everyone with good pay and benefits. The result of their agitation will be more jobs for machines and fewer for the least skilled workers.
    http://online.wsj.com/articles/minim...ire-1413934569


    I really don't see the benefit of minimum wage in the first place but $15hr is a crazy amount to pay someone for making a Big Mac. Where do people think that money comes from? MickyD's isn't going to just lie down as their profit margins are eroded. They're going to cut jobs and raise prices.

  2. #2
    havingaseriouslylooseanus
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,875
    Points
    16 (440,176 Banked)
    Your bold text nailed it right on the head. You have lazy groups of people who want to make a career out of flipping burgers when the fact of the matter is you can't. Flipping burgers is a job for kid's in HS and maybe even possible while going to college just to bring in a few extra dollars. Hell, I can even see an adult doing it for a few months in the event they're laid off from their current job and want to keep busy/need to bring in money until their next job. People that aspire to flip burgers for 30 years and then complain that they're not earning enough money should be thrown into a vat of lye.

  3. #3
    Entensity Vet LEGIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    PARTS UNKOWN
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,570
    Points
    5,651 (58,305 Banked)
    Do you guys not know any idiots?


    Some people aren't smart enough to do anything other than flip burgers. They deserve to earn livable a wage. In Vegas that's 9.60 an hour, 40 hours a week. The minimum here is 8.25 I believe.

    I don't endorse more than that, but I endorse that as the minimum here.
    Last edited by LEGIT; 10/26/2014 at 5:26 pm.
    Seems Legit - Nitro - Hollywood Hogan

  4. #4
    Entensity Vet LEGIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    PARTS UNKOWN
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,570
    Points
    5,651 (58,305 Banked)
    It's like everyone who complains so vehemently about the minimum being raised are people who don't understand undereducated, downtrodden and oppressed portions of society.




    Also, many people have developmental disorders, and according to that school of thought don't deserve something for nothing, so they have to work those jobs as a career.



    Not to mention if you think that people who prepare your food(ibidonteatthatshit) don't deserve a livable wage, then you deserve shit in your food.


    If a company can't provide a livable wage and benefits to their employees, they aren't a very good employer and should be allowed to fall under the guise of general compassion, also known as a livable wage.


    Not fifteen dollars an hour though.
    Last edited by LEGIT; 10/26/2014 at 5:26 pm.
    Seems Legit - Nitro - Hollywood Hogan

  5. #5
    Entensity Vet eedna's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    3,358
    Points
    5,108 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by LEGIT View Post
    It's like everyone who complains so vehemently about the minimum being raised are people who don't understand undereducated, downtrodden and oppressed portions of society.




    Also, many people have developmental disorders, and according to that school of thought don't deserve something for nothing, so they have to work those jobs as a career.



    Not to mention if you think that people who prepare your food(ibidonteatthatshit) don't deserve a livable wage, then you deserve shit in your food.


    If a company can't provide a livable wage and benefits to their employees, they aren't a very good employer and should be allowed to fall under the guise of general compassion, also known as a livable wage.


    Not fifteen dollars an hour though.

    welcome to the republican party
    http://forums.entensity.net/signaturepics/sigpic19077_2.gif

  6. #6
    havingaseriouslylooseanus
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,875
    Points
    16 (440,176 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by LEGIT View Post
    Do you guys not know any idiots?


    Some people aren't smart enough to do anything other than flip burgers. They deserve to earn livable a wage. In Vegas that's 9.60 an hour, 40 hours a week. The minimum here is 8.25 I believe.

    I don't endorse more than that, but I endorse that as the minimum here.
    I know plenty of idiots. However, I currently know no one that works in fast food, although most of us have at at least one point in our lives.

    Quote Originally Posted by LEGIT View Post
    It's like everyone who complains so vehemently about the minimum being raised are people who don't understand undereducated, downtrodden and oppressed portions of society.




    Also, many people have developmental disorders, and according to that school of thought don't deserve something for nothing, so they have to work those jobs as a career.



    Not to mention if you think that people who prepare your food(ibidonteatthatshit) don't deserve a livable wage, then you deserve shit in your food.


    If a company can't provide a livable wage and benefits to their employees, they aren't a very good employer and should be allowed to fall under the guise of general compassion, also known as a livable wage.


    Not fifteen dollars an hour though.
    For people with developmental disorders, there are government programs for that such as disability, SSI, etc. For everyone else, go make something of yourself. You don't chose what you're born into, but you do chose what you make of it. I don't wanna hear that "I was born in the hood bullshit", plenty of people I know have pulled themselves out of that hole.

    Hey I have an idea. Why don't we raise the minimum wage to $20, maybe even $30 dollars. That's a livable wage. Then people will no longer need to aspire to become doctors, teachers, scientists etc. We'll all be able to settle for a few dollars less and just flip burgers till we drop dead. Maybe we can even throw in a pension while we're at it.

    Quote Originally Posted by eedna View Post
    welcome to the republican party
    No not really.

  7. #7
    Entensity Vet LEGIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    PARTS UNKOWN
    Age
    33
    Posts
    3,570
    Points
    5,651 (58,305 Banked)
    You're really stupid
    Seems Legit - Nitro - Hollywood Hogan

  8. #8
    MoatsEBTcard Esquamulose's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    SF...ish
    Posts
    44,857
    Points
    27,818 (0 Banked)
    Minimum wage today has far less purchasing power than minimum wage in the late 60's. It'd be nearly $11 an hour today if it stayed with inflation. Oh no, how did the world continue to run back then?!

    Time and time again, actual scientific research has shown that increasing the minimum wage will provide a boost to our economy. More importantly, it will pull millions of people out of poverty.

    The best part about this is we can look back at what critics said when individual states and cities raised their minimum wages--it's going to kill jobs, it's going to increase prices of things, it's going to kill businesses. All the same as people are saying today. None of which proved to be true, time and time again outside small increases to eating out. How does San Francisco continue to run with a minimum wage over $10 an hour? How does the entire state of Washington run with a minimum wage over $9 an hour?

    Raising the minimum wage will kill businesses and jobs? Tell that to the states and cities that have already increased it, only to be met with economic growth higher than that of non-wage raising states.

    But yeah, lets use what McDonalds as an example as to why minimum wage shouldn't be raised--a company who, and this article straight up says, attributes their "struggles" to declining SALES, not rising wages. Surely it couldn't be because people don't want to eat that garbage and we're paying more attention to what we eat!

    I also love the falsehood/misguidance towards the end that these minimum wage, or more accurately low wage, jobs "provide young people with few skills and experience opportunity." Go to a fucking Mcdonalds and let me know what the average age of the workers you can see is. Just guesstimate it. You can see it with your own eyes. Or, you know, look up the actual numbers that have been documented. The majority of people working these jobs are NOT 16-19 year olds.

  9. #9
    MoatsEBTcard Esquamulose's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    SF...ish
    Posts
    44,857
    Points
    27,818 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by guts View Post
    They're going to cut jobs and raise prices.
    http://seattletimes.com/html/localne...mpactsxml.html

    Ten years ago, San Francisco raised its minimum wage from $6.75 to $8.50 an hour, a 26 percent increase. Since then, it has gone up at regular intervals to its current $10.74 an hour, the highest big-city starting wage in the country.

    The city has slapped other mandates on businesses, including paid sick leave and a requirement to provide health-care coverage or pay into a pool for uninsured residents.

    What have the effects been on employment?

    Almost none, according to economists at the University of California, Berkeley, who have studied San Francisco, eight other cities that raised their minimum wages in the past decade, and 21 states with higher base pay than the federal minimum.

    Businesses absorbed the costs through lower turnover, small price increases at restaurants, which have a high concentration of low-wage workers, and higher worker productivity, the researchers found.

    Santa Fe allowed the phase-in of its 65 percent minimum-wage increase for businesses with fewer than 25 employees. For larger businesses, the minimum jumped from $5.15 to $8.50 an hour in 2004. (It now sits at $10.66.)

    A study two years later by the University of New Mexico Bureau of Business and Economic Research found “no discernible impact on employment per firm.” Employment in the city actually went up slightly, and did better when compared with Albuquerque, which didn’t raise its minimum wage.

    The study was done by Nicholas Potter, now a researcher at Washington State University. He said some businesses in Santa Fe did close and some said it hurt their competitiveness. But workers were overwhelmingly positive about the pay hike. And the fear of massive restaurant closures didn’t happen, he said, though the cost of eating out did go up some.
    So yes, prices in the restaurant industry increase.

    Potential price increases at restaurants was the biggest negative impact identified by the Berkeley researchers. The cost of eating out went up 2 to 3 percent when the minimum wage rose 25 percent.
    Oh, 2-3 percent for a 25 percent wage increase? That's it? Your $20 meal just went up 60 cents. Ouch! We can't stand for that.

    ------------


    Wait, another example of this food price increase?

    http://www.sfgate.com/politics/joega...or-5714913.php


    San Jose increased its minimum wage from $8 to $10 an hour in March 2013.

    The result: The price of a $10 food item went up about 15 cents compared with similar items in other cities in the subsequent six months.

  10. #10
    Bad-ass Member guts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    667
    Points
    84 (439,010 Banked)
    Esquamulose, I see your point but you're missing part of the equation. The minimum wage increases have been historically correlated with inflation rates. In effect, the value of the cash paid (despite the actual amount) has been pretty much flat with a slight decrease. As a result, you haven't and wouldn't see any increase in inflation or prices that would stand out over the normal inflationary increases (roughly %2 a year). The article mentions $15 an hour. This sort of pay increase would almost certainly have economic consequences (especially if federally mandated as opposed to a city law). Check out this chart. You can see how minimum wage has remained at roughly the same rate throughout the years.




    Now you're talking about effectively doubling what the graph depicts. You also have to consider how much employers are having to pay for health benefits versus what they had to pay pre-2010. As I mentioned, I don't really like the idea of a minimum wage but if we're going to keep it then I think it should keep pace with inflation (like it has). However, I'm firmly in the corner of "shitty jobs should pay a shitty wage". Last I checked, it's a free country and no one is being forced to flip burgers. If they don't like the wage then they should find a better job. If they have a disability preventing them from doing that, then they should be taking advantage of the plethora of social programs designed to address those issues.
    Last edited by guts; 10/27/2014 at 11:20 pm.

  11. #11
    MoatsEBTcard Esquamulose's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    SF...ish
    Posts
    44,857
    Points
    27,818 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by guts View Post
    Last I checked, it's a free country and no one is being forced to flip burgers.
    This speaks volumes to who you are as a human being, and speaks even more to your ability to understand the reality of the situation--which is clearly not much.

    As if people ASPIRE to make fucking minimum wage. People grow up WANTING those shitty jobs? People work those jobs out of necessity. They work those jobs to fucking SURVIVE. The "find a better job" comment is just tired and purely stupid. What a privileged life you must lead. Not everyone is born lucky.

    Minimum wage has been LOOSELY tied to inflation, yet we can go years as the purchasing power dwindles before Congress can pass something to catch it back up. Making minimum wage in 1968, $1.60 an hour, is the equivalent of making 10.90 today. That's $3.65 in difference. Doesn't sound like much, but that's nearly 50%. Minimum wage workers in 1968 were making 50% more than minimum wage workers today, in terms of purchasing power. 1978s $2.65 minimum wage had the buying power of 9.67 in todays market. Not 7.25. Here's an inflation calculator for you. http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm



    And this is also completely ignoring worker productivity--which is double that of which it was in the 60's and 70's. If minimum wage kept up with productivity instead of constantly lagging behind inflation, it'd be $21.72. Instead, that money is going to the corporations, CEOs--the rich. Hell, if minimum wage grew at 1/4 productivity growth since 1968 it'd still be over $12.


    http://www.cepr.net/documents/public...e1-2012-03.pdf


    You see, YOU'RE missing an entire part of the equation--states and cities that have raised their minimum wages haven't "certainly had economic consequences" (Negative ones, which is what you were referring to.) San Francisco is doing just fine. Washington is doing just fine. Santa Fe NM did just fine--actually no. Santa Fe NM did BETTER than nearby Albuquerque who had a lower min. wage. Would it be disastrous to wake up tomorrow and up it to $15? Of course. That's why those places that have had drastic increases do so over years so that businesses can properly adapt. Seattle is giving large employers not offering health insurance 3 years--those that do offer it get 4 years, small employers up to 7. In fact, states that increased minimum wage this year have so far done BETTER in the job creation category than states that haven't.

    Where are these "certain economic consequences" that have already been shown to be non-existant? You see, the best part of the minimum wage--as I've already said in here--is we can look at numerous places that have already raised it--where people were predicting flat out economic disaster--and none of those disasters or "economic consequences" have shown up.

    The other part of the equation you're missing? The actual bill trying to be pushed regarding federal minimum wage calls for a $10.10 minimum wage (+inflation pinning.) Not $15. The bill that's being stonewalled is for $10.10, and would lift millions of Americans out of poverty.

    Funny that you mention social programs as well. There are families out there whom, were they making a living wage, actually wouldn't NEED the various social programs they may be signed up for like SNAP (food stamps)

  12. #12
    Bad-ass Member guts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    667
    Points
    84 (439,010 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Esquamulose View Post
    This speaks volumes to who you are as a human being, and speaks even more to your ability to understand the reality of the situation--which is clearly not much.
    And this is why no one posts here anymore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Esquamulose View Post

    As if people ASPIRE to make fucking minimum wage. People grow up WANTING those shitty jobs? People work those jobs out of necessity. They work those jobs to fucking SURVIVE. The "find a better job" comment is just tired and purely stupid. What a privileged life you must lead. Not everyone is born lucky.
    I wouldn't say that people aspire to make minimum wage but rather they have few aspirations at all. This is somewhat of a stereotypical, blanket comment but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's incorrect. Why do you assume that minimum wage earners are incapable of finding a better paying job? If I were making minimum wage I would be extremely insulted by the fact that you assume that these people can't improve themselves. I realize that shit happens and some people are forced to flip burgers to make ends meet. That said, there is no reason that a physically and mentally healthy person has to stay in that job permanently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Esquamulose View Post

    Minimum wage has been LOOSELY tied to inflation, yet we can go years as the purchasing power dwindles before Congress can pass something to catch it back up. Making minimum wage in 1968, $1.60 an hour, is the equivalent of making 10.90 today. That's $3.65 in difference. Doesn't sound like much, but that's nearly 50%. Minimum wage workers in 1968 were making 50% more than minimum wage workers today, in terms of purchasing power. 1978s $2.65 minimum wage had the buying power of 9.67 in todays market. Not 7.25. Here's an inflation calculator for you. http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm






    And this is also completely ignoring worker productivity--which is double that of which it was in the 60's and 70's. If minimum wage kept up with productivity instead of constantly lagging behind inflation, it'd be $21.72. Instead, that money is going to the corporations, CEOs--the rich. Hell, if minimum wage grew at 1/4 productivity growth since 1968 it'd still be over $12.
    I don't disagree with most of what you've said here. Wages haven't kept up with inflation or productivity. I'll even agree that, based on the status quo established in the pre-1970s gold standard economy, minimum wage earners have far less spending power than their counterparts of the 1960s. In fact, I'd agree that the minimum wage should be increased if it's kept around. I don't agree with the $15 number mentioned in the article. I don't agree that "the rich" is the root of all evil or that people in general are entitled to a larger share of corporate profits. It's impossible to prove but I think the market will pay a fair wage if the government allows it to regulate itself. I think the minimum wage law actually decreases the amount people are paid because it creates a legal number that companies can refer to.


    Quote Originally Posted by Esquamulose View Post

    You see, YOU'RE missing an entire part of the equation--states and cities that have raised their minimum wages haven't "certainly had economic consequences" (Negative ones, which is what you were referring to.) San Francisco is doing just fine. Washington is doing just fine. Santa Fe NM did just fine--actually no. Santa Fe NM did BETTER than nearby Albuquerque who had a lower min. wage. Would it be disastrous to wake up tomorrow and up it to $15? Of course. That's why those places that have had drastic increases do so over years so that businesses can properly adapt. Seattle is giving large employers not offering health insurance 3 years--those that do offer it get 4 years, small employers up to 7. In fact, states that increased minimum wage this year have so far done BETTER in the job creation category than states that haven't.

    Where are these "certain economic consequences" that have already been shown to be non-existant? You see, the best part of the minimum wage--as I've already said in here--is we can look at numerous places that have already raised it--where people were predicting flat out economic disaster--and none of those disasters or "economic consequences" have shown up.

    The other part of the equation you're missing? The actual bill trying to be pushed regarding federal minimum wage calls for a $10.10 minimum wage (+inflation pinning.) Not $15. The bill that's being stonewalled is for $10.10, and would lift millions of Americans out of poverty.

    Funny that you mention social programs as well. There are families out there whom, were they making a living wage, actually wouldn't NEED the various social programs they may be signed up for like SNAP (food stamps)

    I think the argument here would be purely based on the actual dollar figure and the adaptation window. As you can see in the graph below, there has been some job growth in states that raised the minimum wage. That said, there has been job growth in states that haven't. Also, it's hard to peg such a small hiring increase to minimum wage increases. The data agrees with you but only barely. Keep in mind that the data doesn't take into consideration any number of other factors that could have caused the job growth and that the increase wasn't across the board. I will conceded that there hasn't been any harmful effect but the amount that minimum wage was increased was inline with inflation. And then, there's the situation of New Jersey. If you're going to drink the Kool-Aid then you're gonna need to pull the Jersey fly out of your glass first.


  13. #13
    Entensity Vet eedna's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    3,358
    Points
    5,108 (0 Banked)
    so people who don't have aspirations deserve to live in squalor?

    Shitty jobs are still jobs that need to be done, even if everyone aspirated to move up the chain to work a different slightly better paying still probably shitty job there are going to be people at the bottom.


    http://rt.com/usa/183720-four-jobs-car-nap/

    This lady died because she was working 4 shitty jobs at once. Maybe she should have aspired a little harder?


    http://www.nj.com/union/index.ssf/20...oney_away.html she spoke 4 languages.
    Last edited by eedna; 10/28/2014 at 7:46 pm.
    http://forums.entensity.net/signaturepics/sigpic19077_2.gif

  14. #14
    Bad-ass Member guts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    667
    Points
    84 (439,010 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by eedna View Post
    so people who don't have aspirations deserve to live in squalor?

    Shitty jobs are still jobs that need to be done, even if everyone aspirated to move up the chain to work a different slightly better paying still probably shitty job there are going to be people at the bottom.


    http://rt.com/usa/183720-four-jobs-car-nap/

    This lady died because she was working 4 shitty jobs at once. Maybe she should have aspired a little harder?


    http://www.nj.com/union/index.ssf/20...oney_away.html she spoke 4 languages.

    This is definitely a sad story. No argument there. But who said she wasn't aspiring? She immigrated to America for the chance to work here. Assuming that America is better than Portugal, she had already achieved more than a lot of people. She chose to work all of those hours because she was saving money to support her online boyfriend and his kids. Again, this was a sad story but it was ultimately her decision. Had she been alone, she wouldn't have needed all of the extra cash. Had the boyfriend been a husband or his children been hers, she would have had access to social programs. As callous as it may sound, she took on more responsibility than she should have and it cost her life.

    Also, the phrase "she was working 4 shitty jobs at once" is misleading.

    Maria Fernandes' working life tracked a carefully choreographed schedule. From 2 to 9 p.m. most days she staffed the counter at a Dunkin' kiosk inside Newark's main train station. Then she headed to a second shop, open around the clock in downtown Linden, where she worked from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. On Saturdays and Sundays, she added an 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. shift at a third shop in Harrison, picking up additional hours when asked.
    She worked M-F from 2pm-6am and picked up another 10 hours (a five hour shift each day) on the weekend. I work about that much and so do a lot of other people. It sucks but it is what it is. She had eight hours a day off M-F and 19 hours a day off on Sat-Sun.

    All that said, I'm assuming that your argument is that she wouldn't have had to work so much if she were paid better. So why didn't she get a better paying job? Why didn't she move up to a management position at Dunkin? Why didn't she use her language skills? Why didn't she get student loans and go to school? I don't know. I do know that she chose to take on a responsibility that she couldn't afford and I don't see how that equates to raising the minimum wage.

  15. #15
    Entensity Vet eedna's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    3,358
    Points
    5,108 (0 Banked)
    Why didn't she move up to a management position at Dunkin? Why didn't she use her language skills? Why didn't she get student loans and go to school? I don't know.
    because she didn't want to and she shouldn't have to. She was working 108 hours a week (2 shifts a day 'most days' not most weekedays, 3 on the weekend and more whenever she could get it) instead because she didn't want to work in an office. And that's bullshit.

    Also, lol @ 'why didn't she becomes a manager' so she can make a dollar more an hour to be beholden to one store and not able to skip around to keep up her insane workload?

    It's not just minimum wage that's the problem, I make $14 an hour and work full time and while I live moderately comfortably, I don't see myself ever retiring realistically(I've done the math, even if I sacrifice pretty much all my creature comforts and live like a monk to contribute more to a retirement account I'll still have to work until I'm about 89 to have enough cash to last 20 years (about 20k/year, not exactly a life of luxury). I'm going to be working until I physically can't anymore and then living on the streets until I'm dead.
    Last edited by eedna; 10/29/2014 at 4:28 am.
    http://forums.entensity.net/signaturepics/sigpic19077_2.gif

  16. #16
    havingaseriouslylooseanus
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,875
    Points
    16 (440,176 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by eedna View Post
    because she didn't want to and she shouldn't have to. She was working 108 hours a week (2 shifts a day 'most days' not most weekedays, 3 on the weekend and more whenever she could get it) instead because she didn't want to work in an office. And that's bullshit.

    Also, lol @ 'why didn't she becomes a manager' so she can make a dollar more an hour to be beholden to one store and not able to skip around to keep up her insane workload?

    It's not just minimum wage that's the problem, I make $14 an hour and work full time and while I live moderately comfortably, I don't see myself ever retiring realistically(I've done the math, even if I sacrifice pretty much all my creature comforts and live like a monk to contribute more to a retirement account I'll still have to work until I'm about 89 to have enough cash to last 20 years (about 20k/year, not exactly a life of luxury). I'm going to be working until I physically can't anymore and then living on the streets until I'm dead.
    And who's fault is that?

  17. #17
    Engorged Member H.I. McDunnough's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Iowa
    Age
    38
    Posts
    5,845
    Points
    4,285 (2,420,503 Banked)
    double post. edited first one because fuck it
    Last edited by H.I. McDunnough; 10/29/2014 at 3:22 pm.
    Quote Originally Posted by gannon View Post
    Cumfarts are
    Quote Originally Posted by Bagga Viagra View Post
    Never trust a nut.

  18. #18
    Engorged Member H.I. McDunnough's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Iowa
    Age
    38
    Posts
    5,845
    Points
    4,285 (2,420,503 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Esquamulose View Post
    This speaks volumes to who you are as a human being, and speaks even more to your ability to understand the reality of the situation--which is clearly not much.

    As if people ASPIRE to make fucking minimum wage. People grow up WANTING those shitty jobs? People work those jobs out of necessity. They work those jobs to fucking SURVIVE. The "find a better job" comment is just tired and purely stupid. What a privileged life you must lead. Not everyone is born lucky.

    Minimum wage has been LOOSELY tied to inflation, yet we can go years as the purchasing power dwindles before Congress can pass something to catch it back up. Making minimum wage in 1968, $1.60 an hour, is the equivalent of making 10.90 today. That's $3.65 in difference. Doesn't sound like much, but that's nearly 50%. Minimum wage workers in 1968 were making 50% more than minimum wage workers today, in terms of purchasing power. 1978s $2.65 minimum wage had the buying power of 9.67 in todays market. Not 7.25. Here's an inflation calculator for you. http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm



    And this is also completely ignoring worker productivity--which is double that of which it was in the 60's and 70's. If minimum wage kept up with productivity instead of constantly lagging behind inflation, it'd be $21.72. Instead, that money is going to the corporations, CEOs--the rich. Hell, if minimum wage grew at 1/4 productivity growth since 1968 it'd still be over $12.


    http://www.cepr.net/documents/public...e1-2012-03.pdf


    You see, YOU'RE missing an entire part of the equation--states and cities that have raised their minimum wages haven't "certainly had economic consequences" (Negative ones, which is what you were referring to.) San Francisco is doing just fine. Washington is doing just fine. Santa Fe NM did just fine--actually no. Santa Fe NM did BETTER than nearby Albuquerque who had a lower min. wage. Would it be disastrous to wake up tomorrow and up it to $15? Of course. That's why those places that have had drastic increases do so over years so that businesses can properly adapt. Seattle is giving large employers not offering health insurance 3 years--those that do offer it get 4 years, small employers up to 7. In fact, states that increased minimum wage this year have so far done BETTER in the job creation category than states that haven't.

    Where are these "certain economic consequences" that have already been shown to be non-existant? You see, the best part of the minimum wage--as I've already said in here--is we can look at numerous places that have already raised it--where people were predicting flat out economic disaster--and none of those disasters or "economic consequences" have shown up.

    The other part of the equation you're missing? The actual bill trying to be pushed regarding federal minimum wage calls for a $10.10 minimum wage (+inflation pinning.) Not $15. The bill that's being stonewalled is for $10.10, and would lift millions of Americans out of poverty.

    Funny that you mention social programs as well. There are families out there whom, were they making a living wage, actually wouldn't NEED the various social programs they may be signed up for like SNAP (food stamps)

    first off, I'm not opposed to something like $10/hr. But I wanted to point a few things out to get this back to reality
    1) "Minimum wage workers in 1968 were making 50% more than minimum wage workers today" - so were middle class workers and pretty much every class of worker except the hated "1%". This is important because it tells us that changing the minimum wage may offer some temporary relief for some people but it is not a solution to the problem.

    2)"And this is also completely ignoring worker productivity--which is double that of which it was in the 60's and 70's" - this has very little to do with the worker and very much to do with automation and efficiency processes implemented by the business. Things which you really can't credit an unskilled worker for.

    3) "would lift millions of Americans out of poverty" - we all know this isn't true. Neither the millions part, nor the lift out of poverty part. We do a disservice to low wage earners by perpetuating this fallacy.

    4) You are totally correct that there will not be "economic disaster" and the minimum is overdue for adjustment. However, people are sorely mistaken when they buy into the idea that regulating market factors such as value of labor will have no consequences. And you can correctly calculate that a $1 increase in wage would net approx $0.15 increase per $10 spent, but that ignores all the other regulatory interventions that artificially inflate cost of goods and labor that accumulate to cause inflation.

    5) It is also a disservice to support a culture that believes an otherwise capable adult SHOULD be working a job flipping burgers for minimum wage for the duration of their working life. In the 50's, 60', and 70's those same unskilled people would be more likely to be working a CAREER in a factory than working a JOB flipping burgers. Maybe a better use of our time, after we get the minimum adjusted for inflation, would be to figure out how to get more industry back to the US so these unskilled folks might actually have a fighting chance to get out of poverty?
    Quote Originally Posted by gannon View Post
    Cumfarts are
    Quote Originally Posted by Bagga Viagra View Post
    Never trust a nut.

  19. #19
    Entensity Vet eedna's Avatar
    Entense Supporter
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    3,358
    Points
    5,108 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Elastic View Post
    And who's fault is that?
    That double minimum wage is not enough to live a life on? Not fucking mine.
    http://forums.entensity.net/signaturepics/sigpic19077_2.gif

  20. #20
    havingaseriouslylooseanus
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,875
    Points
    16 (440,176 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by eedna View Post
    That double minimum wage is not enough to live a life on? Not fucking mine.
    That aspect if it, you're right. The fact that you've calculated that $14 is not enough to retire and you're doing shit about it? Entirely yours.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •