Fast Food workers protest and demand more money.
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
musterion
Well-known member
I agree. But what if they're own repeated bad choice put them there and keeps them there? What if they steadfastly refuse opportunities - difficult ones, true, but opportunities nonetheless - in favor of just getting by and complaining, coveting and envying those who worked for what they have? What good does blaming "the 1%" or "the rich" or "the lucky" do when it only lets one ignore his or her chosen patterns of self-imposed failure? I ask because I suspect you know people exactly like that, as I do, as almost all of us do. How do you help people who refuse all responsibility?
It's ironic that many of the people who are most emphatic that people in dead-end jobs should just better themselves, were cross-eyed with fury when Obamacare ended the "pre-existing condition" scam that made it impossible for people to move up, if they or a family member had such a condition.
Not saying anything against working for prosperity.
barbie lets his imagination run away with him again:
what an intriguing inner monologue you must have in the still watches of the night
what an intriguing inner monologue you must have in the still watches of the night
Then, they need help.
very few, i would expect
and to those that say yes, i would reply "then work harder/longer/smarter - earn it"
Um no, ive been one before though, you know when i was young, worked 2 jobs and wasnt satisfied with that so i worked hard and was in management before i finished school.
See people can get ahead with hard work. Some people though want benefits they did not earn and want everything handed to them.
I have run a business, it doesnt have to be mine to know how to run one and to have run one.
You extreme libbies cant point to any that work the way you dream of though, nor do you - or have ever run one, because there is no way that would work and you know it.
One more time, how long do you think there will even be a fast food place, if you expect them to pay the same thing as a fine dining restaurant? Why do you think the people who work there deserve wages on commensurate with something that makes a much higher profit and can afford a higher wage? You don't know economics 101.
You all think also that all police, firemen, city council members etc.. should make the same thing and a really high wage no matter what the taxes that pay their salaries allow for and city size allows for and well over the amount the average citizen of the city makes as well as benefits that most people dont have and pensions well beyond the pale, and part of why many cities are now going bankrupt. Especially in democrat run cities.
False, inflation is because of the lack of growth. Prices have to be raised in order to make a profit usually because of the lack of sales. And you libbies want it to be worse, or businesses to close, wow what a solution. No wages is better than low ones right?
Because people fall off the roles eventually and give up, and it only looks good on paper - and the new quality of life goes down for everyone because everything doubles and most end up less off, instead of better.
Now why don't you answer all my questions? You have skipped most of them. (i know why too, because you know what you wish for is not feasible, if it were - everyone would be doing it that way, and you cant give any examples of it working)
Socialism never works - it always only looks good on paper and in the extreme liberal dreams.
Last edited:
So, you had a high school job that makes you thoroughly familiar with the running of a fast food restaurant? So I can presume that you should have the answer to any question I have. How did determine how many people to have on the clock at any given time?
I never said otherwise.
Undoubtedly.
Well, ok then. We'll see how you do as an expert witness.
Extreme what?
Can't point to what? Businesses that pay living wages? Of course I can. Costco. Trader Joe's. IKEA. The Gap. Whole Foods. In-n-Out Burger. Ben & Jerry's. And those are just some of the big names.
As I told you the last time you asked that absurd straw man of a question, that isn't something that I'm proposing. And I can't even guess what the number would be were such a thing to happen.
I don't know why you think I've suggested anything like that.
No, no I don't.
The worst mistake that a lot of municipal pensions have made is putting their investments into a rigged stock market and in the hands of disreputable fund managers who skim as much as they can get away with off the top. I actually would probably restrict pretty harshly what public pensions can invest in if I had my way, but that's neither here nor there.
That's absurd, and in contradiction of blunt economic facts.
Here's the US GDP:
http://www.multpl.com/us-gdp-inflation-adjusted/table
And here the historical inflation rate:
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/
See how the inflation rate spiked at the beginning of the financial crisis of 2007-2008, and then took a nose-dive to around 1% as the Great Recession set in in 2008-2009, and remained low compared to the last decade? I don't recall 2009-present being notable for its growth and prosperity. See the dip down to around 1% in early 2002? It coincides with a period of very low GDP growth following the recession of 2001. Most of the rest of the time, growth and inflation are higher.
You gotta check these things before you claim them. It's really hard to take you seriously when you just make stuff up. I'll bet you didn't even realize that the inflation rate is currently quite low.
That would create a death spiral. Business is poor? No problem! Raise prices! That'll help.
In economics, there's a thing called a demand curve. It relates the price of a good or service to how much of it consumers will buy. You can't raise prices and expect that you'll automatically get more money from whatever you're selling. The only works if the commodity was mis-priced in the first place. Usually, especially in a recession, you'll just drive away customers. Which is why, unless they simply can't afford to do so, businesses will try to ride out the downturns and wait for better times rather than raising prices.
On the contrary, when the economy is good, when people have a sense of security, and money to spend, businesses will raise prices because there is competition to buy their commodities, and people aren't always as const-conscious. This causes inflation. It is a sign of growth...and by the way, the data actually back that up. I'm not just relying on the power of my assertion.
Businesses that pay the current minimum are parasitic. They mooch off the taxpayers in the form of welfare payments going to their employees that should be reserved for people who can't work, which allows them to compete on price against more reputable and healthy businesses unfairly. Our economy would be healthier without them.
That said, I don't want to see them go out of business. I just want them to raise their wages, which they will do if we make them.
I think it's more likely that you're so sure that you're right about how this works that you'd rather not consider the evidence. And that is the only difference that matters between the two of us. You're a clever person, but you won't back up what you say with actual data, so you're way off in the weeds.
If you believe that is the case, prove it. Can you show that in situations where the unemployment rate change took a dive after a minimum wage hike, there was a corresponding drop in the workforce? Or in the GDP? Or anything relevant to metrics of economic success or failure?
That's a lie Angel. I haven't skipped any of your questions. I did point out that some of them were straw men.
They don't do it that way because minimizing wages is in the interests of the owners, and the owners have a disproportionate influence over our politics.
Why don't you figure out what you're talking about before making bold pronouncements and setting up more straw men.
Such as a significant raise in their meager allowance?! :idea:
If they are worth it, yes!
Does every get an "A"?
If everyone gets an "A" an "A" becomes meaningless.
There is dignity in earning one's way.
musterion
Well-known member
To further discourage and punish effort and success by rewarding indolence, incompetence and bad choices. It's the way of the liberal [anti-individualist statist]. It's how you collapse a society. And it's working.
These people are so ignorant its unbelievable. People are paid based on skill level and the job they are doing. No skill level is needed to mop the floor at McDonald's. This is all the results of labor unions getting into these moron's heads and agitating because unions have lost clout and they are trying to be relevant.
And what's even more stupid is that McDonald's, Burger King, and the rest, are franchises owned by individuals, not corporate entities. So the whole thing is just plain dumb.
These jobs are entry level jobs meant for kids. They work for a while, get work experience, and then find a better job. That's how the world works. These protesting idiots think that serving french fries is actually a career worthy of high pay. Un-freekin-believable.
Musterion writes:
You were suckered on that one:
Worker productivity has risen dramatically in the United States, but compensation hasn't come close to matching it. The franchise owners want to get more money without doing any more work.
Someone figured you were dumb enough to believe them when they turned the argument upside down.
You were suckered on that one:
Worker productivity has risen dramatically in the United States, but compensation hasn't come close to matching it. The franchise owners want to get more money without doing any more work.
Someone figured you were dumb enough to believe them when they turned the argument upside down.
musterion
Well-known member
Option B. He couldn't even successfully quote the right guy. He'll never move up to the fry vat at this rate.
whitestone
Well-known member
lol,back in the "good o'l days",,everyone had farms,chickens,water wells,fire places,smoke houses ect. and irregardless of whether the rich man's money was good or bad(what it was worth),,when the stock market everyone just went "wow thats sad to see them loose everything",,,but everyone who had a farm could just keep on picking tomatoes and growing corn,that is their world was not determined by the value of the U.S. dollar,,,
Now you have to admit "it was a really good plan",that is seeing that people who grew their own food and had their own water wells also possessed the ability to (not be forced into anything),so to cause them to loose their farms seemed the answer. So if mankind desired to be a part of the system,if they lusted to become rich with the money like the guys in the magazines,shouldn't they hurt when they hurt and not when they do not?
Now you have to admit "it was a really good plan",that is seeing that people who grew their own food and had their own water wells also possessed the ability to (not be forced into anything),so to cause them to loose their farms seemed the answer. So if mankind desired to be a part of the system,if they lusted to become rich with the money like the guys in the magazines,shouldn't they hurt when they hurt and not when they do not?