New York to raise fast food workers minimum wage to $15 per hour.

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:To Joani and Semi Sane Markle:  Okay, we get it.  You don't want workers to earn a living wage.  Luckily, NY City doesn't listen to folks like you.  

That's not what I said!


You asked a question and I answered it.  You never responded.

You did cite some trades requiring some minimal training (2 years or less for all med techs) 6 mos. for most secretarial skills, all of which I'll accept your estimates of starting wages.  

But what does it matter?  Here in Pace, where I live, housing costs are relatively low -- nowhere near those in NY city -- the location this thread discusses.  The thing is, you have consistently berated workers having their wages adjusted to a moderate living level.  You talk about how dumb one must be to work at McDonalds, etc., and how easy the work must be.  The truth is, you don't like poor people and could care less about their struggles to live on a minimal wage.  Reality.

Once again,  why should an unskilled individual make $15.00 an hour performing a task that doesn't require education or skills, when other skiled, trained an educated workers don't make that amount.

Because the task apparently requires an unskilled individual, and unskilled individuals - just like skilled individuals - require things such as 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc..

Yes it does...and if you want to have those basic needs you continue your education through school or training.  You don't go into a menial job expecting a give away to support a family. You earn your way.

If everyone were able to do as you say, there would be no one left to perform unskilled labor.

Part time jobs...while continuing their education. Older people that need extra money,  special needs people, students.  

Ah.  Well then you have solved the riddle.  Let's just tell everyone working a career minimum wage job to go out and get an education.  Then we'll tell employers to fill that new void with old people and college students.  

Problem solved!  Joanimaroni 2016!

SILLY BOY....Can't you understand working in a fast food restaurant is not a career position.

For some it isn't. For others it is. Either way, if someone is to be able to show up to their fast food position, it is a given that they're going to need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc. If not from their wage, where are they to get all of that stuff?

Salinsky wrote:The problem is that the minimum wage has not kept up with the cost of living.

Not even close.

Why should it? It would be best to do away with it entirely, it has accomplished...zero, zip, nada, nothing.

Excuse me, I haven't noticed where you posted the rate of workers earning minimum wage who are the heads of households. Where was that?

Too, what is the average income of a household where one worker earns the minimum wage?

Come on, step up, show your courage!

Salinsky wrote:The problem is that the minimum wage has not kept up with the cost of living.

Not even close.

What's happening to the dollar that this has and will continue to happen? Where did that value go?

Why isn't this the issue?

PkrBum wrote:

Salinsky wrote:The problem is that the minimum wage has not kept up with the cost of living.

Not even close.

What's happening to the dollar that this has and will continue to happen? Where did that value go?

Why isn't this the issue?

It's called inflation. You know, there may still be time to enroll in ECO1101 "Intro to Macroeconomics" for the fall term.

If the minimum wage for service industry worker, such as McDonalds, was raised to $15, do you think this person is going to be working full time?


These businesses have a model that takes on part time employees for a certain amount of yearly budget.


Watch your Big Mac go up in price. Bad meal, no nutrition, optimum price so that someone can support a family?

boards of FL wrote:

For some it isn't.  For others it is.  Either way, if someone is to be able to show up to their fast food position, it is a given that they're going to need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc.   If not from their wage, where are they to get all of that stuff?  

But you have no clue as to how many on either side. NOT a clue. Either that, or you, and your Progressive friends here, are AFRAID TO POST THE TRUTH.

Why do you and the other Progressives refuse to answer these simple questions...you know, to prove your point?

What is the rate of workers earning minimum wage who are the heads of households.

What is the average income of households where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

Come on guys...step up.

SheWrites wrote:If the minimum wage for service industry worker, such as McDonalds, was raised to $15, do you think this person is going to be working full time?  


These businesses have a model that takes on part time employees for a certain amount of yearly budget.  


Watch your Big Mac go up in price.  Bad meal, no nutrition, optimum price so that someone can support a family?

Shouldn't the price of the Big Mac accurately reflect the costs associated in producing the Big Mac? If it takes people to produce a Big Mac, and if those people aren't paid enough to provide 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc., won't those people necessarily have to rely on government to fill that wage gap so that they can survive?

Why on earth would we want the price of a Big Mac to be artificially low and subsidized by government? I say this because when we pay out food stamps, Obamacare subsidies, or any other form of government assistance to these workers, we're subsidizing these businesses and making their products appear artificially cheap. If we're going to subsidize anything, it should be something that is actually beneficial to society. Green energy investment. R&D in cures for disease. Etc. Etc. We absolutely should not be subsidizing Big Macs, Papa Johns, or any of these fast food restaurants; particularly given the obesity epidemic that exists in the US.

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

For some it isn't.  For others it is.  Either way, if someone is to be able to show up to their fast food position, it is a given that they're going to need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc.   If not from their wage, where are they to get all of that stuff?  

But you have no clue as to how many on either side.  NOT a clue.  Either that, or you, and your Progressive friends here, are AFRAID TO POST THE TRUTH.

Why do you and the other Progressives refuse to answer these simple questions...you know, to prove your point?

What is the rate of workers earning minimum wage who are the heads of households.

What is the average income of households where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

Come on guys...step up.

I don't know the answers to any of those questions off hand, and even if I did, that wouldn't change the fact that people need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc. to survive; so if people are to be employed, their wage needs to afford them the ability to provide all of the above.  If it doesn't, then that means that we (the government through our tax dollars) will have to bridge that gap.

But with that said, you seem to have a point lurking there.   Why don't you simply answer your own questions and make your point?  The floor is yours.

Please proceed, governor.  And by "proceed", I obviously mean "run away".

by Wordslinger on 9/13/2015, 5:21 pm
Joanimaroni wrote:
“
Wordslinger wrote:
“
Why do republicans hate the idea of fast food workers earning a living wage? Why do they resent poor workers getting a raise? It's good to know your enemies!
”

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm

$15.00 for a fast food worker without an education would be making more money than many trained/educated individuals that do a lot more than ask if you want it "super-sized".
”

Can you cite some instances of trained/educated individuals working for less than $15 per hour?
----
EMTs in this area, lifeguards, beginning teachers, prison guards and cops in Milton etc

by boards of FL Yesterday at 11:50 pm
PkrBum wrote:
“
Salinsky wrote:
“
The problem is that the minimum wage has not kept up with the cost of living.

Not even close.
”
What's happening to the dollar that this has and will continue to happen? Where did that value go?

Why isn't this the issue?
”


It's called inflation. You know, there may still be time to enroll in ECO1101 "Intro to Macroeconomics" for the fall term.
----
Inflation? You recently said there was no inflation worth mentioning.

He will not proceed.  His questions have no relevancy which is obviously why he does not answer the same.  This has relevancy.  I was making the equivalent of almost $11 an hour in 1968 in 2012 dollars when the minimum wage was only $1.60   The student debt crisis is reaching 1 trillion, and as usual when employers reap obscene profits over not paying living wages, the taxpayers must pay the same.

I believe the minimum wage should be in the $11 range.  I believe it will create demand and grow GDP.  I believe that the deficit will decrease as the obscene profits which are taken off shore, will now in part be paid to Americans who will grow America again.

I take the argument against minimum wage increases the same way historically I saw opponents of child labor argue that government has no business interfering with the free market.  Yes, the general welfare of the American people is part of the role of government and predatory labor practices whether it involves a 17 year old kid or a 12 year old have to be regulated for the greater good.  I have employees.  I have to pay folks and the difference of $4 an hour is going to hurt small business in the short term.  However, the expansion of the economy and the demand which is created by minimum wage workers spending their dollars in the long term help the American economy and lower government debt.  Legitimate goals of our legislatures.

It's a pretty simple model... that an honest economist would be able to break down easily. McDucks labor costs rise dramatically... they raise prices... demand for shitty food falls. Then they cut labor and invest in automation. Lose, lose, lose.

Thanks for another govt engineered solution comrades. Results matter.

Then they cut labor and invest in automation. Lose, lose, lose.

More efficient delivery of goods and services is exactly what we should be striving for as a nation to be competitive. We cannot continue to subsidize big business by artificially keeping the minimum wage below the rate of the 1968 level which would be 11 bucks today. The taxpayer is picking up the difference as our National debt grows with the social services provided to fill the gap, and the major corporations are taking these huge profits which are fueling income disparity and investing the capital in offshore investments in other countries while reaping their profits in America. Productivity is good. Living wages are good. It is not a zero sum game. We can have both.

PkrBum wrote:It's a pretty simple model... that an honest economist would be able to break down easily. McDucks labor costs rise dramatically... they raise prices... demand for shitty food falls. Then they cut labor and invest in automation. Lose, lose, lose.

Let's go to the other end of the extreme.  McDonald's doesn't feel that it should be required to pay the true cost of labor, so it pushes that responsibility onto the federal government.   Any attempts to take away that subsidy are met with people like you who say "But if McDonald's has to pay its employees enough to actually survive, the cost of a Big Mac will increase by $0.15!!! Egads!!!!"  

So how about this?  Why not mandate that McDonald's no longer has to pay any wages at all?  The federal government will then subsidize McDonald's labor costs 100% (as opposed to the % that they already do today).  And the end result - which, for whatever reason, appears to be your chief concern here - will be a cheaper Big Mac.  Once McDonald's is able to push its entire labor cost onto the federal government (all of us taxpayers), then we'll all be enjoying the cheapest Big Macs in world history!   Well, not all of us.  Just those of us who eat Big Macs.  

Free labor and cheaper Big Macs, brah!  It would totally, like, happen if the government would just, like, get out of the way or something!  Right, brah?  Right, PkrBum?

Wouldn't the better solution simply be that consumers of Big Macs should pay the full price for those Big Macs; as opposed to the rest of us non-Big-Mac-eaters subsidizing the cost of that Big Mac?  Consider the current obesity epidemic as you think about that one.

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

For some it isn't.  For others it is.  Either way, if someone is to be able to show up to their fast food position, it is a given that they're going to need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc.   If not from their wage, where are they to get all of that stuff?  

But you have no clue as to how many on either side.  NOT a clue.  Either that, or you, and your Progressive friends here, are AFRAID TO POST THE TRUTH.

Why do you and the other Progressives refuse to answer these simple questions...you know, to prove your point?

What is the rate of workers earning minimum wage who are the heads of households.

What is the average income of households where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

Come on guys...step up.

I don't know the answers to any of those questions off hand, and even if I did, that wouldn't change the fact that people need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc. to survive; so if people are to be employed, their wage needs to afford them the ability to provide all of the above.  If it doesn't, then that means that we (the government through our tax dollars) will have to bridge that gap.

But with that said, you seem to have a point lurking there.   Why don't you simply answer your own questions and make your point?  The floor is yours.

Please proceed, governor.  And by "proceed", I obviously mean "run away".

Curious, you go out of your way to display your adamant insistence that YOU REMAIN IGNORANT. If you were serious about being concerned about those on minimum wage, you would KNOW the subject.

Like Progressives everywhere, you don't care about measurable results, or results at all. You care ONLY about what FEELS GOOD.

Now...if you wish to prove me wrong, you'll respond to the below with accurate, verifiable FACTS.

What is the rate of workers earning minimum wage who are the heads of households. Where was that?

Too, what is the average income of a household where one worker earns the minimum wage?

Come on, step up, show your courage

Menial labor is worth less than skilled labor. I'm sorry to have to break this to leftists... it must be very shocking.

Salinsky wrote:I worked my way through college full time.

I was getting paid more than minimum wage, but not much more.

I was able to get my degree with no debt, pay for a car, and live independently in a decent studio apartment.

Food was what I skimped on, but never beer.

In today's world, I would never be able to do that.

Times have changed.

I did as well. I worked full time but all told, I did earn a fair amount above minimum wage. Something I never paid any attention too. So I didn't skimp on food either.

Times have changed indeed. The reason tuition and the cost of a higher education have skyrocketed, even beyond medical care, are the government grants, subsidies and loans now available.

The more subsidies and loans available to students, the higher the tuition.

Our debt bubble on the verge of bursting today are student loans. Over $1.2 TRILLION. Except for real estate loans, many kids today graduate with more outstanding debt than I have ever had my entire life.

PkrBum wrote:Menial labor is worth less than skilled labor. I'm sorry to have to break this to leftists... it must be very shocking.

Oh dear...that's not going to make them "feel" very good.

PkrBum wrote:Menial labor is worth less than skilled labor. I'm sorry to have to break this to leftists... it must be very shocking.

Well stated.

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

For some it isn't.  For others it is.  Either way, if someone is to be able to show up to their fast food position, it is a given that they're going to need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc.   If not from their wage, where are they to get all of that stuff?  

But you have no clue as to how many on either side.  NOT a clue.  Either that, or you, and your Progressive friends here, are AFRAID TO POST THE TRUTH.

Why do you and the other Progressives refuse to answer these simple questions...you know, to prove your point?

What is the rate of workers earning minimum wage who are the heads of households.

What is the average income of households where one of the workers earns minimum wage?

Come on guys...step up.

I don't know the answers to any of those questions off hand, and even if I did, that wouldn't change the fact that people need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc. to survive; so if people are to be employed, their wage needs to afford them the ability to provide all of the above.  If it doesn't, then that means that we (the government through our tax dollars) will have to bridge that gap.

But with that said, you seem to have a point lurking there.   Why don't you simply answer your own questions and make your point?  The floor is yours.

Please proceed, governor.  And by "proceed", I obviously mean "run away".

Curious, you go out of your way to display your adamant insistence that YOU REMAIN IGNORANT.  If you were serious about being concerned about those on minimum wage, you would KNOW the subject.

Like Progressives everywhere, you don't care about measurable results, or results at all.  You care ONLY about what FEELS GOOD.

Now...if you wish to prove me wrong, you'll respond to the below with accurate, verifiable FACTS.

What is the rate of workers earning minimum wage who are the heads of households. Where was that?

Too, what is the average income of a household where one worker earns the minimum wage?

Come on, step up, show your courage

I just responded to all of that. I told you that I don't the answers to those questions. Can you not read?

This would be your queue to make your point. Give us the answers to your questions and then use that information to make whatever point it is that you're trying to make.

Can you do that, Ole' Man Markle? Are capable of using words to form coherent sentences so as to transfer an idea over the internet?

Salinsky wrote:Did someone say that skilled laborers should not be paid more than menial laborers?

I must've missed that.

Read it again!

BOF....said if you show up at work you should be paid enough to provide....

" Either way, if someone is to be able to show up to their fast food position, it is a given that they're going to need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc. "

No matter what...give them $15.00 an hour. Suppose someone in a lower paying position, more qualified than the fast food worker with no skills, shows up who should be employed?

Joanimaroni wrote:BOF....said if you show up at work you should be paid enough to provide....

" Either way, if someone is to be able to show up to their fast food position, it is a given that they're going to need 1) daily caloric intake, 2) clothing, 3) shelter, 4) etc. "

No matter what...give them $15.00 an hour.  Suppose someone in a lower paying position, more qualified than the fast food worker with no skills,  shows up who should be employed?

I said that if you show up to work, it necessary requires you to be alive. I also said that in order to remain alive....well...you can read the rest.

What part of that are you struggling with?