Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Impending Minimum Wage hike causing restaurants to close

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Even if that were an accurate figure, there has to be an incentive for the R&D to design and build such a machine. SOMEBODY would have to spend a bunch of capital investing in an idea that may not even work.



    Are you claiming that a burger flipper job SHOULD be a "living wage"?



    Nope. There HAS to be some incentive to do the R&D, and radically change how local businesses operate. It wouldn't be about "breaking even" - it would be about saving substantial amounts of money.

    Anyone working 40 hours a week for 52 weeks should be earning a living wage, yes.

    The issue of R&D doesn't have anything to do with the thought experiment; that the manufacturers of such devices would earn a lot of money from selling them doesn't have anything to do with worker compensation and the point at which automation becomes profitable for the restaurant.
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sam View Post
      Ah, so the "free market" isn't really going to sort this out, after all. If the pressure is "on the middle management and below" to increase the bottom line, that strongly implies that the pressures of the market are insufficient to curb excesses above middle management or protect labor interests.
      There are no market pressures because their salaries aren't excessive, they get paid what they're worth. Labor is cheaper than ever, so workers also get paid what they're worth (which isn't much when machines and starving mexians/chinese/indians can do it for a tenth of the cost). If you want low/no income individuals to be paid better you should be making a social (rather than economic) argument for it because the gods of economics have spoken and they don't think much of labor interests.

      So a solution must come from somewhere else. If you're against an increase in wage floors and you don't think these corporations are going to start dropping executive compensation closer to the 30:1 ratio of previous decades on their own, what do you propose? Higher income taxes? Taxes on accumulated wealth? Higher capital gains tax?
      A ceo that only makes 300 times minimum wage isn't enough to cover the almost half a million employees mcdonalds has, even if you drop the ceo's salary to minimum wage.
      "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

      There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sam View Post
        Ah, so the "free market" isn't really going to sort this out, after all. If the pressure is "on the middle management and below" to increase the bottom line, that strongly implies that the pressures of the market are insufficient to curb excesses above middle management or protect labor interests.
        Ah, so YOU think that the burger flipper should be compensated by the franchisee, at a LOSS to the franchisee, even though it was the franchisee who took the risk and invested his own capital!

        So a solution must come from somewhere else. If you're against an increase in wage floors and you don't think these corporations are going to start dropping executive compensation closer to the 30:1 ratio of previous decades on their own, what do you propose?
        You're really not getting it. Sam, have you EVER operated a business? EVER?

        Higher income taxes? Taxes on accumulated wealth? Higher capital gains tax?
        It appears that you have decided that a burger flipper should be a "livable wage" job. Is $15 / hour going to do that, Sam? IF that were a full-time job, and paid 40 hours a week, it would STILL only be grossing $31,200 annually. Now, since you're MUCH better at Googling than I am, how many burger flippers would you say actually work 40 hours a week? How many hours a week does the average burger flipper work? Just a preliminary look on my part shows that "the mean hourly wage for fast-food cooks stands at $9.07 and the mean annual wage rings in at $18,870, according to the latest available data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics." (Lost my source after I copied / pasted that, sorry)

        And, keep in mind that there are pressures from the government that "full time" kicks in a whole new category of expenses for the employer.
        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          Are you claiming that a burger flipper job SHOULD be a "living wage"?
          Well, there used to be manufacturing and agriculture jobs that paid well but those went overseas or to starving Mexicans. What should a person too stupid to do a higher skilled job (not that there's an abundance of those waiting for them anyway) do? Accept their $5 an hour? Seems to me that at some point they will have an economic incentive to sever CEO heads, mount them on their makeshift dune buggy and ride around the nevada desert with a soldering mask on their face swinging around a chainsaw.
          "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

          There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sam View Post
            Anyone working 40 hours a week for 52 weeks should be earning a living wage, yes.
            And, as I asked in the other post (we're cross-posting, obviously) how many burger flippers work 40 hours a week? (I gave my initial finding)

            The issue of R&D doesn't have anything to do with the thought experiment;
            Well, of course not, because it doesn't help your argument.

            that the manufacturers of such devices would earn a lot of money from selling them doesn't have anything to do with worker compensation and the point at which automation becomes profitable for the restaurant.
            This shows how little you know about actual business.
            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

            Comment


            • You don't need minimum wage increase to introduce robotics into equation.
              Robotics replace high wage factory workers.
              To say that crony capitalism is not true/free market capitalism, is like saying a grand slam is not true baseball, or like saying scoring a touchdown is not true American football ...Stefan Mykhaylo D

              Comment


              • Originally posted by jordanriver View Post
                You don't need minimum wage increase to introduce robotics into equation.
                Of course not - you simply need an incentive to implement the plan!

                Robotics replace high wage factory workers.
                Yes, largely because unions pushed the cost of labor to where it became practical to offset that expense.

                They didn't introduce robotics because they thought robots were "cute".

                Robots don't require time and a half or double time for overtime, or health insurance, or sick pay....
                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by jordanriver View Post
                  Robotics replace high wage factory workers.
                  Because there came a point at which it was financially responsible!

                  The unions served a purpose, there's no doubt about that - but as a kid, I worked at an assembly plant and was a member of UAW-424 - United Auto Workers. The unions did everything they could think of to keep more people employed even to the point of stupid. I had a water cooled welding machine I operated. It would occasionally jam, and I COULD get it working again in just a few minutes, but no - I had to call for a "skilled tradesman" who might be a pipe fitter, but he couldn't work on the unit until he got an electrician, and the electrician wouldn't work til he got a boiler maker, and on and on --- so they drag this thing out for over an hour with lock-out tag-out mechanisms on my work station..... and they laughed and joked about how they were holding up production....

                  That's what you're in favor of?
                  "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    Of course not - you simply need an incentive to implement the plan!



                    Yes, largely because unions pushed the cost of labor to where it became practical to offset that expense.

                    They didn't introduce robotics because they thought robots were "cute".

                    Robots don't require time and a half or double time for overtime, or health insurance, or sick pay....
                    you're blaming unions now.
                    ok
                    here's the thing.
                    I'm not blaming either side.
                    I don't blame greedy entrepreneurs

                    they are what they are and they gotta do what they gotta do to achieve more money.

                    ...but you are blaming labor for trying to do the same thing
                    ...get more money.

                    ...let me ask everyone. ..

                    ....shouldn't everybody act in their own (and their family) self interest
                    To say that crony capitalism is not true/free market capitalism, is like saying a grand slam is not true baseball, or like saying scoring a touchdown is not true American football ...Stefan Mykhaylo D

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by jordanriver View Post
                      you're blaming unions now.
                      No, I'm stating fact.

                      ok
                      here's the thing.
                      I'm not blaming either side.
                      I don't blame greedy entrepreneurs
                      Yeah, you do -- you just can't admit that.

                      they are what they are and they gotta do what they gotta do to achieve more money.
                      And there's the blame!

                      ...but you are blaming labor for trying to do the same thing
                      ...get more money.
                      Nope - there is nothing stopping them from starting their own businesses - nobody forces them to flip burgers.

                      ...let me ask everyone. ..

                      ....shouldn't everybody act in their own (and their family) self interest
                      If you don't act in our own self interest, who will? And if you ONLY act in your own self interest, what kind of man are you? (That's actually one of the early Jewish historians - can't remember which one)
                      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                        Would you go flip burgers if the pay and benefits were the same as what you do now? I did it in college, and it's not fun...I know I wouldn't trade the job I have now for it even if it paid the same...
                        My first job was at Kentucky Fried Chicken back when it was still called Kentucky Fried Chicken, and, no, I wouldn't trade my current job for frying chicken even if the pay and benefits were comparable. But as my first job? Heck yeah, I'd have loved that job if I was making the equivalent of $15/hr while still in high school!
                        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                        Than a fool in the eyes of God


                        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                          My first job was at Kentucky Fried Chicken back when it was still called Kentucky Fried Chicken, and, no, I wouldn't trade my current job for frying chicken even if the pay and benefits were comparable. But as my first job? Heck yeah, I'd have loved that job if I was making the equivalent of $15/hr while still in high school!
                          And there would be less incentive for you to quit and find a REAL job!
                          "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            ...

                            If you don't act in our own self interest, who will? And if you ONLY act in your own self interest, what kind of man are you? (That's actually one of the early Jewish historians - can't remember which one)
                            Who else's interest is corporate acting on behalf of, when they fire a division, (IOW, send them packing off to McDonalds or KFC), after replacing them with robotics
                            To say that crony capitalism is not true/free market capitalism, is like saying a grand slam is not true baseball, or like saying scoring a touchdown is not true American football ...Stefan Mykhaylo D

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                              My first job was at Kentucky Fried Chicken back when it was still called Kentucky Fried Chicken, and, no, I wouldn't trade my current job for frying chicken even if the pay and benefits were comparable.
                              So you would admit (as would most of us) that it's not fun work, and you wouldn't do it now for the same money as you make now. Tell me why that doesn't qualify as a "Real Job"? It's hard hot, back breaking work. Where the risk from severe burns (ESPECIALLY in your case at KFC) is pretty high! Why if you won't do it for what you make now, it is determined that we should pay people less to do it?

                              But as my first job? Heck yeah, I'd have loved that job if I was making the equivalent of $15/hr while still in high school!
                              Well, you probably wouldn't have got it if it paid that much if we are all being honest. In my town it would have been a primo job!
                              "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

                              "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                And there would be less incentive for you to quit and find a REAL job!
                                Why do you not consider it a real job? Is it a real job if you are the "grill man" at a 4 star restaurant with a goal to be the head chef? I really don't understand yall's mentality here. SOMEBODY has to cook the hamburger or fry the chicken!
                                "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

                                "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Today, 07:54 AM
                                9 responses
                                54 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Backup
                                by Backup
                                 
                                Started by NorrinRadd, Yesterday, 12:06 PM
                                5 responses
                                49 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, 06-18-2021, 06:43 AM
                                28 responses
                                163 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, 06-18-2021, 06:27 AM
                                14 responses
                                60 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Started by seer, 06-17-2021, 11:25 AM
                                7 responses
                                73 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post oxmixmudd  
                                Working...
                                X