$8 Big Macs coming soon if libtards have their way

[Al Doggity]

A thoroughly ridiculous statement by the way, because it fails to take into account those who were gainfully employed, but lost employment because of economic conditions, ...and are now forced to perform in minimum wage occupations, ...or those from a "nuclear" family wherein the breadwinner passed away, leaving the other parent venturing into the workforce for the first time. etc., etc.,

There are a myriad of reasons that cause people to have to exist on minimum wage.

Great post!  Harkens back to my original point    Sometimes you get into these prolonged back&forths, (specifically, when they involve Retardo) and you begin responding myopically and leave out larger, more salient points. For the sake of brevity, I've been refraining from using varied examples, but these are excellent points. As I've been saying, everyone does not have the same path into or out of poverty.

[Gonuclear]

All you guys screaming about fast food workers getting $15/hr really need to give your heads a shake.  

What would you rather do? Pay 50 cents to $1 more for a Big Mac, or fork out the the billions in social welfare costs to keep them housed, clothed and fed? There's a tremendously high cost to low wages.

Yeah, that's what they are screaming about.  They really scrimp together all that loose change for their daily heart-attack burger.  You'll note when it comes to their own case, raises are fine, but not for the low-skilled worker struggling to exist on what is today a non-living wage.

Get two jobs?  55% already do that.

Cliff's note to the Tea Party Clique: Contact Falcon for a low-cost peanut butter sandwich recipe to replace that grease burger you can no longer afford.  And you can make it yourself.  Yes, you can!

[dario73]

Yeah, that's what they are screaming about.  They really scrimp together all that loose change for their daily heart-attack burger.  You'll note when it comes to their own case, raises are fine, but not for the low-skilled worker struggling to exist on what is today a non-living wage.

Get two jobs?  55% already do that.

Cliff's note to the Tea Party Clique: Contact Falcon for a low-cost peanut butter sandwich recipe to replace that grease burger you can no longer afford.  And you can make it yourself.  Yes, you can!

The original objective of these fast food workers is to DOUBLE their wage. That is insane.

Any increase should be based on what the business can afford and their needs. If those employees feel they are not earning enough, they can go get another job or get the necessary training to change "careers".

Either way, to put the onus solely on the business and constantly put pressure on them to keep increasing wages for JOBS THAT DON'T WARRANT SUCH INCREASES will hurt the "low-skilled worker" in the long run, since companies can turn to automation or layoffs.  

You've taken a turn into lunacy. Is your assertion that if "low-skilled workers" don't get a raise, no one else is entitled to one? Why is it that ACCORDING TO YOU anyone who gets a raise is not in a position to criticize the efforts of these unions to get DOUBLE the wage for minial jobs?  It seems you don't make a distinction between the productivity of skilled and unskilled labor and what that means to any enterprise. It seems in your opinion a doctor is in the same boat as a sanitation worker.

[Gonuclear]

The original objective of these fast food workers is to DOUBLE their wage. That is insane.

Celebrate!  It's not going to happen.

Any increase should be based on what the business can afford and their needs. If those employees feel they are not earning enough, they can go get another job or get the necessary training to change "careers".

Can't you read?  55% already work two jobs.

Either way, to put the onus solely on the business and constantly put pressure on them to keep increasing wages for JOBS THAT DON'T WARRANT SUCH INCREASES will hurt the "low-skilled worker" in the long run, since companies can turn to automation or layoffs.  

They will do that anyway, no matter what they pay.

You've taken a turn into lunacy. Is your assertion that if "low-skilled workers" don't get a raise, no one else is entitled to one? Why is it that ACCORDING TO YOU anyone who gets a raise is not in a position to criticize the efforts of these unions to get DOUBLE the wage for minial jobs?  It seems you don't make a distinction between the productivity of skilled and unskilled labor and what that means to any enterprise. It seems in your opinion a doctor is in the same boat as a sanitation worker.

Oh, I said that? Where exactly? 

Did you know that productivity is not correlated with whether a worker is skilled or unskilled?

And what's with the "ACCORDING TO YOU" shit?  What you post, isn't according to you? 

[dario73]

Celebrate!  It's not going to happen.

Can't you read?  55% already work two jobs.

Hey retard, I didn't mean as ADD another job. But, to switch jobs or get another "career".

Listen you socialist idiot, a free market is the best way to go. The key here is for the economy to improve, not to punish corporations for caring about the bottom line. Because when there is no bottom line or any profitability there won't be any jobs.

People also have to be accountable. They can get educated, they can get training, they can search for better paying jobs.

[dario73]

Celebrate!  It's not going to happen.

It already happened in Washington.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25239433

And not happening NOW for these other people is not the point. These movements continue to grow and grow until something does occur. There were more people protesting this time around than last year.

They will do that anyway, no matter what they pay.

Duh. But the fast food restaurants don't have the need to do it NOW, so why all the pressure from these unions? Any increase should be determined by the EMPLOYER, not PICKETING EMPLOYEES.

Oh, I said that? Where exactly?  

Did you know that productivity is not correlated with whether a worker is skilled or unskilled?

And what's with the "ACCORDING TO YOU" shit?  What you post, isn't according to you?  

You said it when you stated "You'll note when it comes to their own case, raises are fine, but not for the low-skilled worker struggling to exist on what is today a non-living wage."

Who are you to tell ANYONE that they can't post their opinion about low-skilled worker wages just because they won't object to their own raise?

A lot of people here are professionals. Are you saying they are no better than a low-skilled worker?

[Dos Equis]

This article is a couple years old, but shows the majority of fast food consumers are lower middle class.  Those will be the people paying higher fast food prices.

Fast Food: Middle Class Indulges More Often Than Poor People Do
First Posted: 11/08/11 11:45 AM ET Updated: 11/10/11 11:40 AM ET

People tend to think of obesity as a problem primarily for the lower class in America. And much of the data bears this out: especially in white and Mexican-American populations, rates of obesity go up as annual income goes down. The correlation isn't as ironclad for black Americans, but there is a relationship at work.

The easiest explanation for this trend is that cheaper food is unhealthy food. Just look at fast food menus! You can get hundreds of calories for a single dollar at McDonald's, for example -- poor people must be eating there, in droves, right?

Not so fast.

A recently-released UC-Davis study of the demographics of fast food shows that the people who eat at fast food restaurants most often aren't poor people, but those in the lower-middle class. Fast food consumption doesn't start to decline until household income hits $60,000. Researchers even found high rates of fast food intake in households making as much as $80,000 or $90,000 a year.

The study cited a few possible explanations for the popularity of fast food in the middle class. Researchers noted that middle class people are often pressed for time, and so appreciate the convenience of things like drive-through windows. And, despite a recent push by the fast food lobby, most food stamp programs still cannot be applied to fast food orders, limiting the amount the 45 million on nutritional assistance can spend at quick service eateries.

The surprisingly upscale demographics of fast food restaurants may also help explain the success of fast food chains like Chipotle, Starbucks and Five Guys over the past few years. These restaurants offer much of the convenience of fast food, with slightly higher prices and significantly better food than their competitors.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/08/fast-food-middle-class-poor_n_1081904.html

[2Thick]

If you chose or have to make a career out of flipping burgers, you cannot expect to make much money.

[24KT]

thank you canadian, when I want your opinion Ill ask the trailer park boys;)

Yes b/c abortion is obviously the ONLY WAY to prevent unplanned children

Abortion is not a preventative measure to an unplanned pregnancy. It's a reactive one.

The ONLY sure fire way to prevent an unplanned pregnancy is to have the necessary organs removes, or don't engage in sex period. So which is it in your case? Have you been castrated, ...or you just simply can't get laid?  

I didnt address those situations b/c the vast majority of people making minimum wage are not those people!!

I agree education itself is not worth taking on loans for if that education you obtain dont help you find gainful employment. Thats why they need to become educated in a field that is in demand. Dont be suprised when you graduate with a philosophy degree and have a hard time finding a job

At the rate at which technology is/ has been changing & evolving, what was an "in demand" field often ended up pretty much obsolete by the time graduation rolled around.

Its also pretty disgusting that in the US the vast majority of people we call "poor" have multiple tvs, video games, cable tv, Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, has money to go out to eat and entertain themselves

And poor people should not have airconditioning? They should not have video games, or TVs? They should live in overcrowded dilapidated squalor? Is that your argument? Oh ya, poor people stuck sweltering in cramped, overcrowded, dilapidated squalor, with no jobs, and nothing to occupy their time. Sure fire recipe for success there.

You have no clue! Not everyone who is poor was ALWAYS in that financial situation. Ever considered that perhaps the multiple TVs, video games, or expensive accroutrement are vestiges from a time when they had a healthy positive cashflow? Just because they are broke today, doesn't mean they were always broke. They might have had a Merril Lynch financial advisor.  

and these same people are the ones taking money from others in the form of govt assistance

Rather than get pissed off about social welfare benefits that help poor people to live on less than $5 a day on food, (a paltry sum that might make the difference between them perserverring through adversity, and robbing your ass) you ought to be pissed about the government waste the gives rich politicians who also make 6 figure incomes off the tax payers dime, $3,000 + per week housing allowances, and an additional $200 a day for food that they can already afford to pay for themselves.

[dario73]

If you chose or have to make a career out of flipping burgers, you cannot expect to make much money.

Not to the libtards on this thread.

They should get WHATEVER they want. It doesn't matter if it doesn't make any financial sense to those businesses. It doesn't matter what the needs of the business are.  It doesn't matter that it is a low skill job.

Why stop at $15? Why not $30 an hour?

The unions and libtards are NUTS!

[24KT]

If you chose or have to make a career out of flipping burgers, you cannot expect to make much money.

Unfortunately, part time minimum wage service sector jobs are the only jobs being created in the USA.
What is a person whose job has been permanently outsourced to India to do, ...stay home and collect unemployment? ...and when that run out welfare?

[tonymctones]

Abortion is not a preventative measure to an unplanned pregnancy. It's a reactive one.

The ONLY sure fire way to prevent an unplanned pregnancy is to have the necessary organs removes, or don't engage in sex period. So which is it in your case? Have you been castrated, ...or you just simply can't get laid? 


At the rate at which technology is/ has been changing & evolving, what was an "in demand" field often ended up pretty much obsolete by the time graduation rolled around.

And poor people should not have airconditioning? They should not have video games, or TVs? They should live in overcrowded dilapidated squalor? Is that your argument? Oh ya, poor people stuck sweltering in cramped, overcrowded, dilapidated squalor, with no jobs, and nothing to occupy their time. Sure fire recipe for success there.

You have no clue! Not everyone who is poor was ALWAYS in that financial situation. Ever considered that perhaps the multiple TVs, video games, or expensive accroutrement are vestiges from a time when they had a healthy positive cashflow? Just because they are broke today, doesn't mean they were always broke. They might have had a Merril Lynch financial advisor. 

Rather than get pissed off about social welfare benefits that help poor people to live on less than $5 a day on food, (a paltry sum that might make the difference between them perserverring through adversity, and robbing your ass) you ought to be pissed about the government waste the gives rich politicians who also make 6 figure incomes off the tax payers dime, $3,000 + per week housing allowances, and an additional $200 a day for food that they can already afford to pay for themselves.

im not going to read all your stupidity but i will point out i didnt say unplanned pregnancy, I said unplanned children

now piss off and go watch some trailer park boys

[doison]

If you chose or have to make a career out of flipping burgers, you cannot expect to make much money.

Not if the neocon repubes have their way

[syntaxmachine]

Not to the libtards on this thread.

They should get WHATEVER they want. It doesn't matter if it doesn't make any financial sense to those businesses. It doesn't matter what the needs of the business are.  It doesn't matter that it is a low skill job.

Why stop at $15? Why not $30 an hour?

The unions and libtards are NUTS!

Since increasing the minimum wage doesn't have significant disemployment effects, we can simply raise it to $1 million and reap the stimulatory benefits for the economy (since its recipients will simply spend it). The only thing standing in society's way is repugnanticans and the mostly white shareholders of MCD to whom they are beholden, both of which hate black people.

[Shockwave]

Id be interested to see 24kt math sources om how almkst doubling their employees wage will only result in a .50 cent increase in price while retaining their profit margins.

Note - before you say theyll just have to cut their profits, you better realize that they arent going to just be 'ok' with slicing their margins by 1/3 to 1/2. Thats wishful thinking at its worst. Ajd there is no law stating they have to do so. So I guarantee you that the increase in layout to their employees will more than be reflected in the cost of their food. they arent going to eat it, thats for damn sure.


companies dont exist to provide people with a means to a comfortable life... they exist to make their owners/stockholders money. Period, end of sentence. I think many of you are forgetting why these places go into business in the first place.

[dario73]

Since increasing the minimum wage doesn't have significant disemployment effects, we can simply raise it to $1 million and reap the stimulatory benefits for the economy (since its recipients will simply spend it). The only thing standing in society's way is repugnanticans and the mostly white shareholders of MCD to whom they are beholden, both of which hate black people.

Raise it to $84958495498549584958494849!

Why not?

Let's imitate the dumocrats and pull a number out of our asses.

[Al Doggity]

companies dont exist to provide people with a means to a comfortable life... they exist to make their owners/stockholders money. Period, end of sentence. I think many of you are forgetting why these places go into business in the first place.

Likewise, workers don't exist to make companies rich. They are concerned with providing for themselves and their families. Why do you suppose McDonald's doesn't pay $3/hour or less? It's not because no one would take the job.

I pay about $15 a day for lunch in the deli in my building and it's nothing fancy, to say the least. $8 Big Mac doesn't seem too far fetched to me.

Are you in NY?

These large multinationals cause more damage to the economy than they benefit it. And, no, I don't mean that in an anti-capitalism way. They create unnatural demand for supplies that destroy the environment. They destroy entire industries under their weight. They lobby to re-write laws to make sure they lay waste to whatever shreds of nature or industry they didn't manage to snuff out. They lobby to re-write laws to make sure they don't apply to them. Why they bother is beyond me, as they are exempt from facing any real penalty by dent of their size.  They are the biggest cause of the contracting economy, simultaneously creating a shrinking oligarchy that divides ever greater wealth, while creating a work force that realistically can never advance.

Truthfully,  a $15 minimum wage for companies over a certain size would probably be the best thing the American economy has seen in the last half century.

[dario73]

Truthfully,  a $15 minimum wage for companies over a certain size would probably be the best thing the American economy has seen in the last half century.

Over a certain size?

So, small companies/mom and pop shops would be exempt from such a law?

Laws are supposed to apply to everyone.

[Al Doggity]

Over a certain size?

So, small companies/mom and pop shops would be exempt from such a law?

Laws are supposed to apply to everyone.

No, they aren't. Especially laws aimed at businesses.

[tu_holmes]

Truthfully,  a $15 minimum wage for companies over a certain size would probably be the best thing the American economy has seen in the last half century.

So a burger flipper who makes 15 bucks an hour would mean that people who make 15 should make 30?

That's basically what you're saying... if a burger maker's value is double, then everyone else's should be as well... right?

[Al Doggity]

So a burger flipper who makes 15 bucks an hour would mean that people who make 15 should make 30?

That's basically what you're saying... if a burger maker's value is double, then everyone else's should be as well... right?

That isn't what I'm saying at all. People who make $15/ hour are already making $15/hour. There are plenty of cooks who already make $15/hour and beyond that. Minimum wage employees' salaries are not the economy's baseline.  A $17/hour bank employee's salary is not contingent on how many times more it is than a Wendy's employee.  

[Shockwave]

That isn't what I'm saying at all. People who make $15/ hour are already making $15/hour. There are plenty of cooks who already make $15/hour and beyond that. Minimum wage employees' salaries are not the economy's baseline.  A $17/hour bank employee's salary is not contingent on how many times more it is than a Wendy's employee.  

there are plenty of non burger uppers making 12... are they suddenly worth 20? Or are the just going to suddenly be making minum wage instead of a semi decent wage? Because cosf od living is going to go up to compensate for the increase in minimum wage.... its not like suddenly everyone is going to make more and no one is going to have ro oay kore because of it.... raising the minum wage is just going to lower everyone elses standard of living so that people wirh no skills can live better

fuck that.

[tu_holmes]

That isn't what I'm saying at all. People who make $15/ hour are already making $15/hour. There are plenty of cooks who already make $15/hour and beyond that. Minimum wage employees' salaries are not the economy's baseline.  A $17/hour bank employee's salary is not contingent on how many times more it is than a Wendy's employee.   

But when you move the "minimum wage" you are saying that the lowest job on any ladder should make 15 dollars an hour.

What I'm saying is that if you move the starting point, you have to move all points in between, or it's not right to other people.

People with skills should make X times more than a minimum wage employee. So... if you have some sort of skill that pays 25 dollars and you move minimum wage to twice what it is, then you should move THAT job to twice what it is as well. Someone with a skill should make relative difference money to someone without one.

[Al Doggity]

What I'm saying is that if you move the starting point, you have to move all points in between, or it's not right to other people.

Exactly. That's what YOU'RE saying. It isn't what I said nor is it a logical reduction of what I said since that is not how the economy works now.

[tu_holmes]

Exactly. That's what YOU'RE saying. It isn't what I said nor is it a logical reduction of what I said since that is not how the economy works now.

Oh, but it is... The second you move minimum wage to DOUBLE what it is... You're going to have to start moving the entire thing.

If YOU DON'T think so, then you are being silly.

You can't start paying burger flippers more without expecting everyone else to think their value has gone up. If you are saying that's not true, then you have no understanding about an internal sense of value.