MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Seattle Wages Soar! Spread the wealth!  (Read 35020 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: April 03, 2015, 14:51 »
-5

Did you try to serve in the military to pay for school? Did you make that effort? I doubt it.

While I agree with you that there should be no minimum wage laws, but let the free market decide them, I am with Shelma on the education problem.

The American education system is broken. It is based on wealth instead of being based on intellectual merits. Only rich kids can afford to go to universities able to compete with the rest of the world. Moreover, morons can go to ivy league universities, only because they play well some sport? Come-on!

Besides, no parents in a civilized country, should be forced to send their kids to war in order to get a decent education. Losing a limb or being killed only to "serve" (and here, "serve" has his original Latin meaning = slave) the government and the warmongers in congress? No thank you!

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that last part. I think every American has a responsibility to serve their nation, state or community at some point. It doesn't have to be in the military. There are other ways in which you can serve and get educational benefits.  I wasn't a slave. I volunteered and got money in education in return.

I guess I get bothered by entitlement attitudes. You're not supposed to be given anything, other than the freedom to make a way for yourself. At least that's the way I see things. I understand other people see things differently and think things like health insurance or free education should be a right. I just don't. I think those things should earned. 


« Reply #51 on: April 03, 2015, 15:05 »
+3
In Utopia, $8/hour jobs are held by high school kids who are on their way to college and making a better living.

In America, the oligarchs buy government representation and lobby to pass laws that benefits themselves and their business interests, which has led to increasing disparity between rich and poor. The U.S. now has the largest gap between rich and poor of any industrialized nation. They also cut spending on education, making it more difficult for people to get ahead. This leads to adult heads of households struggling to feed their families on minimum wage salaries. It's more difficult to be upwardly mobile in the U.S. than in many other comparable economies.

Yes, business owners take risksbut one of the challenges of starting a business is being able to make that business profitable while paying a living wage to your employees. Insurance, equipment and other associated costs have not been kept artificially low while inflation marches on. The minimum wage has remained stagnant for decades while businesses are making record profits. Paying your employees is a business expense, and it should be an expense that keeps up with the cost of living. If you can't operate a successful business paying what you need for the assets required to run that business, employees included, you deserve to have to declare bankruptcy.

Could not agree more!

This also apply's to microstock.  Shutterstock has not made a price of living adjustments for it's contributors since 2008. And they are taking their profit out of our hides by devaluing the assets they depend on to make a living.

I am certain that if they paid for the equipment, materials, talent and labor to produce said assets themselves, they would not be leading a race to devalue the product they require to maintain company revenue.

Shutterstock now has a significant portion of the market and their actions affect the entire market negatively when they continue using the downward trend to gain market share.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2015, 11:50 by gbalex »

« Reply #52 on: April 03, 2015, 15:07 »
-1
I guess I get bothered by entitlement attitudes. You're not supposed to be given anything, other than the freedom to make a way for yourself. At least that's the way I see things. I understand other people see things differently and think things like health insurance or free education should be a right. I just don't. I think those things should earned.
I don't understand how raising minimum wages to keep up with the cost of living is entitlement. Entitlement would be if people didn't want to work at all and expected to get paid. In most instances, like the company referred to in the beginning of this thread, expenses go up all the time, and business owners raise their rates accordingly. Why wouldn't minimum wage go up as well?

I agree with you that things like health insurance and education shouldn't be free, but how can a kid just graduating from college afford to pay housing, auto, health insurance, student loans, etc. on $7.00/hr? If he has an education, he should be able to get a better paying job. But that isn't going to happen instantaneously, for most. A huge local ad agency here hires graphic designers, requires a bachelors degree, and pays $25,000/yr. starting salary. That isn't much more over minimum wage. But management all drive BMWs and live in half a million dollar homes.

The gap is widening between the poor and the rich. There isn't going to be a middle class soon.

ultimagina

« Reply #53 on: April 03, 2015, 15:17 »
+4

I guess I get bothered by entitlement attitudes. You're not supposed to be given anything, other than the freedom to make a way for yourself. At least that's the way I see things. I understand other people see things differently and think things like health insurance or free education should be a right. I just don't. I think those things should earned.

We can debate about healthcare. You said, everyone must have "responsibility towards the community". True!

But since I have to pay taxes, I prefer to see my taxes used to help poor people with their sickness, instead of helping politicians waging wars on the other side of the world.

Moreover, please realize that my taxes are used to subsidize the education for war volunteers like you, while I have to pay $45K/year for my kid (thank you microstock, for chipping in!)

I would prefer to subsidize a smart kid with poor parents instead of a soldier who decided to "serve" the politicians and their wars.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2015, 15:57 by ultimagaina »

« Reply #54 on: April 03, 2015, 15:17 »
+4
I agree with you that things like health insurance and education shouldn't be free, but how can a kid just graduating from college afford to pay housing, auto, health insurance, student loans, etc. on $7.00/hr? If he has an education, he should be able to get a better paying job. But that isn't going to happen instantaneously, for most. A huge local ad agency here hires graphic designers, requires a bachelors degree, and pays $25,000/yr. starting salary. That isn't much more over minimum wage. But management all drive BMWs and live in half a million dollar homes.

I graduated from college, and started at Disney making $7.35 working in the parks.  I lived with my roommate in a $600 a month 2 bedroom.  When I turned full time, 3 months later, I got health insurance.  We went to nickel beer night.  Eventually I quit my full time to go part time, and had two other part time jobs, until I got into Feature Animation.  So, yes, you can do it.

« Reply #55 on: April 03, 2015, 15:40 »
-3
I guess I get bothered by entitlement attitudes. You're not supposed to be given anything, other than the freedom to make a way for yourself. At least that's the way I see things. I understand other people see things differently and think things like health insurance or free education should be a right. I just don't. I think those things should earned.
I don't understand how raising minimum wages to keep up with the cost of living is entitlement. Entitlement would be if people didn't want to work at all and expected to get paid. In most instances, like the company referred to in the beginning of this thread, expenses go up all the time, and business owners raise their rates accordingly. Why wouldn't minimum wage go up as well?

I agree with you that things like health insurance and education shouldn't be free, but how can a kid just graduating from college afford to pay housing, auto, health insurance, student loans, etc. on $7.00/hr? If he has an education, he should be able to get a better paying job. But that isn't going to happen instantaneously, for most. A huge local ad agency here hires graphic designers, requires a bachelors degree, and pays $25,000/yr. starting salary. That isn't much more over minimum wage. But management all drive BMWs and live in half a million dollar homes.

The gap is widening between the poor and the rich. There isn't going to be a middle class soon.

It's entitlement thinking because some people think they "deserve" more pay for a job that requires no education, no experience and very little responsibility. Nobody "deserves" anything. And $25,000 a year is a lot more than minimum wage. A full-time minimum wage worker only makes $15,000 a year. My first job out of school in 1994 only paid $18,000 a year, and I had a family to support.

« Reply #56 on: April 03, 2015, 15:50 »
+6
It's entitlement thinking because some people think they "deserve" more pay for a job that requires no education, no experience and very little responsibility. Nobody "deserves" anything. And $25,000 a year is a lot more than minimum wage. A full-time minimum wage worker only makes $15,000 a year. My first job out of school in 1994 only paid $18,000 a year, and I had a family to support.

i'm not even sure waiter(ess) job is very little responsibility. i have sat and watched in many bars, restaurants, and the treatment many customers give to the people serving them, whether it is in an ethnic shish kebab fast food or a pub, it takes the server a lot of child-psychology/ anger management therapist experience to go through a day's work.
if you think it is no responsibility, you obviously like most politicians have not done commoners' work

moreover, many service people are students who pay their own way through university
and they are not just no qualification types you imply...
even the guy at the parking lot , some of them no doubt have more qualification than you

« Reply #57 on: April 03, 2015, 18:04 »
+4
I agree with you that things like health insurance and education shouldn't be free, but how can a kid just graduating from college afford to pay housing, auto, health insurance, student loans, etc. on $7.00/hr? If he has an education, he should be able to get a better paying job. But that isn't going to happen instantaneously, for most. A huge local ad agency here hires graphic designers, requires a bachelors degree, and pays $25,000/yr. starting salary. That isn't much more over minimum wage. But management all drive BMWs and live in half a million dollar homes.
y

I graduated from college, and started at Disney making $7.35 working in the parks.  I lived with my roommate in a $600 a month 2 bedroom.  When I turned full time, 3 months later, I got health insurance.  We went to nickel beer night.  Eventually I quit my full time to go part time, and had two other part time jobs, until I got into Feature Animation.  So, yes, you can do it.


When was that? A number of years ago. I did it, too. Things are a lot different now. A lot.

No Free Lunch

« Reply #58 on: April 03, 2015, 20:48 »
+4
I agree with you that things like health insurance and education shouldn't be free, but how can a kid just graduating from college afford to pay housing, auto, health insurance, student loans, etc. on $7.00/hr? If he has an education, he should be able to get a better paying job. But that isn't going to happen instantaneously, for most. A huge local ad agency here hires graphic designers, requires a bachelors degree, and pays $25,000/yr. starting salary. That isn't much more over minimum wage. But management all drive BMWs and live in half a million dollar homes.

I graduated from college, and started at Disney making $7.35 working in the parks.  I lived with my roommate in a $600 a month 2 bedroom.  When I turned full time, 3 months later, I got health insurance.  We went to nickel beer night.  Eventually I quit my full time to go part time, and had two other part time jobs, until I got into Feature Animation.  So, yes, you can do it.

Looking back now- we might have a harder life now than we had while in college  :)


Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #59 on: April 03, 2015, 20:51 »
+3

Your facts are little more than spin. They're assumptions based on a biased viewpoint. I was not a privileged person like you were. I had to do military service to pay for my education. But you don't even have to do that. You can apply for grants or use scholarships to go to technical school to learn a useful trade that will guarantee that you will never have to work for minimum wage. In the state where I live, all you need to do is graduate from high school with a C average and you get to go to technical school for FREE.

Those are facts. Minimum wage is not supposed to be a living wage. If it were, every lazy person out there would just go flip burgers and our economy would go in the toilet.

"According to Bloomberg, college tuition and fees have increased 1,120 percent since records began in 1978.

Using this chart to explain its findings, Bloomberg reports that the rate of increase in college costs has been 'four times faster than the increase in the consumer price index.' It also notes that 'medical expenses have climbed 601 percent, while the price of food has increased 244 percent over the same period.'"

The cost of a college education has increased more than 1,000% since 1978, while the minimum wage has increased about 275%.

You can apply for grants or scholarships, but there's no guarantee you'll get them. And everyone can't serve in the military. You can't even get a student loan unless you qualifyI couldn't.

I'm not sure why you are so adamantly opposed to the minimum wage simply keeping pace with the economy.

Because it makes no sense to have the same minimum wage in areas of the country with vastly different costs of living. City leaders in San Francisco can thump their chests all they want about raising the minimum wage there to $15 an hour, but that amount has less spending potential than $7.25 an hour where I live.

All I've seen from people with views similar to yours is demagoguery about sticking it to corporations and the "oligarchs" who run small pizza shops. It's garbage.

Did you try to serve in the military to pay for school? Did you make that effort? I doubt it. Fact is, people who think they're stuck earning minimum wage haven't made the effort needed to get a job that pays more than minimum wage. If they did, fewer people would be available for those jobs and the demand would increase the pay.

No, I have no interest in serving in the military. But since I didn't do EXACTLY what you did, I didn't make an effort. Working 40 hours a week and taking 18 credits a semester in two majors is not making an effort, to you. Amazing.

And I don't understand how requiring companies to pay a minimum wage that simply keeps pace with inflation is "sticking it" to corporations. CEOs make higher and ever higher salaries while wages for workers have stagnated. The gulf between them grows every day. Corporations are raking in record profits off the backs of their workforce. They're sticking it to workers and have been for decadesnot the other way around. Yet you feel sorry for them. 

Pizza shop guy will just have to raise prices. How much is a pizza where you live? You think people can't afford to pay a buck more? Move to a place with lower rent, then.

« Reply #60 on: April 03, 2015, 21:33 »
+2
I wonder if the business owners who are tacking on a visible surcharge for the wage increase also tacked on visible surcharges when the cost of coffee went up, or the cost of flour, or the cost of every other thing they buy on a daily basis. Seems to me like they are making more of a political statement.

I suspect the 'political statement' theory is true. But it's also true about the costs of flour, coffee, labor and everything else: When businesses have to pay more to be in business, they have to raise prices or else operate at a loss.

If costs of labor go up 15%, then most of what businesses buy will go up (suppliers eventually have to pay higher labor costs too). The result is that employees make more money, but the things they buy cost more. All that has really happened is inflation. Unfortunately gov can't create new wealth by passing laws.

« Reply #61 on: April 03, 2015, 22:28 »
+1
I agree with you that things like health insurance and education shouldn't be free, but how can a kid just graduating from college afford to pay housing, auto, health insurance, student loans, etc. on $7.00/hr? If he has an education, he should be able to get a better paying job. But that isn't going to happen instantaneously, for most. A huge local ad agency here hires graphic designers, requires a bachelors degree, and pays $25,000/yr. starting salary. That isn't much more over minimum wage. But management all drive BMWs and live in half a million dollar homes.

I graduated from college, and started at Disney making $7.35 working in the parks.  I lived with my roommate in a $600 a month 2 bedroom.  When I turned full time, 3 months later, I got health insurance.  We went to nickel beer night.  Eventually I quit my full time to go part time, and had two other part time jobs, until I got into Feature Animation.  So, yes, you can do it.

You deserve credit for your hard work, but your in your 40s, right?  Stagnant wages, much higher rents and cost of living, combine with poor job market are much worse for millennials than for the generation x and baby boom.  You would have had a harder time of it if you were 20 now than you did back then, no matter how smart and hard working you are.

No Free Lunch

« Reply #62 on: April 03, 2015, 22:34 »
+1
The plot thickens-

EATTLE -- Two popular Seattle restaurant owners reversed course Friday, saying they would not institute surcharges to help offset changes to the city's new minimum wage law.
Tom Douglas, who owns more than a dozen restaurants across Seattle, and Chris Linker, co-owner of Belltown's Black Bottle, both cited public outcry in removing 2 percent surcharges instituted this week.
 
"It was very clear instead of polling my team and myself I should've polled my customers first," Douglas said Friday. "People that thought I should just increase my prices and stop whining far outnumbered the people - like 15 to 1 - that liked seeing it broken out."
 
Douglas' restaurants, which include Serious Pie, Palace Kitchen, and Dahlia Lounge, tacked on the 2 percent "wage equity surcharge" Wednesday, when the first stage of Seattle's new minimum wage law took effect. The ordinance will eventually raise the city's minimum wage to $15 an hour.
 
"I think first and foremost we're merchants and we're here to serve the public. This is a response to what we believe they want most," said Chris Linker, co-owner and managing partner at Black Bottle, which had also introduced a surcharge. "We're grateful the feedback. We've heard from the public. They will no longer see a surcharge on their bill."
 
Other restaurants have said they would raise prices in order to accommodate the new city law.
Ivar's Salmon House has raised prices by 21 percent to pay for a $15 minimum wage for all workers. In exchange, the restaurant will no longer encourage tipping, owners said.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #63 on: April 04, 2015, 00:54 »
+1
the real issue i've seen in any country i visited, rich or poor, is the cost of housing.

and governments are doing absolutely nothing about this, actually they all refuse to build fair priced council homes for the poors.

as for employers soon they will ask for a master's degree even to grill burgers or to clean toilets, that's exactly the trend i'm witnessing now apart in jobs where "soft skills" are in high demand (sales in particular).

these are the direct result of governments abdicating from their natural roles and becoming a puppet of the ruling plutocrats.

where it will lead ? to high criminality, to total corruption, and ultimately to civil war.




Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #64 on: April 04, 2015, 05:48 »
+2
I wonder if the business owners who are tacking on a visible surcharge for the wage increase also tacked on visible surcharges when the cost of coffee went up, or the cost of flour, or the cost of every other thing they buy on a daily basis. Seems to me like they are making more of a political statement.

I suspect the 'political statement' theory is true. But it's also true about the costs of flour, coffee, labor and everything else: When businesses have to pay more to be in business, they have to raise prices or else operate at a loss.

If costs of labor go up 15%, then most of what businesses buy will go up (suppliers eventually have to pay higher labor costs too). The result is that employees make more money, but the things they buy cost more. All that has really happened is inflation. Unfortunately gov can't create new wealth by passing laws.

Yes, prices will go up. But they won't go up as much as salaries will rise. Payroll is just one expense of running a business. Rent, for example, won't double overnight. Equipment has already been purchased. And I'm glad to see the public backlash. Do business owners think people will want to see some poor working person's slight minimum wage increase broken out on their bill? Customers interact with staff, not business owners, most of the time. So customers will have sympathy for the people they know and see every day.

ultimagina

« Reply #65 on: April 04, 2015, 08:58 »
0
I wonder if the business owners who are tacking on a visible surcharge for the wage increase also tacked on visible surcharges when the cost of coffee went up, or the cost of flour, or the cost of every other thing they buy on a daily basis. Seems to me like they are making more of a political statement.

The result is that employees make more money, but the things they buy cost more. All that has really happened is inflation. Unfortunately gov can't create new wealth by passing laws.

So true! Moreover, this is also a political tool to attract votes. The government is printing money (quantitative easing). The paper is used to raise minimum wages, but the market forces will also drive the cost of living up.
People are tricked to believe that they earn more, when in fact they end up spending even more.
Inflation is a hidden tax most people don't see. Printing money, raising minumum wages with it, only make the banks richer, because the banks are the first to get the new money from the central bank. By the time the new money trickles down to common people, the prices would have already eaten up all the "gains".
As soon as common people realise that the prices have risen again, more money will be printed to fake another wage increase.
This is one of the reason why "richer get richer" and politicians get elected.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2015, 09:27 by ultimagaina »

« Reply #66 on: April 04, 2015, 09:35 »
+2
Interesting discussion and we will see how it all plays out.  I doubt the place raising prices by 21% really had their costs go up by that much, and it sounds like their customers are mostly supporting labor.  In general I don't have a lot of sympathy for companies whining about increasing costs while dramatically increasing the pay of their CEOs.  For example, a couple of years ago McDonald's increased CEO pay over three times despite decreasing sales (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/12/mcdonalds-ceo-pay_n_3070833.html?).  How can they justify that?  CEO compensation rates are made by other CEOs or retired CEOs who sit on their boards - and get paid handsomely for a few meetings a year.  It's obscene.  When the CEO of McDonald's gets paid more than $27 million in a year I certainly think they can give a bit more to their employees.  It's the same with the cable companies - they always raise rates and complain about rising costs while their CEOs get $15-20 million a year.  I would think you could survive off the first couple of million and there are plenty of equally qualified people who would do just as well or better for a paltry 4 or 5 million.  If they want to cut costs they should start at the top.  Then they could pay their rank-and-file employees more, who would stimulate the economy by spending most of what they get, rather than giving more to people who don't need it.  They will also find that by paying employes more they will have less turnover, less theft and much more loyalty when they need to ask for something extra.  Progressive leaders know this already and that is why most of those companies are thriving.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #67 on: April 04, 2015, 10:49 »
+4
I guess I get bothered by entitlement attitudes. You're not supposed to be given anything, other than the freedom to make a way for yourself. At least that's the way I see things. I understand other people see things differently and think things like health insurance or free education should be a right. I just don't. I think those things should earned.

I guess I'll be getting negatives also but I feel the same way.

I believe that market supply and demand should drive compensation. The position I hold in my day job is in very high demand with very few people available to fill the role. As a result, the pay is much higher than similar roles and I get constant desperate calls from recruiters who can't fill the roles. Years ago I decided my career at that time wasn't going anywhere. So I researched and found an opportunity where I saw job growth with few skilled people. I went to technical schools, studied hard, got certifications, hunted down employers, and created a new and better career for myself. I didn't stumble on that job. No one handed it to me. I didn't take a low paying job and demand I make more money. The reason minimum wage jobs are low is because supply of people can do them is so high.

Today, here in the US there are so many safety nets provided by the government that people are becoming lax because they know somebody will bail them out. While I have no sympathy for greedy businesses I also have no sympathy for people who don't make enough money or can't find a job. I have two jobs. If you don't even have one job you are doing something wrong and need to make changes. If you don't want to change that should not be my problem to need to contribute my hard earned money toward you.

I realize some people have unbelievably bad fortune and need a hand occasionally and I feel for them. Maybe their spouse died, insurance refused to pay massive medical bills, or they were in a debilitating accident. But I personally see a lot more people who are fully capable of working and don't seem to be truly making much effort to improve their situation.

To me this is common sense. And maybe very few people share my views. If there are no jobs for your skills it's time to get different skills. If you don't make enough money find out what you need to do to get a raise. If you can't get a raise get a different job. If you can't get a different job get a second job. If you can't get a second job cut back on spending. If there are no jobs in your town move. If you can't move find an internet based job. And on and on. If you've sincerely exhausted every avenue I feel for you. But if you really haven't sincerely exhausted all avenues and are just unwilling to do anything other than demand more money I have no sympathy.

ETA: Totally forgot to finish my point here. Guess what would happen if everybody working a minimum wage job improved themselves and moved on to better jobs so that there were no people left to fill the minimum wage jobs? Exactly. Those companies would be forced to make changes (increase pay, offer insurance, etc) to attract people to want to take the job.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2015, 11:00 by PaulieWalnuts »

« Reply #68 on: April 04, 2015, 10:49 »
+1
I wonder if the business owners who are tacking on a visible surcharge for the wage increase also tacked on visible surcharges when the cost of coffee went up, or the cost of flour, or the cost of every other thing they buy on a daily basis. Seems to me like they are making more of a political statement.

I suspect the 'political statement' theory is true. But it's also true about the costs of flour, coffee, labor and everything else: When businesses have to pay more to be in business, they have to raise prices or else operate at a loss.

If costs of labor go up 15%, then most of what businesses buy will go up (suppliers eventually have to pay higher labor costs too). The result is that employees make more money, but the things they buy cost more. All that has really happened is inflation. Unfortunately gov can't create new wealth by passing laws.

Yes, prices will go up. But they won't go up as much as salaries will rise. Payroll is just one expense of running a business. Rent, for example, won't double overnight. Equipment has already been purchased. And I'm glad to see the public backlash. Do business owners think people will want to see some poor working person's slight minimum wage increase broken out on their bill? Customers interact with staff, not business owners, most of the time. So customers will have sympathy for the people they know and see every day.

You clearly don't own a business that deals in retail in any significant way. Customers go to where they feel they get the best value, and lot of them think the best value is the cheapest. They don't care how much the employees are paid.

Why do you think foreign car makers such as Mercedes, BMW, Volkswagen, Kia and Hyundai build all their plants in the Southeast? They do it because the labor costs are cheaper. And now American workers also have to compete with foreign workers who make $1 a day, and you want to price small businesses out of business because you hate corporations? Left-wing thinking is so nonsensical and bankrupt. Guess what? Unemployment doesn't pay more than minimum wage, and it doesn't last forever.

« Reply #69 on: April 04, 2015, 10:53 »
+2
Interesting discussion and we will see how it all plays out.  I doubt the place raising prices by 21% really had their costs go up by that much, and it sounds like their customers are mostly supporting labor.  In general I don't have a lot of sympathy for companies whining about increasing costs while dramatically increasing the pay of their CEOs.  For example, a couple of years ago McDonald's increased CEO pay over three times despite decreasing sales (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/12/mcdonalds-ceo-pay_n_3070833.html?).  How can they justify that?  CEO compensation rates are made by other CEOs or retired CEOs who sit on their boards - and get paid handsomely for a few meetings a year.  It's obscene.  When the CEO of McDonald's gets paid more than $27 million in a year I certainly think they can give a bit more to their employees.  It's the same with the cable companies - they always raise rates and complain about rising costs while their CEOs get $15-20 million a year.  I would think you could survive off the first couple of million and there are plenty of equally qualified people who would do just as well or better for a paltry 4 or 5 million.  If they want to cut costs they should start at the top.  Then they could pay their rank-and-file employees more, who would stimulate the economy by spending most of what they get, rather than giving more to people who don't need it.  They will also find that by paying employes more they will have less turnover, less theft and much more loyalty when they need to ask for something extra.  Progressive leaders know this already and that is why most of those companies are thriving.


The thing you don't understand is that a lot of those McDonald's are franchises, owned by people running a small business. They aren't rich CEOs. They're people living in small towns trying to squeeze as much as they can out of their budgets so they can pay their employees and themselves. People who own small businesses often work 7 days a week for no pay in the hopes that they will turn a profit. And you all are talking about hitting them even harder.

ultimagina

« Reply #70 on: April 04, 2015, 11:41 »
-1
The thing you don't understand is that a lot of those McDonald's are franchises, owned by people running a small business. They aren't rich CEOs. They're people living in small towns trying to squeeze as much as they can out of their budgets so they can pay their employees and themselves. People who own small businesses often work 7 days a week for no pay in the hopes that they will turn a profit. And you all are talking about hitting them even harder.
Exactly, but even more: most of the big corporations CEOs are not the owners of these corpoarations. They are employed by the owners or shareholders to successfully drive their business.
The owners know exactly how much their CEO work is worth. Don't you think they would love to pay their CEO less? Sure they do! But if this how much the market dictates that a succesful CEO must be paid, then this is how much they have to dig in their pockets for, if they don't want their business to be run by the drunk of the town.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2015, 12:38 by ultimagaina »

No Free Lunch

« Reply #71 on: April 04, 2015, 11:58 »
+1
One main thing that a lot of the workers don't understand is the difference between cost of "living wage" and "minimum wage".  The living wage is what you need to have a decent life in that area so for example if you live in San Diego, California you would need around $30 an hour to have a good apartment and food on your table. In Louisville, Kentucky you would need $14 per hour to have the same standard of living.  Minimum wage was never intended to be 'Living wage'...   

« Reply #72 on: April 04, 2015, 12:00 »
-1
the real issue i've seen in any country i visited, rich or poor, is the cost of housing.

and governments are doing absolutely nothing about this, actually they all refuse to build fair priced council homes for the poors.

as for employers soon they will ask for a master's degree even to grill burgers or to clean toilets, that's exactly the trend i'm witnessing now apart in jobs where "soft skills" are in high demand (sales in particular).

these are the direct result of governments abdicating from their natural roles and becoming a puppet of the ruling plutocrats.

where it will lead ? to high criminality, to total corruption, and ultimately to civil war.

where we are going as you said only beaureucrats and nepotismo will live a comfy life while the common people , esp those with huge students loan to repay , is more like what happened to the chinese in the dynasty era.  the whole country will be poor , while those in the forbidden city live a high and mighty life as the emperor picks all the young virgins from the countryside to be his maids and concubines.  i think it is already happening with africa where the only ppl eating well are the govt.
soon, the first world will run into this problem too, as the empire age begins in the (cough cough (free world).
as for having a MA to flip burgers, i think that is already happening as i know several graduates still flipping burgers. Too many qualified people with no jobs to go to, because the Union is too powerful.
They will not let the highly overpaid unqualified seniority ppl go. How much is the bus driver and underground transit workers minding the turnstiles paid???  some are actually earning as much as your kid with a degree , or the mechanic who is repairing your car.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #73 on: April 04, 2015, 12:11 »
+1
One main thing that a lot of the workers don't understand is the difference between cost of "living wage" and "minimum wage".  The living wage is what you need to have a decent life in that area so for example if you live in San Diego, California you would need around $30 an hour to have a good apartment and food on your table. In Louisville, Kentucky you would need $14 per hour to have the same standard of living.  Minimum wage was never intended to be 'Living wage'...

If someone's earnings aren't high enough to match the living wage of the city what's the solution? Use the government to force higher pay? Or maybe let the market dictate who can afford to live there? Can't afford to live in ultra expensive San Diego or Seattle? Simple. The United States is huge with a lot of affordable options. Move to an area you can afford. Debate over.


« Reply #74 on: April 04, 2015, 13:36 »
+2
One main thing that a lot of the workers don't understand is the difference between cost of "living wage" and "minimum wage".  The living wage is what you need to have a decent life in that area so for example if you live in San Diego, California you would need around $30 an hour to have a good apartment and food on your table. In Louisville, Kentucky you would need $14 per hour to have the same standard of living.  Minimum wage was never intended to be 'Living wage'...

If someone's earnings aren't high enough to match the living wage of the city what's the solution? Use the government to force higher pay? Or maybe let the market dictate who can afford to live there? Can't afford to live in ultra expensive San Diego or Seattle? Simple. The United States is huge with a lot of affordable options. Move to an area you can afford. Debate over.

Except that's not what people are doing. They just complain and expect someone else to fix their problems for them. That seems to be the way of things nowadays. I don't buy that there aren't opportunities for the next generation. There's plenty.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2351 Views
Last post September 13, 2012, 11:36
by StanRohrer
11 Replies
4059 Views
Last post May 01, 2013, 22:52
by Silken Photography
3 Replies
3971 Views
Last post May 04, 2014, 13:34
by Click Images
0 Replies
3105 Views
Last post January 28, 2015, 12:06
by ShadySue
9 Replies
12404 Views
Last post February 05, 2021, 04:29
by StockPerformer.com

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors