DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on May 27, 2015, 11:22:36 PM
-
Raising the Minimum Wage causes McDonald's to Install Kiosks, Ushering Out Workers
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CF1WiE2WIAA-Nqj.jpg:large)
https://twitter.com/rekotc/status/602733100016205824/photo/1
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDUeLHeWIAAoFhJ.jpg)
https://twitter.com/JohnWeeden/status/591412106752352257/photo/1
-
Only about 15% of all the McDonalds' are owned by the parent company. The vast majority are owned by franchisees, many of whom will refuse to pay for what McDonald's charges for these things.
$15 an hour is the equivalent of the minimum McDonald's was paying when they first opened, selling burgers of 15¢ and fries for 12¢.
Using machines will only work if the public accepts using them.
Americans should be paid a living wage.
-
If you look at the number of kiosk it out numbers the clerks. On paper it makes sense but in practice im confidate it'll have limited success if any. Lucky has a auto pay system and it's super easy to steal stuff from that store now. Also theu breakdown alot.
Onething commercial technology can never solve is wear and tear
-
Hey
I just remembered a burgerking had this last year. It's gone now. Meaning it's not going well for those machines
-
Americans should be paid a living wage.
No.
This is a seductive but pernicious idea.
If you paid the workers more across the board , then the value of the money goes down.
If you pay more than the real value of the work , then the business looses profit and becomes unsustainable.
Profit is not an option, it is a necessity.
-
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-05-27/finally-an-answer-to-the-old-minimum-wage-question
I like this guys attitude.
-
Actually plane you just supported minimum wages increase when you say pay for the value of the work. The increase is actually not about living wage but about cost of living adjustment due to several delays in the pass from increases so this is really is paying for the worth of the labor. When people now complsin the bad service is not worth the wage is actually proof. They are actually confirmming how much the wage has been delayed has cause the mindset has not caught up with the price of everything else.
-
If labor was worth three times the rent of a modest apartment in 1970, then it should be worth three times the rent of an apartment today. And clearly, it is not.
The Oligarchy has used a variety of tools to keep unemployment high enough to enable them to pay shit wages and this is abolishing the middle class.
-
Using machines will only work if the public accepts using them.
http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/local/2015/03/26/create-your-taste-menu/70499122/
-
It is really easy for companies that introduce automation to get great reviews. They write a puff piece about how modern they are, and submit it with their advertising buys. Restaurants that advertise get great reviews, more often than not.
Winn Dixie installed checkout machines several years ago. Being as WD has the practice of pricing stuff at $2.98 on the shelf and then charging $3.98 when it goes past the register, and then taking 15 minutes to verify the price, and then telling you that "someone forgot to take last week's special price off the shelf, This resulted in those customers who paid attention to the prices marked forming a huge line after they were bilked by the goddamn machines.
The Miami Herald ran a story about how everyone LOVED the new WD machines.
So believe this crap if you believe in the tooth fairy.
Check out how McDonald's ads advertise a special price, and when you get there, well, you cannot find the price, the item or both. And what is closest to what you remember being advertised is at least $2.00 more than the price you saw in the paper. And damn! you left that paper at home, didn't you?
Mickey D screws his customers and screws his help as well. There are worse restaurants, of course, but many are better.
Home Deport's robo cashiers seem to work well. But then again, a 2X4 is not something you eat.
-
It is really easy for companies that introduce automation to get great reviews.
They write a puff piece about how modern they are, and submit it with their advertising buys.
Or the reality is...a lot of the machines work great.
I notice at grocery stores, Walmart, Lowes, etc...
the checkout machines are readily used by customers especially the younger generation.
I use them often!
-
They have none at a
It is one thing when you scan the merchandise and see the charge appear. It is NOT THE SAME THING when you are SELECTING the merchandise from a menu on a screen. It might be easier, but it also might be more confusing. Next time you go to McDonald's, Burger King, Taco Bell, KFC, notice the menu that is posted. Very often many similar or identical items are listed twice. Once with a BIG image (and a larger price) and again, with a teensy image and a lesser price. The KFC in my area does not list prices for drinks at all.
However, the issue here is not really the replacement of human beings with robots, it is the fact that many jobs do not pay a living wage and often have schedules that vary from week to week, so working a second job is difficult to impossible.
This is a consumer society. When the consumer has insufficient money to consume, everyone suffers. In the 1950's and 1960's, one could live on the minimum wage, and very often one could work 40 hours per week as well. The rich bastards that run the show need to pay living wages to everyone to keep this consumer society going. They are resisting all attempts to do this, claiming that the poor drudges do not deserve even $750 an hour or a 40 hour week, because they are not interested in keeping this economy going all the time, just for the next year or so.
Every year the few at the very top, which I doubt include you, own more and more of the country, and the standard of living is crumbling.
I really is not about Mickeyburgers. It is amazing that you fall for stupid puff pieces like that Mickeyburger thing. I thought you were smarter than that.
-
Those machine can never be used in high crime areas supermarkets. It's real easy to pretend to scan and place in your bag. Remember it's one clerk per four machine so nobody is watching you. That clerk may not even be there
-
In the 1950's and 1960's, one could live on the minimum wage,
When I started working as a dishwasher in 1974 the minimum wage best I can remember was about $1.70 per hour
I doubt many people were living on that.
It was for first time jobs, teenagers, etc...
Those were job training wheels for youth
Now illegals have taken many of those jobs from Americans
Oh...but we gotta let the senors and their ninos all in....booowhoo
The problem is the gvt.....
the explosive growth of gvt has to be paid by someone...money doesn't grow on trees.
Also the gvt has debased/devalued the worth of money by printing money to cover immoral deficits.
So money does not go as far anymore....because gvt has debased our currency thru printing/borrowing
It's a sneeky/immoral way to hurt working people and the poor....make their money worth less.
I really is not about Mickeyburgers.
It is amazing that you fall for stupid puff pieces like that Mickeyburger thing.
I thought you were smarter than that.
Of course it's not about McDonalds.....
it's about liberals pretending money grows on trees
Forcing companies to pay unskilled labor more than they are worth raises prices for soccer Moms.
clearly a hidden tax on those it hurts the most!
Min wage doesn't "hurt" me.
I can afford higher prices across the board....I am not buying 6 happy meals for rug-rats.
Soccer Moms can't as easily afford higher prices you cause that are passed on to the consumer.
Automation will continue to rise not only because of technology, but because "do gooders"
that think they are helping people, but really screw people....see "if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor".
-
Not a one of those "immoral deficits" was important when we pissed away billions in Iraq in a stupid and useless invasion.
Has printing money caused inflation?
If it has, you can still get more yen, euros, Swiss francs and rubles for your dollars now than in the past 30 years.
]The American economy is not sustainable. Just as the current use of carbon fuels is not sustainable.
If people do not have money in a consumer society, then they will not consume, and those who supply the goods they used to consume will also be out of business.
I managed to get a BA and only borrowed $1800 on a NDEA loan. Minimum wage was 80¢ an hour in 1960. I put wheels on Falcons and Ford paid me $2.35. I sold velvet Elvis paintings and tripled my money. And I do not think I consumed anything new other than food or gasoline, which were not available used.
You perhaps need to google "How the Federal Reserve Creates Money". You might find it informative and you would stop sounding like someone who slept through Econ 101.
The people working at my local Checkers and KFC are NOT teenagers: they are mostly women in their thirties and forties.
-
Cu this is very doubtful. I remember many people living on minimum wage in the midwest. In the 80's you can fill a shopping and not tip over $20.
I stated the wage is acost of living adjustment so it totally equally with worh of the labor.I'll say it again i eas originally was against it untill it was point out to me in the past that people used to be able to live on it. So the more i gave it thought to greater it made sense and none of the arguements seems to w ork anymore to me.
-
Cu this is very doubtful. I remember many people living on minimum wage in the midwest.
what is doubtful that any large segment of Americans lived on min wage for very long
When I started min wage was around $2 x 40 hours = $80 a week?
I don't remember many people living on $80 a week
Min wage in 1981 = $3.35 x 40 hours = $134 a week.
Most people did not stay on min wage long
it was for entry level and youth
that is until the Left/Unions/Big Gvt caused the problem
by debasing the currency, started giving "free" goodies away for votes, or exploded = gvt growth
all the jobs started going automated, overseas, or allowing border chaos slave labor from Mexico
it now takes two incomes to meet all the taxes and devalued currency the gvt has caused
-
The government has cause NONE of these problems, even though you love to hate it.
Robots have taken many jobs. No one gets paid to pump gas any more. The car factory where I used to work has a fifth the workers it did in 1962.
Over the years, anti labor lawyers have made it almost impossible to start a union. We should have MORE unions. Unions are the only way a regualr worker can get any leverage with management. Pay us what we are worth or we will shut your sorry ass down tomorrow. Works like a charm.
The currency has not been debased. The only way that booms and busts can be prevented is a steady rate of inflation of 2 to 3%. That is simple economics. Booms and busts are normal traits of capitalism. If you study the history of this country, you can see this. Up through Hoover, there was a crisis, a bust or a depression every 7 to 10 years. Stop listening to Reaganite simpletons who do not know shit from Shinola. Jeez!
]
The idea of putting the women to work is a way of squeezing more productivity out of the population. It is the dream of all capitalists to squeeze as much as possible.
International trade deals have been written to put this country's workers in a race to the bottom.
-
It may of been for entry level and youths but I see alot of old folks in those jobs.also entry level are getting pretty complicated so a higher wage is still justified
-
Pay us what we are worth or we will shut your sorry ass down tomorrow. Works like a charm.
Ha Ha....hilarious non-sense!
Yes it's worked like a charm to send jobs overseas!
Look at the chart...more gvt, more regulations, more unions = the jobs drop off a cliff!
(http://s12.postimg.org/9t7ays9vx/Manufacturing_Employment_1_1_1.jpg)
The government has cause NONE of these problems
The gvt has caused almost ALL of these problems.
The bigger the gvt the bigger the lobbyists.
The bigger the gvt the bigger the special interests.
The bigger the gvt the bigger the corruption
The bigger the gvt the bigger the costs of gvt regulations on the economy.
The bigger the gvt the more it takes two incomes to make ends meet.
The currency has not been debased.
The government has absolutely debased the currency.
Currency is debased when government prints excessive amounts of money.
When the Government just prints more money and introduce it into the system
also known as "quantitative easing" it doesn't make us richer, it makes us poorer.
Your wages are suddenly worth less. Your savings are worth less.
In many years if you had put aside $100 one year, the following year it in effect is worth only $95.
The Government banks on us not noticing.
Most of us don't realize the currency is being debased.
We just think prices are rising for "some reason".
It is the ultimate stealth tax.
Look what the Federal government and Federal reserve have done to the poor old US Consumer
with their reckless budgets, huge borrowing, and printing of excess money to cover deficits of spending
so much more than they take in....trillions more than they take in! It's a crime and immoral!
(http://s7.postimg.org/gt2wvlgu3/fredgraph_dollar.png)
-
Actually plane you just supported minimum wages increase when you say pay for the value of the work.
No.
The real price of that chair you sell at a yard sale is what someone is willing to pay for it.... $10 maybe.
If they discover it is an actual Chippendale and resell it at a Sotheby auction ....$1100 maybe.
It is the same chair only the provenance changed , not the old chairs ability to bear your weight.
If the government tells your prospective employers that you cannot be hired for less than $N then all the ones that cannot afford $N are out of the running to hire you, also all the ones that do not think you will make $N+profit in your productivity.
Perhaps your abilities and knowledge would improve the entire company and your productivity will actually be $N x 1100. But if the employer doesn't even know you are worth $N he will never risk hiring you at even one times $N.
Now if your skill is a scarce one and you are able to show that you will easily produce many times the minimum wage in your work effort, why would you be interested in a minimum wage? Supply and demand determine value for employers also , so when everyone in town wants to hire you , you pick the best offer.
Now who gets set up by the government , to be the most desirable employee in town? This is always going to be a guy that took care of his own motivation and found his own skill.
-
Democrats did not make robots more efficient than people. That is just absurd.
Capitalism causes boom and bust cycles, and will always do so unless there is a small amount of inflation. The busts are far worse for the average non investor than the booms. There was inflation when Regan and both bushes were president, and there will continue to be inflation during the next president's term.
The dollar has lost less of its value than the Euro, the Yen, the Pound, the Swiss Franc and the Ruble.
-
Democrats did not make robots more efficient than people. That is just absurd.
It is not absurd , it is a concept.
Most robots have a high front end cost , then maintenance and depreciation much like a car.
People grow more skillful as they work so it is almost the opposite , the elder employees are more valuable than the young (excepting heavy lifting type jobs).
So a Robot will be evaluated as a fixed cost, an employee as a variable cost .
But there are always a few jobs where the cost of one is nearly the same as the cost of the other.
A mandated increase in the cost of an employee pushes this margin in the direction of an advantage for the robot.
So... the margin can be moved , by the government.
-
Plane that analogy is not exactly workable before the introduction of minimum wage virtually everything eas going into a snails pace due to very low spending . After minmum wage did encourage more higher spending which alllowed more higher end business to florish more.
All your anology is totally dependent on the employer to know the value of work by the employee. The flaw is by nature he will always think what he pay is more than enough and no surprise alot of time it maybe less. He'll never notice all his overheadl has gone up and that may correlate with cost of labor.
The ironic thing is thinking os so common your not gonna see wage increase due to competition. Most likely wages are not even allowed to be talked about in business.
-
Because they have to guess what a new hire will be worth in work, won't they tend to bet carefully? Therefore hire less?
What your productivity does for the business is what they hire for, if they can't determine that you will earn your pay and contribute to profitability why hire at all?
They have to guess what you are really worth.
This is what makes a degree and a portfolio so valuable.
I once went to a job interview in good clothes, but the employer wanted nothing but to see how well I could weld.
So I borrowed some leathers and ruined my shoes and landed that job, my paper resume never being read at all.
-
Welder makes minimum wage?
But by nature the employer will naturally want to naturally undercut whether it's consciously or not. I did say employer may not know he maybe shorting his staff. You did state it's a pocket change entry job so the determinating factors are also minimul. It's not that high of degree value jugdement. I even got hired at mcdonalds. It's is one of the most challenging jobs i ever done . I scoff at people who think these job are beneath them and say you only think that way because you can't handle it.
-
The point is that Americans should be paid enough to live on, period.
The value added by the employee is not something absolute, it depends on how many are available to do the job.
Selling stuff is difficult, so successful salesmen are paid a lot, even though they do not add to the value of anything.
No matter how the economy is doing, there are always lots for salespeople of the type they call "self-starters" who can sell crap of any sort to anyone.
-
Im not really supporting this as a living wage thing. It's purely economic reason to increase spending. I want America to avoid being a nation of walmart customers. Despite the fact ever since i found one i have been a frequent customer and plan not to stop. I admit hipocracy. But i notice how run down that area is. Im using walmart as a sign of a problem.
A nation of small spenders is not gonna help us out of anything.
-
Wal Mart is often not the cheapest place to buy stuff. Their proce on bananas is always the same, while in the Latino supermarkets, it is usualy less, and often MUCH less, like 25¢ a pound vs. 69¢
But Wal mart is simply a retailer in a consumer society. They are not the lowest paying employer and far from the worst place to work.
-
The point is that Americans should be paid enough to live on, period.
Evil , seductive idea.
People that do not create , are fed of pity.
People that create , create money , only if their creation is good for another person.
-
Because Republican'ts believe this sort of shit, I will never vote for any of them.
-
If you very strongly refuse to believe, then, it can't be true.
-
Of COURSE it is not true.
-
The point is that Americans should be paid enough to live on, period.
Evil , seductive idea.
People that do not create , are fed of pity.
People that create , create money , only if their creation is good for another person.
It was just recently I listened to a pundit explain this issue, in a far clearer ideological manner. To folks on the left, certain things that they have decided, in a group think manner, just must be. Such a universal health care or the idea of a living wage. Such concepts are noble, and as you rightly refer to here, as seductive. They're sold on an emotional level however, because in the arena of reality, especially, in a free market system that the United States functions in, those "ideas" are disastrous, leading to still more and more folks beholden to Government services
And that's kicker. To folks like Obama, success of a society is determined by how many folks can be helped/supported by Government services. The greater the #, the more "successful", Government must be functioning.
It's also feeds the notion of how "caring" Democrats are, and now "evil" Republicans are, for daring to want to "kick grandma onto the streets". Emotion is a strong weapon of the left. It doesn't require any facts to debunk reality of who's paying for all the services. You find a boogeyman (be it evil conservatives, white racist cops, hateful republicans, Fox News), and proclaim that's the reason you can't get a job, or that some CEO is making a bazillion dollars to your minimum wage. No facts necessary, just raw emotion
So it matters not how many small businesses are put put out of business with "living wage" cries. It matters not how many people lose their jobs. It matters not that the increased costs get slapped on those who can least afford it. Because if that happens, it just means more people that will need Government "help".........whaalaaaa.........success
-
It is not an emotional issue that everyone in this prosperous nation should have a job that will allow them to live a decent life.
"People that do not create, are fed of pity". What a great steaming crock!
The entire advertising industry does not create. Real estate salesmen do not create. Professional athletes do not create. Bankers do not create.
Artists, writers, cinematographers, painters, sculptors, architects, bricklayers, cooks and many others do create.
Getting paid for doing something is not creating.
-
It is not an emotional issue that everyone in this prosperous nation should have a job that will allow them to live a decent life.
That's a perfect example of an emotionally-centric arguement. There's no facts or objective concepts to bolster the claim. Just an opinion. I could argue that everyone in this "prosperous" nation should have a home, that will allow them a "decent place to rest". Everyone should have HDTV's, to allow a "decent chance to keep up with daily events". You're using emotionally charged concepts and words, like prosperous, allow, and decent life. No one is against anything of those concepts
That said, No one is NOT allowing anyone to do anything. People have the control to do as much as they want....or as little as they want. We shouldn't be punishing those who chose to do much, with higher taxes, to support those who choose to do little. Nor should there should there ever be such a thing as a 'living wage", since it completely robs people of any incentive to do better. Just enough to get along, and anything else will be taken care of by the Government.....(AS IN WE THE TAX PAYERS)
-
What a dipshit! You do not even know what taxes are.
Taxes are not punishment, fool. They are fees you pay for belonging to the country, and availing yourself of the services rendered.
People who make a lot of money often do very little for it. Some corporations pay the directors $20K to attend a meeting in which they only listen to the management.
You seem to think that the only reason people work is for money, which is probably true for you, considering.
But it is not true for normal people.
-
Leave it to the liberal professor to take debate down to the gutter level, once again. When you increase taxes on those who are successful, you are defacto punishing them for their success. I never claimed that's what taxes were Dr Deflection, merely a reality to what the left tries to do...taxing more and more of the successful, which pours over into the pool of middle class, to pay for all their "freebies" to those who the left systematically keeps removing any incentives to better themselves. Your twisted sense of who works or doesn't work for their money aside, the predomnant majority of folks who have become successful, WORKED THEIR ASSES OFF to get to that point.
Under the left's thought process of "living wage", there need be no higher education. Hell, who needs to graduate High School. Just drop out, and get a job that pays a 'living wage", and all is taken care of. Any other needs, the Government will help you out with. I think HDTV's are necessary to allow everyone to live a decent life. ::)
-
Yeah, let's keep going the way we are going until twelve people own every fucking thing on the planet. It must be what God had in mind.
This country would be far better off if we did what Denmark does, and provide all the education that a person has the aptitude for through the graduate school level.
The Danes are far better off than the Americans are, and get four or five weeks' vacation every year. We really have no need of any more Rupert Murdocks, Kochs or Trumps. They should be paying far more in taxes. It would make no difference to their lifestyles. No one needs a CHOICE of private jets.
-
Or.......you can just move to Denmark, and leave us more freedom focused Americans be ::)
-
I noticed also your rant on the uber rich, as if they're the only ones who have made themsevles successful, seemed to be focused on everything but liberal Democrat uber rich. Which tends to validate that its not the money but what they support/believe in. So you are perfectly swell with Steyer, Soros, & company, with all their gobs of $$$$$$'s. Isn't that just a tad....hypocritical?
-
I'll just leave this here
http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
-
Hey
I just gave it a thought if those kiosk increase as predicted 30% more business than thier will be no employee loss. Since whose gonna prepare the food? You can't exactly expect the back to hump it since they already are.. Somebody gotta pickup the slack.
Remember it's been months since the increase meaning those machines been coming way before the thought of wage increase.
-
I'll just leave this here
http://www.dol.gov/minwage/mythbuster.htm
Myth: Increasing the minimum wage will cause people to lose their jobs.
Not true: A review of 64 studies on minimum wage increases found no discernable effect on employment. Additionally, more than 600 economists, seven of them Nobel Prize winners in economics, have signed onto a letter in support of raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2016.
These studies must be the sloppiest science on the planet.
Americans used to pick peaches and onions , Americans used to wash cars and pump gas.
There are dozens of jobs that are no longer available above the table, or they are the sort of jobs that "Americans won't do".
-
I have no problem with Soros and Steyer (whoever the crap he is) paying the same rate as Trump and Koch.
The system rewards them grossly more, so they should pay a proportionate amount for this fluke and unfairness in the system.
One thing is for sure: you wlll never join them.
.
-
News Flash.....THEY ARE PAYING MORE ALREADY ::)
One thing for sure, you remain as unable to remain civil or respectful to anything political that doesn't agree with you
-
Americans still wash cars but with machines and i already anwered why full service went away. Americans are cheap bastards and only people pretending to be disable want full service. So full serive has to go . I've been working in gas stations for ten years and totally know this. I remember odd and even days
-
I have picked up a lot of pecans .
Not lately , I make better money on my regular job.
But I remember how much it was a struggle for me to pick up enough pecans to equal minimum wage, meanwhile some people were a lot more agile and practiced and were able to pick up several times what I could .
Was it fair that I was paid a lot less than the guys that picked up a lot more pecans?
-
.....oh, and how's this for rank Hypocrisy. In LA, we had the labor unions with their bought & paid for politicians, get this disastrous passage of the $15min wage by City Council, only NOW, they're pushing for a waiver......for union run businesses, knowing the net result negative hit businesses will take
It doesn't get much more rank, than that
-
Actually that confirms my suspicions that unions are so different they cannot take credit any more for what happens to labor anymore.
-
Union run businesses has minimum wage jobs???
-
The LA raise in the minimum wage is scheduled to take place gradually between now and 2020.
I doubt that sirs actually understands wheat he thinks he has read about unions.
There are lots of Americans washing cars and picking things here in South Florida.
Picking jobs are basically piecework jobs. They must pay the minimum, but if you can pick more than what has been established as a regular pace, then you get paid more.
Piecework was also used in the needle trades, with the difference that NO ONE could do even as much as what some fool had decided was the base rate.
-
Piece work is mostly done by immigrants so im quite skeptical of any sympathy of those jobs being outsourced and people complaining of the plight of those jobs. In the past when i talk about the problems of outsourcing the answer i get its not of much concern. Funny that now it is.
-
I know exactly about the scheduled increase in the minimum wage over the next several years. It changes absolutely nothing on the points of what increasing the wage does to businesses (especially the smaller ones), the increased unemployment for those businesses just barely making it, or the rank hypocrisy of the labor unions supporting the LA City Council's passing the increase, while seeking a waiver that exempts them from it
-
Piece work is mostly done by immigrants so im quite skeptical of any sympathy of those jobs being outsourced and people complaining of the plight of those jobs. In the past when i talk about the problems of outsourcing the answer i get its not of much concern. Funny that now it is.
I am old enough to remember when most petty jobs were done by young people , mostly people who went home to their parents afterwards.
This is the sort of job that the minimum wage eliminates, work that has a lower worth than the cost of a minimum wage employee.
Starter jobs are important , but a kid can't get one until his abilities are equal to the minimum wage.
There is no reason at all to make every job a living wage job, it is just putting the lower level out of the reach of starters, or firmly into the black market.
-
Well the times has changed and parents are less inclined to lets thier kids to work so minimum wages more likely don't have access to teens like it does in the past. Don't forget thier teens so the businesses have to work harder to deal with these unpredictable workers. We got alot of youtube proof its not akways the best interest for businesses to hire that young. The concept as a learning experience requires normally one extra element people neglect. The parent or relative is involved.
Every single slacker i trained which has a parent who works there is actively making sure he or she shows up on time. The ones without that rarely makes it. The rare ones that makes it all has an economic interest beyond pocket change.
If you think about it the lack of teens makes alot more sense adults can do more work and has less restrictions . Unless your one of those shadey employers who knows how to cheat teens out of pay which happens alot. Remember teenagers are too young to know labor laws so it super easy to trick them out of anything. Thiers even a movie about a fastfood girl tricked into sex recently based on a true story .
It's the very reason the military prefer the youngest recruits becayse thier the most programable.
-
Oops
For got mention this is not against teen working but something to be aware how vulnerable teens are . I actually know some kids (plural) who got tricked into doing alot of work for free . I refuse to to put teens into the they should know better discussion.
-
We could be discussing monitored or regulated or supervised apprenticeship, or work education .
Instead we have eliminated all the little jobs and started "intern" programs , some of which are onerous work for free.
-
Some of those intern programs are ill thought out by some colleges. It was mentioned if a course requires am internship that does not pay then literally the student is actually because of tuition is paying to work which take time away from studying on top of the time being in that class.
Actually I don't recall trade apprenticeship going away in fact the demand is higher than ever since it's not trendy
-
So, does a kid living with his parents , or an apprentice early in training HAVE to have a "living wage"?
This is a requirement that only makes the job harder to get and harder to provide.
Is it possible to have jobs that cost the employer more than they produce for the employer?
If it is possible there would have to be a limit to it.
-
Im abit slow but just realize were in hard to get entry level work territory. When you're in this area we get into another other subject. You see even adults has fetting work and still it has nothing to do with minimum wage but it does involve money. Businesses fir the past decade are starting to stop devoting resources to training and just hire experienced people only. A couple a years ago businesses are complaining school are not training thier grad to be job ready. Which was always the businesses job since no school can possibly know what to train students.
Which is why i said on anther post texass instrument is a great company due to its famous training program
-
Perhaps the government should do what it can to make hiring young trainees a greater expense and a greater risk?
-
Government has entry level jobs which only require very limited requirements. It's how I got my job.
-
Bank teller,notary public,book keeper. These are the jobs you can get at the age of eighteen without college. I did a if you can go back and tell your young self test
-
Is eighteen a good age for a fellow to have his first job?
-
I don't think in terms of age but in terms of need. If the kid can go college and not pay a dime but is focusing on studies than no. But if the kid needs books for school than yes. Alot of my relatives didn't work til into thier twenties and they all got degrees.
-
I don't think in terms of age but in terms of need. If the kid can go college and not pay a dime but is focusing on studies than no. But if the kid needs books for school than yes. Alot of my relatives didn't work til into thier twenties and they all got degrees.
Even so , there is not a reason to eliminate all jobs that pay less than a living wage.
There are people who need the small jobs , and are able to move up.
But the elimination of the small jobs does nothing to produce more jobs that pay better.
-
No one eliminates crappy jobs. Large corporations essentially do not offer them. For every McDonalds that pays crappy wages, there are two or three jobs that pay even less. The Latino supermarkets have small children, nine years or under that bag groceries, and I suspect that they are the children of the underpaid checkout women, working only for tips. Crappy jobs are regularly advertised in the Spanish language newspapers here. They pay less than the minimum wage, but they know that the EEOC and the Labor Dept have no Spanish or Creole speaking people that will investigate. There are piecework needle trade jobs in which the seamstress must pick up and deliver sub-assemblies of clothing, and must own their own industrial sewing machines to do the work on. It speaks well of Singer that they made machines before WWI that are still in use.
-
I'm not on this issue for living wage. I support this to increase spending so businesses actually gets a chance to thrive. Stagnent labor cost mean the business will unlikely get more customers.
-
So a large hike in the minimum wage will have the first effect of increasing the black market of labor.
Eliminating only the jobs that cannot be hidden.
Increasing the wages paid , out of funds that are never missed elsewhere.
-
What jobs are black market?
Im adressing economics issues
-
What jobs are black market?
Im adressing economics issues
The black market is an important part of the economy , it just isn't taxed.
I know some people who lived for years on under the table money , you get more bang for the buck if you are not skimming taxes off. Thus a lower pay rate becomes survivable and the employer who could not afford the overhead of a real employee hires two on the sly.
The downside is how little they are building credit with the SS administration.
-
Oh you mean under the table.
Well Since I've been gone I had more thought and will answer this differently. Your premise is raised minimum wage is the villian for all the problems you have previously stated. I on the other hand am thinking and existing problems can be helped with increased wages. On the present matter of losing sidejobs for teens, i say unfortunately even if wages were delayed its highly likely those jobs would go anyway. Why? Because if alittle thing like increased wages can eliminate them then thiers is no way a business owner will not be tempted to get rid of them later on to increase profit. In fact downsizing is viable if spending doesn't increase .
-
It is as though no one got paid any wages at all before there was a minimum wage.
No one hires anyone so that they can have a job, the job is for the work not the worker.
When there is full employment wages tend to rise , this is not a function of government.
When the government makes small jobs illegal, what has it really done?
The desperate break the law , and the law produces this desperation.
Right now only a small percentage of us make minimum wage , when the minimum is raised there will be a greater number at the minimum , and an other greater number working tax free for low wages.
How would this result in more value in circulation? It might cause more money to be in circulation, but this is more money paid on the same or less new value.
Lets say that you produce value at your job, at a steady rate, this is very likely actually true.
So then lets say that with no other change your pay rate is doubled.
To your employer the value received per dollar has been cut in half.
Can you cut the value of the money that much , and restrict the effect to only a part of the population , only a portion of the economy?
-
Before minimum wage was around a massive amount of people got super low pay and some zero because they simply got ripped off. But nothing got done. Businesses simply can't progress if nobody can buy much.
more people maybe looking for under the table work but that doesn't mean it available. If your pay doubles thats simply to the detrement to the business and has nothing to do with the topic on hand.
The idea of raising pay due loss increases equals radicall increasing to extreme has no bearing at all.
None of this has anything to do with stimulating the economy. At least raising pay will let people buy more stuff.
-
There are very few jobs that can be hidden. In Miami, it is the sort of jobs that hire only foreigners who do not speak English: Spanish speakers oin the needle trades and construction, restaurant work, nail salons and restaurants in the Chinese-speaking community.
Hiring Spanish and Chinese speaking enforcement people could end this abuse.
-
Hiring Spanish and Chinese speaking enforcement people could end this abuse.
And Vietnamese.
Isn't this difficult?
I suppose that a really fluent translator commands good pay because the skill is scarce among the qualified.
-
The idea of raising pay due loss increases equals radicall increasing to extreme has no bearing at all.
None of this has anything to do with stimulating the economy. At least raising pay will let people buy more stuff.
I think it applies to the economic effect.
Because you can't by legislation declare that the dollars I have are worth more than the dollars you have.
If the dollars an employer spends gets him half as many employees today as they did yesterday then the value of everyone's dollar is cut in half.
All the difference is only a matter of time lag, no raise will do anything but temporarily put a wage earner ahead , or temp catch him up.
In Switzerland where there is no minimum wage, there is not a major problem thereby, if you want to hire a Swiss you have to pay him what he is worth , then when he spends it he is spending the value he created with his hands.
Whatever you make whether it is a watch , or the secure perimeter as a watchman, you create a certain amount of value, and this amount is not changed by government redefinition of the worth.
-
Switzerland lacks manpower, because of the aging of the population and the reluctance of the Swiss to admit foreigners.
Government translators never are paid much. The EEOC has almost no one in Miami Dade County that speaks Spanish.
-
but if we refer to the the swiss model then that mean we must admit the employers in america owes more pay to thier empyyee due to not paying them enough. I've several times with never a disagreement state minimum wage has never kept up with thr cost of living fir over a decade. The repeated theme here is pay for the value of the work and all data suggest we've been very sub par on the matter. As such it has hurt the businesses who want to stiff thier workers
-
To impose a Swiss model, you must first make a sufficient percentage of Americans think like the Swiss. This would require that the US have a history similar to that of Switzerland, isolated by mountains and cultural divisions from neighbors. That is simply impossible.
-
Fourteen to one, in favor.
That was the Los Angeles City Council vote to raise, over the next five years, the city’s minimum wage from $9 an hour to $15. Of course, as Investor’s Business Daily tells us, the $15 per hour really is closer to $20.
How does it get to $20?
Investor’s Business Daily says: “Once all the nonwage costs are added, including payroll taxes, paid sick leave and the big one – Obamacare’s employer mandate – minimum compensation for a full-time worker could rise as high as $19.28 an hour by 2020, an IBD analysis finds. That would amount to a jump of $10.67, or 124 percent, since June 2014.”
How cynical is the push for higher minimum wage?
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now traveled from state to state, collecting signatures to place minimum wage increase initiatives on ballots. To pull this off, the organization needed to hire lots of workers. In 1995, ACORN came to California to gather signatures for a higher minimum wage. But ACORN sued the state, seeking to exempt itself from California’s minimum wage and overtime laws. Its brief read, “The more ACORN must pay each individual outreach worker – either because of minimum wage or overtime requirements – the fewer outreach workers it will be able to hire.”
Not cynical enough?
Union leaders, who successfully lobbied for L.A.’s $15-an-hour minimum wage, then asked for an exemption for any firms using union labor! Repeat: the very same union leaders who successfully lobbied for a $15-an-hour minimum wage then wanted an exemption for businesses that employ union labor and negotiate their wages under collective bargaining. Union bosses want the fear of a $15 minimum wage hike to push companies into unionizing their labor forces.
This push for a higher minimum wage will mostly hurt women – a constituency the left claims to care so much about. According to the National Women’s Law Center, women are at least half of the minimum wage workers in all 50 states. In New Hampshire, Arkansas, Maine and Pennsylvania, 70 percent of the minimum wage workers are female.
Before the ever-increasing minimum wage laws took effect, a black teenager was slightly more likely to be employed than a white teenager. Economist Walter Williams writes: “In the 1940s and 1950s … teenage unemployment among blacks was slightly lower than among whites, and black teens were more active in the labor force as well. All of my classmates, friends and acquaintances who wanted to work found jobs of one sort or another.”
Minimum wage and other New Deal policies, according to CATO’s Jim Powell, cost jobs: “The flagship of the New Deal was the National Industrial Recovery Act, passed in June 1933. It authorized the president to issue executive orders establishing some 700 industrial cartels, which restricted output and forced wages and prices above market levels. The minimum wage regulations made it illegal for employers to hire people who weren’t worth the minimum because they lacked skills. As a result, some 500,000 blacks, particularly in the South, were estimated to have lost their jobs.”
Today’s push for a higher minimum wage occurs as the supposed “pay gap” between male and female millennials now approaches extinction. Pew Research Center says: “(T)oday’s young women are the first in modern history to start their work lives at near parity with men. In 2012, among workers ages 25 to 34, women’s hourly earnings were 93 percent those of men. … And women in the younger age cohort were significantly more likely than their male counterparts to have completed a bachelor’s degree – 38 percent versus 31 percent in 2013.”
Two years ago, Elissa Shevinsky, described as a “social justice warrior,” complained about “sexism” in high-tech industries. She argued for policies to encourage more women in tech. But Shevinsky later had an epiphany: “I think the more important meaning is to actively choose a path that’s yours – for women to create their own companies and their own infrastructures, to actively seek out people and create places that are a fit for them. Women are martyring themselves trying to change the existing culture, and it’s miserable for everyone.”
In other words, stop acting like victicrats – and take control. Shevinsky now says, “Complaining can be effective but also authoritarian, and often unpleasant for everyone involved. Building something new can be even more impactful, and I believe it’s a healthier approach.”
Former Sony Pictures co-chief Amy Pascal gives equally blunt advice about knowing and getting what you’re worth. After the Sony cyberattack revealed that the studio head paid star Jennifer Lawrence less money than her less-popular male costars, Pascal offered this defense: “Here’s the problem. I run a business. People want to work for less money; I’ll pay them less money. I don’t call them up and say, ‘Can I give you some more?’ Because that’s not what you do when you run a business. The truth is, what women have to do is not work for less money. They have to walk away. People shouldn’t be so grateful for jobs. … People should know what they’re worth.”
Any questions? (http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/minimum-wage-hikes-hurt-women-blacks/)
-
Recently Disney has decided to contract with some staffing company to replace a lot of its better paid American workers with Indians on H-1 visas. Not only that, but before Mickey and Goofy throw their loyal American eorkers away, they will make then train their untrained foreign replacements.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/last-task-after-layoff-at-disney-train-foreign-replacements.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/last-task-after-layoff-at-disney-train-foreign-replacements.html?_r=0)
Capitalism at work.
-
Recently Disney has decided to contract with some staffing company to replace a lot of its better paid American workers with Indians on H-1 visas. Not only that, but before Mickey and Goofy throw their loyal American eorkers away, they will make then train their untrained foreign replacements.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/last-task-after-layoff-at-disney-train-foreign-replacements.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/last-task-after-layoff-at-disney-train-foreign-replacements.html?_r=0)
Capitalism at work.
-
And it had nothing to with minimum wage but simple reorganization for max profit which the core cause of the majority of outsourcing being done.
-
That's not so much captalism as it is taking advantage of our upside down immigration laws. The law was there to supposedly allow foreigners to work at jobs "Americans weren't doing". And yet, here we have a clear demonstration of jobs Americans were not only doing, but then ordered to train those to take their places, when they were fired
-
Here where I don't understand how it's not a violation of use of h-1b visa. H-1b clearly states it cannot be used to replace an exact job an American workers is doing . But if an existing worker is training such a worker to do his job then isn't that a violation of the h-1b visa?
We can hire overseas worker but the act of training them to replace is a violation isnt it?
-
Forgot to mention these companies claim not enough American qualified workers but they used laidoff existing worker to stay long enough to train the h-1b workers to do thier jobs.
Looks like a violation to me
I'm claiming bullshit
-
It's clearly a violation. The whole notion of the visas was to give jobs to those foreigners that Americans weren't doing. Here we have a clear case of Americans doing precisely the job, but companies, being pushed by ever expanding government regulations & mandates, topped with Obamination care, are using the immigration law to lower their overhead. There really can be no other reason
-
The Americans are making around 100K per year, plus benefits, the Indians will be getting $60K plus lesser benefits.
This sounds exactly like something illegal to me. It is this sort of crap that makes unions necessary.
Let us see who denounces this among the Presidential candidates and who prefers donations from Disney.
-
LOL...yea, the same Unions that want to exempt themselves from the very minimum wage increase, they want to force on everyone else. Exactly the type of denouncing I'm looking forward to any of the Candidates bringing to light
-
All unions for schmucks like you are the same.
Unions are democratic, and they do what their members ask them to do.
-
;D That was a good one
-
All unions for schmucks like you are the same.
Unions are democratic, and they do what their members ask them to do.
I wish this were so.
-
Me too....which is why I got such a chuckle the 1st time that line was given. It could only be taken as a joke
-
Every teachers' union I ever belonged to was democratic, so was the UAW at the Claycomo Ford where I worked. If you wanted to affect change in the local chapter, you could volunteer for various committees and become a shop steward.
-
Is it possible to instruct the high command at Union HQ that they should not give campaign contribution strictly to one party with no discernible quid pro quo ,nor any evidence that the membership likes the beneficiaries?
I am a Union member in good standing, but I oppose vehemently the idea of involuntary membership , or mandatory union shop. This measure removes all leverage the workforce should have on the union leadership.
-
I am a Union member in good standing, but I oppose vehemently the idea of involuntary membership , or mandatory union shop. This measure removes all leverage the workforce should have on the union leadership.
BINGO!
-
Without your union, you would surely be worse off than you are now.
There is no bingo, sirs, you are such an ass.
-
Surely, is just your opinion, while the point Plane made, that you couldn't refute is the notion that its the members who tell leadership what to do, when its pretty much the exact opposite
-
The members do, in fact tell the leadership what to do.
There are ample avenues in nearly all unions for the average member to rise to a position in which he can voice his opinion of what the union should do. Of course, if his opinion is that the union should just dry up and blow away, that is not a useful suggestion. That would be like electing anarchists. The union needs to be strong to get what it wants from management. To say that the union should try to act to have fewer members is counter to the purpose of the union.It would be like the batmaker advocating making the bats of balsa wood.
-
The members do, in fact tell the leadership what to do.
They do in fact...don't. The do in fact are mandated to pay dues, to support causes they may not support in any way. They are told what they're going to support, and just shut up, because they know better
Unions, like the NAACP, were once absolutely beneficial and well intentioned. But years of apparent ability for control, have mutated those organisations simply into massive Democrat PAC's, who care more about their own power & growing their #'s, than actually fighting for American workers or African Americans
-
Union menbers can opt out of political action committees as they wish and have been able to do this for ages.
-
................. have mutated those organisations simply into massive Democrat PAC's, who care more about their own power & growing their #'s, than actually fighting for American workers ............................
Yes, that.
Being so fully wedded to the Democratic party allows the Dems to rely on our monetary support even when they align us with causes contrary to our interests.
Consider the immigration policy that would really benefit Union Membership, and see how that compares with Democratic plans and platform.
-
Without your union, you would surely be worse off than you are now.
Oh yes !
I would never say otherwise. I have been personally helped by my union when I was in some troubles.
I work for the US Government , one of the worst bosses on the planet, there has to be someone to represent my interests.
But I will never go on strike , we will never have a union shop, we will never forget PATCO.
-
Most unions are not anti-immigration.
-
And who, pray tell, is anti-immigration??
-
Most unions are not anti-immigration.
Yes , why is that?
-
You could ask them. I imagine that it has to do with so many union members being the children of immigrants.
-
You imagine alot, but couldn't help but notice, still no answers as to who is supposedly anti-immigration. No surprise there
-
Seems as though Unions should be enough pro-membership that they should not want them displaced or replaced.
I think a real poll of union membership would have found a lot more conservatism than union contribution to political campaigns would indicate.
So forcing a person to join , then taking his dues and spending them as he would not want ...
What do they think they are government agencies?
-
Union members can opt out of making political contributions. The other things that unions contribute to are paying the people that collectively bargain wages, and they are generally worth the money, because union workers almost always make more money than people doing the same work in non union shops, and recruitment.
There are some unions that have pension funds. Most of these are managed properly.
If more Americans belonged to unions, we would have more equality of both incomes and opportunities.
-
Oooo.....another good chuckle ;D
-
Didn't ann coulter recently state some anti immigration rhetoric
-
Anti-ILLEGAL Immigration rhetoric, yes.
-
it`s immigrants
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-04-24.html
-
We have no choice about native-born losers. We ought to be able to do something about the people we chose to bring here.
Hahaha!
Isn't she something.
Even Jimmy Carter had to draw the line somewhere, the Mariel boatlift looked like a winner at first, then we found that Fidel was emptying his prisons this way.
Where should we draw the line?
Can we really make everyone in the world an American?
-
Can we really make everyone in the world an American?
=======================================
What a novel idea! There was some goofy general that wanted to make them all Christians, but he didn't say anything about making them Americans as well.
-
it`s immigrants
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-04-24.html
Our immigration system definitely needs overhauled. I also don't think she was indicting immigrants, as much as venting at how may immigrants were committing such heinous crimes. But I can't read her mind, and if she's the 1 person that actually is anti-immigrant, then you indeed found 1, that I would strongly disagree with
-
Coulter likes to rant and rave, and she will say anything to sell her hateful books.
It only takes several thousand ignorant haters to keep her in business.
-
And millions more to keep people like Obama in office
-
How does that make Coulter less odious?
Only that idiot fundie preacher that liked to disrupt dead soldiers funeral is more odious than Coulter.
And I think she gets a lot more money than he ever did.
-
Didn't ann coulter recently state some anti immigration rhetoric
Yes she speaks the truth!
She wants to stop the insanity at our borders
no other non-war torn country has the level of border insanity that we do.
And she wants to stop ALL IMMIGRATION for ten years to get this under control.
Seems logical to me.
We have more than enough people here already....
with small exception we don't need more people here for at least ten years.
-
So, in other words, she's not even "anti-immigration". She merely supports a time-out period to get our system fixed & border better secured. Legal immigration would then resume, with the latest reforms in place
(and no xo, we all realize that no border will be 100% secure, so you can halt any attempt to even start to argue a point no one making)
-
Can we really make everyone in the world an American?
=======================================
What a novel idea! There was some goofy general that wanted to make them all Christians, but he didn't say anything about making them Americans as well.
Wait?
This is not what you want?
-
Well a time out looks pretty bleak on my end. My folks have a very bad habit of job security first before getting a childs so immigration is very important aspect for asians. We may need to learn to copy rest of America and focus on having kids first.
-
Never said a time out was viable, definately not PC, only an appropriate notion to fix our current system, not to mention refutes the notion that Coulter is acutally anti-immigration
-
She did state most immigrants should not enter do to lack of usefulness. Again looks pretty bad for my kind again. I've learn here that outside of California alot of Americans think asians only got into college due to affirmative action so our stutus as productive citizen has yet been established yet. We the least respected minority in the u.s. .
-
I really don't know how you might come to that conclusion, Kimba. Asians that made it here, generally did so with hard work, and doing what they needed to do, to enter. AA really has little to do with it, IMHO. AA is generally applied to the black community, and to a lesser extent, Hispanic population
-
The day Americans believe chinaman is offensive to chinese and not a phrase to defend as a right to say to a chinese is the day i believe we're respected as the other minorities.
Asian tend to be accused of only being college due to AA and are stealing other students place in college. I only knew about this when a former poster here made such a claim about his son losing a spot incollege and as i digged and found many parents think thier kids didn't get into the college if choice due to a asian they think is on AA.
Ironically i found this funfact asian actually are the most academically disadvantaged minority in America. Due to the higher entry requirements reseved only for asian applicants.
-
Ironically i found this funfact asian actually are the most academically disadvantaged minority in America. Due to the higher entry requirements reseved only for asian applicants.
Actually I consider this to be pretty well known, especially in California Asian heritage kids are getting sort of the opposite of affirmative action .
I have heard about it before , several times sense way back.
There ought to be a couple of million persons with the standing to sue by now.
-
It's starting right now but not gonna hold my breathe that it'll go far. Asian causes rarely get much attention. I recall many complaints but few wins
http://www.businessinsider.com/former-ivy-league-admissions-dean-racial-stereotyping-is-alive-and-well-2015-6
-
Even the tiger mom writer told her daughter the only way to get into harvard is not mention she's part asian.
In fact thats how alot of minorities in general write white on the application to ensure they get a job
-
The day Americans believe chinaman is offensive to chinese and not a phrase to defend as a right to say to a chinese is the day i believe we're respected as the other minorities.
Kimba i am not sure of exactly the point you are making
but from my experience Asians are no doubt a respected minority population
Asians tend to be smart, very serious about school, and prisons are not full of Asians
My Dad used the term Chinaman some, but that was a different time...
I never hear that used nowadays..
just curious do you not like the term "Chinatown" in SF?
-
It's so offensive to me that the very act of typing it here pains me but its not like i have achoice. Even when i explain it in the most simple and basic reason how it's offensive people will refuse to think it's offensive or the courtesy of leaving it at that.
I explained it is thee number one word an asian will hear when getting punched or attacked and note how that reasoning would parallel how nigger became offensive and discard all that history rhetoric.
i use that reasoning due to the very strange fact in a heated situation no matter the aggressor background the chance are very high that word will be used and the context is never nuetral
-
Funny thing just recently i notice such emotion from words like entitlement or gentrification but a wotd that offends my people is considered unreasonable?
-
If ypou are Chinese and your surname it Lee and you want your daughter or son to get into Harvard, the best thjng to do is to name then Dixie and Robert E.
-
Actually likely true
http://www.businessinsider.com/high-school-students-told-to-appear-less-asian-on-college-applications-2015-6
-
This is the second time chinese are called jews. The first we're called jews of the east
-
The Chinese have several things in common with Jews in many countries:
1.) They own many businesses, often a higher percentage than the locals.
2.) They tend to keep to themselves, educating their children in the Chinese language and culture.
3.) They often are involved in moneylending, clothing stores, and selling cheap imported goods.
4.) Often they have more money than the locals.
In the Dominican Republic, the same role is taken by Syrian and Lebanese Christians.
-
Xo
Those are the very same aspect that s likely to get us shot when the chips are down.
Philipines,indonesia,uganda,los angeles, Baltimore