# are fast food workers worth more pay



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...-employees-to-stay-home-as-protests-loom.html

Protests for higher wages and unions.


----------



## homesteader25 (May 8, 2014)

I don't even make 15 an hour.... i work in a hand crafting manufacturing type job that requires more skill to flip a burger. How is that even fair?


----------



## Coillte (May 21, 2014)

I am interested not in whether they are worth more pay but whether they get it. I imagine it is difficult to negotiate with such a faceless corporation. Do fast food places in the US have a high staff turn around? They certainly do here. I wonder if it is cheaper to pay a decent wage and retain staff than to constantly have to retrain new comers. In Ireland we have a statutory minimum wage which I think is approx. &#8364;8.65 per hour (about $12). People miraculously manage to raise families on such a wage, even in urban areas and I have no notion how they do it. With great difficulty, I guess!


----------



## TXWildcat (Mar 26, 2014)

this will cause the prices to increase and likely cause workers hours to decrease. only thing i buy there is the dollar ice cream once in a while. guess i will cut that out when price goes up. 


Live life in such a way that the preacher won't have to lie at your funeral.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

I think it's an atrocity when somebody flipping burgers is making as much as health care professionals who are handling precious human lives.

I started my nursing career in 1975 making a whopping 7.59 an hour. That was with shift differential and working a specialized nursing floor (OB). If I hadn't chosen that option, I would have started at 7 dollars an hour.

The local Kroger checkers were making over 10 an hour. 

When we lived in Western IL the starting pay around us for LPNs was 12$ an hour.

Our sense of priorities has become totally skewered.

And no. I do not think they need more money for flipping burgers.


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

I don't know if they are worth more or not , but i do know if one does not eat or uses the services at places that makes fast food, fast coffee, or fast oil changes its much easier to live on less money. Just saying...


----------



## TXWildcat (Mar 26, 2014)

good point. some police and teachers dont make much more than 15/hour. 


Live life in such a way that the preacher won't have to lie at your funeral.


----------



## Awnry Abe (Mar 21, 2012)

Either prices will rise to keep the siphon constant on wage, or capital will flow into burger-flipping robots. Capital won't just flow into the paycheck of untrained labor.


----------



## Awnry Abe (Mar 21, 2012)

badlander said:


> I think it's an atrocity when somebody flipping burgers is making as much as health care professionals who are handling precious human lives.
> 
> I started my nursing career in 1975 making a whopping 7.59 an hour. That was with shift differential and working a specialized nursing floor (OB). If I hadn't chosen that option, I would have started at 7 dollars an hour.
> 
> ...


Agreed. If the efforts of this organized wage increase succeed, I imagine an LPN or three will trade the night shift and stress at the hospital for the day shift at McDs. I hope those folks in the fast food trade are prepared for the competition.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Gotta feeling automation may be the next step, the larger companies would probably benefit.


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

Frozen pre-flame broiled burgers heated in 3 seconds by a hyperheat sonic series 9000 food servent. Frozen fries flash fried in genetically altered fish oil fry cloud to paper wrapper in 8 seconds. 

All that tasty goodness in less time than it takes you to place your finger with the gobmnt mandated personal chip in it on the express finger pad to pay for said services and goods. 

Be sure to wave your finger in the anti bacterial mist before engaging the financial transaction pad, Thank you for visiting Mc Instant Foods and have a wonderful day.


----------



## Coillte (May 21, 2014)

doingitmyself said:


> Frozen pre-flame broiled burgers heated in 3 seconds by a hyperheat sonic series 9000 food servent. Frozen fries flash fried in genetically altered fish oil fry cloud to paper wrapper in 8 seconds.
> 
> All that tasty goodness in less time than it takes you to place your finger with the gobmnt mandated personal chip in it on the express finger pad to pay for said services and goods.
> 
> Be sure to wave your finger in the anti bacterial mist before engaging the financial transaction pad, Thank you for visiting Mc Instant Foods and have a wonderful day.


This! I hate fast food joints. I hate the food. I hate the clinical interiors. I haven't eaten anything in one of those hideous places since I got the munchies after a beer fest in college about a decade ago. I prefer my meat on the bone, pasture raised, organic and when not camping or BBQing, on a proper plate with a proper knife and fork. I chew slowly and relish every bite!


----------



## jefferson (Nov 11, 2004)

In answer to the question......... For most, NO


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Fast food jobs should be only short term part time minimum wage plus a buck or so in raises jobs to prepare teenage workers for other jobs. Those who choose to restrict themselves to those fast food jobs should accept the lower wages those jobs typically offer.

I have known many with inadequate for the real world education who worked fast food jobs and furthered their education through night classes and eventually got away from the fast food jobs.

Now that so called adults have siphoned off the fast food jobs leaving the teen market more unemployed , many complain of increased teen gang violence along with complaining they cant feed their families on what their fast food job they should have left years ago pays.

If they would prepare themselves to move on to viable real world jobs at a reasonable wage and leave those fast food jobs for the teens they fit better, both of their complaints would be reduced.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

I suppose the appropriate people to ask would be the franchise owners of the organization being protested. This would be the same franchise owners who recently spent a week in Orlando being wined and dined by various vendors vying for their business. The same franchise owners who were treated to concerts by Adam Levine and Sting and who had a major theme park opened solely for their pleasure one evening. I don't know whether the workers are worth more. I do know they have every right to ask for more and organize towards that goal.


----------



## Coillte (May 21, 2014)

Shrek said:


> Fast food jobs should be only short term part time minimum wage plus a buck or so in raises jobs to prepare teenage workers for other jobs. Those who choose to restrict themselves to those fast food jobs should accept the lower wages those jobs typically offer.
> 
> I have known many with inadequate for the real world education who worked fast food jobs and furthered their education through night classes and eventually got away from the fast food jobs.
> 
> ...


Wise observations!


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

TXWildcat said:


> good point. some police and teachers dont make much more than 15/hour.
> 
> 
> Live life in such a way that the preacher won't have to lie at your funeral.


Around here police can make a hundred thousand a year and teachers $70 to 80 thousand per year for essentually part time work. When you know that, I guess $15 per hour looks really appropriate.


----------



## Shoden (Dec 19, 2012)

badlander said:


> I think it's an atrocity when somebody flipping burgers is making as much as health care professionals who are handling precious human lives.
> 
> I started my nursing career in 1975 making a whopping 7.59 an hour. That was with shift differential and working a specialized nursing floor (OB). If I hadn't chosen that option, I would have started at 7 dollars an hour.
> 
> ...


Kroger checkers were making over 10 an hour in 1975? Adjusted for inflation, that's $44.07 per hour in 2014, which is more than I make as a computer programmer/application architect. And your $7.59 per hour in 1975 is the equivalent of $33.45 per hour today, which is a pretty good wage and much closer to what I'm making. Minimum wage in 1975 was only $2.10 per hour (http://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm), so you were making over 3.5 times minimum wage.

Inflation really needs to be taken into account when comparing wages over the years, especially when you're going back several decades. Play around with this calculator if you really feel like getting depressed: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/. It made me realize earlier this year that despite two promotions and almost annual "merit" raises, my salary has actually been flat for the past 8 years.

As for the original question, no, I don't think fast food workers are worth $15 per hour. Or if they are, then educated, experienced professionals, like myself and badlander, are worth more than 2.5 times minimum wage, so expect our salaries to jump up to $60-75 per hour to keep pace, and then expect inflation to make the pay increases all meaningless in a few years, if not sooner.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

I wish I could make 33 dollars an hour practicing as a nurse. Even working as a temporary nurse, (horribly stressful job) the most I ever made was 25 an hour. A local nursing home negotiated my pay with me considering my experience and previous job as a second shift charge nurse. All they could give me was 14.50 an hour. That was 8 years ago.

Think about this folks. Your life and the life of your loved one. The people who you count on to take care of your health would be making less than somebody flipping burgers. 

You have to REALLY like cardboard hamburgers to even think this is close to being fair.

And Yep. The Krogers workers were making something like 12 dollars an hour. She was union. How do I know this? Knew the woman working at Krogers. She went to the same church I belonged to.

The big thing to remember is that the small businessman who depends on minimum wage workers to make his or her business run are going to be eating this increase should it go through. We were self employed and paid our employees above minimum wage when we had employees. Many self employed will simply not be able to handle that increased expense and shut down. You very well may be seeing the end of the small business the same as what has happened with farming and the extinction of the small family farm.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

If the fast food places were having trouble filling all their slots at those wages, they would be paying more. It's a "buyers market" for employers right now. A lot of people out of work or underemployed, they can get reliable, hard working grownups to fill jobs that used to go to teenagers for spending money. 

I feel for the people who are trying to live on those paychecks, but if there is a mandatory raise in wages, the employers will cut jobs, cut hours, put in more machines, whatever they can to cut expenses versus raising prices. Fast food is very competitive based on price, not the actual so called food. 

"Fairness" or what any given job is "worth" isn't really applicable. We all like to get on our soap box about it, but the real world is what it is. Some very unpleasant people end up with wealth beyond our imagination, some very good people never have two nickels to rub together. That's just the way of the world and we are never going to make it all "fair".


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

mmoetc said:


> I suppose the appropriate people to ask would be the franchise owners of the organization being protested. This would be the same franchise owners who recently spent a week in Orlando being wined and dined by various vendors vying for their business. The same franchise owners who were treated to concerts by Adam Levine and Sting and who had a major theme park opened solely for their pleasure one evening. I don't know whether the workers are worth more. I do know they have every right to ask for more and organize towards that goal.


I feel the same way as this. They should present their case as to why they should receive better compensation.

So why is it I hear so much of this is in regards to increasing the Federal Minimum wage? Let's keep this between McDonalds franchise, their employees and the various Union representation.


----------



## TXWildcat (Mar 26, 2014)

where I want to said:


> Around here police can make a hundred thousand a year and teachers $70 to 80 thousand per year for essentually part time work. When you know that, I guess $15 per hour looks really appropriate.



in the bigger cities, yes they make good money. some of the smaller departments around here pay $30k to $35k. thats just a tad more than $15/hour. of course they have the option to work EJ's that pay even better. same for teachers. smaller skool, smaller pay. 

not sure how you get part time work for a teacher. my wife is a teacher in a medium size district. she makes pretty good annually. she would prolly make more if she was actually paid $15 an hour though. thats another topic though. 



Live life in such a way that the preacher won't have to lie at your funeral.


----------



## lonelytree (Feb 28, 2008)

I was always told to do the math. Are they actually gaining income?

Loss of EIC?

Actually having to pay taxes?

Loss of subsidies for ACA?

The FED is just setting us up for inflation. Will a pay raise show a gain?

I don't know, just thinking out loud.


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

They already have a Mc drink machine, its a cupped conveyor that fills drink orders tied in with the registers. I think Mc owners already know where this is going. China already has Mc workerbots in part of their daily operations, the frier is automated. 

Burger k place has a conveyor that cooks the plasti meat to "flame broiled perfection". It would be pretty easy to automate the rest of the place it seems.


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

If fast food places went to automated frybots would that keep you from using their services? We use automatic car washers, clothes washers, automatic transmissions, automatic everything. 

Is it time for the food industry to get on board? 

What do you think?


----------



## 65284 (Sep 17, 2003)

mmoetc said:


> I suppose the appropriate people to ask would be the franchise owners of the organization being protested. This would be the same franchise owners who recently spent a week in Orlando being wined and dined by various vendors vying for their business. The same franchise owners who were treated to concerts by Adam Levine and Sting and who had a major theme park opened solely for their pleasure one evening. I don't know whether the workers are worth more. I do know they have every right to ask for more and organize towards that goal.


 
I suppose you have no idea how much of an investment it takes to secure a franchise and open a McDonalds? I suppose the appropiate people to ask would the franchise owners that risk close to a million dollars by the time they open the doors, with absolutely no guarantee of any return on that investment or even to recoup it. Oh yeah, they also have to put up with whiny, demanding employees. 

What do the protesting burger flippers have invested, bus fare to work? Boo hoo hoo the owners are making a lot of money, gimmie, gimmie, gimmie, another classic wealth redistribution demand.

I find it extremely disgusting that jealous people hate on and revile the folks who take all of the risks and do the hard work involved in a successful business enterprise when they reap their just rewards. 

You seem to think it's just a gravy train so why don't you open a franchise, pay your employees $15.00 per hour and let us know how it works out?

A niece worked at McDonalds, where she learned a lot; the importance of getting to work on time, getting along with fellow employees, how to deal with the public, teamwork, organizational skills, it was a great experience that served her well as an adult.


----------



## Coillte (May 21, 2014)

65284 said:


> I suppose you have no idea how much of an investment it takes to secure a franchise and open a McDonalds? I suppose the appropiate people to ask would the franchise owners that risk close to a million dollars by the time they open the doors, with absolutely no guarantee of any return on that investment or even to recoup it. Oh yeah, they also have to put up with whiny, demanding employees.
> 
> What do the protesting burger flippers have invested, bus fare to work? Boo hoo hoo the owners are making a lot of money, gimmie, gimmie, gimmie, another classic wealth redistribution demand.
> 
> ...


In general I agree with some of what you are saying. The praise goes to the man in the arena. He is taking the risk. There are different kinds of risks however, from the silly to the calculated. If an individual calls himself a business man and wishes to invest a small fortune in a franchise, one would think his risk is calculated. If not, another profession might be more suited to him. None of this translates as employees not being permitted to ask for a wage rise. Whether they are right or wrong in such an endeavour is really irrelevant. Whether they are worth more or less is also irrelevant. They can ask, demand, protest and whine all they want and that's a wonderful thing. In this respect mmoetc is spot on!


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

Coillte said:


> They can ask, demand, protest and whine all they want and that's a wonderful thing. In this respect mmoetc is spot on!


But they are pursuing their wage increase through political means. They are not bargaining in good faith with their employer; they are petitioning the government to force the employer to pay higher wages. There is a HUGE difference here.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

If McD's starts paying $15 and hour dh will want to quit his job and go back to McD's. 

Home health care aids here, licensed at that, make about $11 an hour. Dental assistants right close to that. No way McD's workers should earn more.


----------



## Coillte (May 21, 2014)

Nate_in_IN said:


> But they are pursuing their wage increase through political means. They are not bargaining in good faith with their employer; they are petitioning the government to force the employer to pay higher wages. There is a HUGE difference here.


In my mind they are the same. I come from a country with a highly unionised work force and all demands for wage hikes are in some sense political. The threat of strike is a political act and the bulk of petitions to government are symbolic at best. I doubt very much that the government is going to overhaul minimum wage legislation on the back of protestors from a fast food chain. If that happens I will be astounded. Now, if the McDs workers were sensible they would invite all unskilled and semi skilled employees to join then in their petitions and therefore leverage more power. That's what the French do and when it comes to industrial action, they have it down to an art form!


----------



## Coillte (May 21, 2014)

A somewhat unrelated question here. I don't know how in the states the numbers of those in relative and absolute poverty are calculated but, is it possible that a full time employee (35-39 hours per week in Europe) earning a minimum wage would fall into one of those categories?


----------



## secuono (Sep 28, 2011)

Fast food kids are worked to the bone and treated like crap. Get sick too often, fired, get injured or complain about bad conditions, fired, don't get along with someone, fired. Work 8hrs, they ask you to stay 2hrs more, then 1hr more and more. Forget having school or not being a robot, the heck they care. You're cheap labor. No AC, who cares, drink more water. You drink more water, they yell at you for drinking water and not working or having to go take a piss. No one cares about complaints, no one believes you and no one wants to loose their crap job, so they won't back you up. 

Fast food places need to disappear. Not good for anyone other than the money grubbing * in corporate who could care less about you quitting, a million other gullible teens in school who will apply.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

Coillte said:


> I doubt very much that the government is going to overhaul minimum wage legislation on the back of protestors from a fast food chain. If that happens I will be astounded.





> May 21 (Reuters) - More than 100 demonstrators seeking better pay for McDonald's workers were arrested on Wednesday as protesters swarmed the fast-food chain's corporate campus near Chicago demanding a minimum wage of $15 an hour and the right to unionize.





> U.S. President Barack Obama has pushed Congress to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour from $7.25. Washington, D.C. and 21 states have minimum wages higher than the federal minimum.


http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/21/mcdonalds-protests-idUSL1N0O718220140521


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nate_in_IN said:


> But they are pursuing their wage increase through political means. They are not bargaining in good faith with their employer; they are petitioning the government to force the employer to pay higher wages. There is a HUGE difference here.


They were demonstrating at the restaurants, not at the Dept. of Labor in DC, right? Maybe you have Mr President, who wants to raise the min. wage to $10, mixed up with the burger flippers who are asking for $15?


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

MO_cows said:


> They were demonstrating at the restaurants, not at the Dept. of Labor in DC, right? Maybe you have Mr President, who wants to raise the min. wage to $10, mixed up with the burger flippers who are asking for $15?


You don't think the two are tied together?


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

MO_cows said:


> They were demonstrating at the restaurants, not at the Dept. of Labor in DC, right? Maybe you have Mr President, who wants to raise the min. wage to $10, mixed up with the burger flippers who are asking for $15?


How about this?



> Fast-food workers backed by the Service Employees International Union protested last week in front of McDonald's Corp. MCD +0.02% and other restaurants in more than 100 cities. Another protest is planned Wednesday at McDonald's headquarters in Oak Brook, Ill. Workers are demanding starting pay of $15 an hour&#8212;a 100% pay increase for many&#8212;and the right to form a union in states where they are limited by laws.The SEIU also has assisted adjunct college faculty, home-care workers and other service employees in demanding better pay.
> 
> "In addition to the government raising the floor, fast-food workers are joining together and saying we can do better than the floor because our employers can afford to pay us," said SEIU President Mary Kay Henry, citing fast-food companies' profits. McDonald's recorded a $5.59 billion profit last year, up 2% from 2012.


http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...0001424052702304652804579571901096717092.html

Read the quote from the president of the Service Employees International Union. I think that provides pretty clear direction of what they are trying to make happen.


----------



## doingitmyself (Jul 30, 2013)

If they get the $15 per hour i wonder if they still get free happy meals, or maybe just steal a fry of the fryer, perhaps maybe a shamrock in the cleaning closet. :bouncy:

Next thing will be the cleaning crew will want to get tips for wiping down the tables. :duel:


----------



## Coillte (May 21, 2014)

According to 2012 figures, published in 2013, 15% of Americans lived below or on the poverty line. That's 46.5 million people - 10.3 times the population of my country or roughly the entire population of Spain. I suspect Obama's desire to raise minimum wages is more connected with such a fact than with 100 disgruntled employees protesting outside the McD's corporate headquarters in Chicago. Whether such a policy of raising minimum wage is correct, worthy or possible doesn't matter but the truth is, fast food workers, even gathered in a group of 100, doubtless have the influence to shift minimum wage policy. Now, the disgruntled unskilled and semi skilled workforce in general, that's another story. 

I have no idea of the cost of living in the states really. In my few visits, it is certainly cheaper than Europe. I am an advocate of an honest wage for an honest days work but is it possible to live (sufficiently) on the current federal minimum wage? Given the disparity in minimum wages by state, am 
I to assume that those states with a higher minimum wage have less small to medium businesses, a declining retail sector and higher unemployment as a result of the higher wage?

http://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/how-many-people-are-poor


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nate_in_IN said:


> You don't think the two are tied together?


No. I sincerely doubt the burger flippers have communicated with the president. The speech where he called for the raise in minimum wage was no doubt motivational to the burger flipper "movement" but I don't see a conspiracy here. 

The lefties are beating the drum of "income inequality" now. Because, you know, they already fixed health care (insert tongue in cheek) and are moving on. So in that regard it IS all tied together.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

Dollars and percentages and poverty levels do not tell the whole story. An American living at the poverty level might just have a better quality of life then a person at the poverty level in another Country. For many years, due to the seasonal nature of my work and the size of our family we lived below the poverty level. Im not saying it was not a struggle at times but inspite of it there were plenty of good times. No expensive vacations but everyone seemed to enjoy hiking and camping and fishing. Our garden was more then a hobby. As far as demanding higher wages, please tell me why they deserve them? If your skills only allow you to work as a burger flipper your going to get paid as a burger flipper. If you flip burgers because of the economy and it was the only job you could get, Then these are your hard times, deal with it. If its because you have no ambition, training or skills, its your problem, not your bosses. If the job only pays $8.50 an hour and you can't get by, get another job. I grew up in a single parent household and my mother worked three jobs to take care of us four kids. I've worked the equivalent of two full time jobs (80hrs.+) for years, as have millions of others. If you only want to work 40 hrs. a week, well La Dee friggin' Da. My heart bleeds for you. Nobody owes you anything. You want to make more money? Get valuable first.
If everyone at Mickey D's is making $15 an hour what the heck is one of those crappy burgers going to cost?


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

MO_cows said:


> No. I sincerely doubt the burger flippers have communicated with the president. The speech where he called for the raise in minimum wage was no doubt motivational to the burger flipper "movement" but I don't see a conspiracy here.
> 
> The lefties are beating the drum of "income inequality" now. Because, you know, they already fixed health care (insert tongue in cheek) and are moving on. So in that regard it IS all tied together.


I'm not stating there is a conspiracy. I was saying that the protests in the name of McDonalds workers, and fast food workers in general have been aimed at government to increase the minimum wage. It is not good faith negotiations between employer and employee, it is workers trying to circumvent negotiations and use government to get what they desire.

I encourage every worker to access what they deliver, what the value of their labor is and what the cost of the next viable alternative is and go after the best benefits they can. That is a free market. But what I am seeing is something akin to "we've pulled together a large voting block, please see to our demands".


----------



## ErinP (Aug 23, 2007)

> is it possible that a full time employee (35-39 hours per week in Europe) earning a minimum wage would fall into one of those categories?


Absolutely. 

What people often forget is that the American taxpayer is _already_ heavily subsidizing the minimum wage. 
We'll be generous and say a single-parent family of three averaging $11 an hour. (Ie, she's working a MW job, but has "moved up" a little)

That comes up to $440 a week, or $22800 a year. 
If she's lucky, Dad's not a deadbeat and is contributing a mediocre child-support payment for those two kids. If she's not?...well, tough. 

That income level is getting fully subsidized health care coverage, daycare costs, food stamps, EIC, pays _no_ income taxes, (in the US a family of four has to make about $_50K_ before they pay a penny in income tax), probably qualifies for a host of other assistances like utility or rent assistance, home-owner's repair costs, etc. 

Remember: This is someone who is _working full time_. 
This is not some welfare mama sitting on her duff collecting her check and popping out more kids, but we're supporting her nonetheless because WalMart isn't going to pay any more than they absolutely have to and she doesn't have the skills to get something better. (Or the time to aquire them)


----------



## just_sawing (Jan 15, 2006)

My Sawmill pays 10 cents per board foot. Period
I get 30 cents per board foot for sawing and what the help gets is one third. My mill in capable of doing 6000 feet a day if the help pushes (My wage is not part of that) 
I work by myself because the average help on my mill complains and produces the equivalent of 6-8 dollars and hours at 10 cents. 
A cross tie has 50 feet in it and one person that sets his area up can off bear 25 in four hours figure it out. 
If a restaurant paid their employees a percentage then I can see the worker at the restaurant making really good money. If I was there I would be taking care of the customer and there would be more coming back. That is the bases of paying a waitress 2.30 an hour because she takes care of her people and the tips take care of her. I only wish companies would be more open with what the bottom line was as I am open my mill so if the worker wants more he understands what is needed.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

I started in in fast food in high school when minimum wage was $1.65 an hour.
Hamburgers were 19 cents, as were fries and regular soft drinks.
Every time minimum wage rose, so did prices. 

Frankly I don't think fast food workers deserve more, but I do believe many executives deserve less. Multi-million dollar salaries while they run companies into the ground.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Why stop at $15 per hour if that is fare then $20 per hour will be more fair or maybe $50 per hour and then every body would be rich and wold not have to work their hineyes off at some job they hate.:gaptooth:


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

You pull into your local drive thru and does it really matter if your order taker is inside the building or in a call center in India? Think about that one for a while

I've seen places where you punch your order into a computer screen and put your money into the slot .

Taco Bell was actively working on a machine that made your menu items - not sure if they still are but it was the vision of the CEO a few years back. They stopped making food on premises a couple decades back and now just heat or reconstitute them on premises.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

I ate at a Taco Bell a couple of months ago. Reconstituted food is a nice way to say it.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

ErinP said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> What people often forget is that the American taxpayer is _already_ heavily subsidizing the minimum wage.
> We'll be generous and say a single-parent family of three averaging $11 an hour. (Ie, she's working a MW job, but has "moved up" a little)
> ...


Are you sure about that? Poverty level for family of 3 is $19,790. She's above that, before child support. Most states, she isn't going to qualify for Medicaid. If her full time employer offers a health plan, she can't get an Obamacare subsidized plan, either. Are all those other benefits available to people earning above the poverty line?


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

mnn2501 said:


> You pull into your local drive thru and does it really matter if your order taker is inside the building or in a call center in India? Think about that one for a while
> 
> I've seen places where you punch your order into a computer screen and put your money into the slot .
> 
> Taco Bell was actively working on a machine that made your menu items - not sure if they still are but it was the vision of the CEO a few years back. They stopped making food on premises a couple decades back and now just heat or reconstitute them on premises.


Call centers are already taking orders at fast food drive thrus in some places:

http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/home/story.php?id=31789



> San Diego-based Jack in the Box has tested outsourced drive-through order-taking since mid-2008 at seven of its 30 Charlotte, N.C.-area restaurants. Spokeswoman Kathleen Anthony declined to specify the locations, though workers at the Cotswold restaurant in Charlotte recently said it uses the system.
> 
> The technology is intended to improve speed, accuracy and service, freeing up restaurant employees to process orders, accept payment and address other needs, Anthony said. The chain has not reduced staffing as a result of the remote order-taking, and the restaurants can turn the system on and off as they wish, she said.
> 
> Still, it's piqued curiosity among local customers who have encountered heavy accents with order-takers, then rounded the bend to find different people handing them food.


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

secuono said:


> Fast food kids are worked to the bone and treated like crap. Get sick too often, fired, get injured or complain about bad conditions, fired, don't get along with someone, fired. Work 8hrs, they ask you to stay 2hrs more, then 1hr more and more. Forget having school or not being a robot, the heck they care. You're cheap labor. No AC, who cares, drink more water. You drink more water, they yell at you for drinking water and not working or having to go take a piss. No one cares about complaints, no one believes you and no one wants to loose their crap job, so they won't back you up.


Probably not exclusive of fast food only. These are also reasons why people decide to become self employed.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

When those folks showed up in McDonalds uniforms everyone cotton picken one of them should be FIRED on the spot, no ifs ands or buts about it. Fire EM All.~! They disrespected their place of employment. Not making enough GET another job.
Not making enough, get yourself up in the ranks and go to a nice family restaurant. PERIOD.


----------



## FeralFemale (Apr 10, 2006)

Since economic arguments don't work about increasing ff workers' wage to min $15/hr, how about an emotional argument? 

You had a really bad day at work. You are PMSing and jonesing for mcnuggets. You wait in a really long drive through line. After waiting behind a car with two people in it that, literally, take 5 - 10 minutes to order, you finally get to give yours: I'd like a mcnugget meal with a coke and bbq sauce.

The voice on the other end gives you your total and tells you to drive around where you wait another 5-10 minutes to pay and go to the window where you get your food.

You grab it, thank them, and drive on...but wait...you've been given a wrong order many times before so you check your bag....and have to go back in side because they gave you a freaking big mac meal. 

I'm sorry, but if you cant even get a simple order correct, you do not deserve 15 flipping bucks an hour. I don't eat fast food much at all, but when I do the ff workers seem to mess it up more often than not.

You get paid what your skills are worth. Most of those folks are not worth 15/hr.

That is not to say that I haven't had excellent and friendly service at a ff place, lately...just that it is so rare that I am flabbergasted when I do.

ETA: And, and this isn't the workers' fault at all, but I just have to say that mcnuggets are bovine excrement since they switched to all white meat. I loved the dark, gristley mcnuggets. Stupid McD's.


----------



## wally (Oct 9, 2007)

You know what, i dont visit fast food places, dont care what they pay the workers, if they want to work there they can , if they dont like the pay dont take the job, or use it as a stepping stone to a better paying job..low paying jobs are not a way of supporting your family


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> I suppose the appropriate people to ask would be the franchise owners of the organization being protested. This would be the same franchise owners who recently spent a week in Orlando being wined and dined by various vendors vying for their business. The same franchise owners who were treated to concerts by Adam Levine and Sting and who had a major theme park opened solely for their pleasure one evening. I don't know whether the workers are worth more. I do know they have every right to ask for more and organize towards that goal.


If it's such a good deal, why don't the whining burger flippers borrow the money and open their own franchises and run them as they see fit? They have no right to a raise or even a job. They should EARN their worth. I've seen fast food workers I wouldn't have on the premises and I have seen very good ones. I notice the good ones don't stay long because they find something better. The dregs stay until they get fired for continually screwing up or regularly fail to show up for work.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

No matter how much they are paid, they deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

I see fully automated fast food in the near future. Ask the telephone operators union and the meter readers union how well demanding premium pay for unskilled labor worked out for them.The rabid socialist dividers need to be stopped.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Fast Food is no longer an entry level Job work by your Teenager after school and during the Summer. It is worked by your 30 year old Father of 3 trying to pay serious Bills.

Why because the Jobs these people were working left the country. Not saying $15 an hour but much more than they are making.

big rockpile


----------



## ErinP (Aug 23, 2007)

MO_cows said:


> Are you sure about that? Poverty level for family of 3 is $19,790. She's above that, before child support. Most states, she isn't going to qualify for Medicaid. If her full time employer offers a health plan, she can't get an Obamacare subsidized plan, either. Are all those other benefits available to people earning above the poverty line?


Yep. 
Most of those "benefits" apply to people in the 100-130% of poverty range. Which, for a family of 3 is a little more than $24K annually. And no, she won't qualify for Medicaid, she'll qualify for subsidized medical coverage (Obamacare). Most minimum wage jobs don't include health coverage.


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

where I want to said:


> Around here police can make a hundred thousand a year and teachers $70 to 80 thousand per year for essentually part time work. When you know that, I guess $15 per hour looks really appropriate.


The cost of living where you are probably makes it that the cops make about the median income. And if you think teachers are "essentially" part time workers, you've never been a teacher.  Every teacher I know works at least 10 hours a day if not more. Yes, some have off during the summer but they get paid for when they work so they either don't get paid during the summer or they get smaller paychecks during the year so that it's paid year-round. Also remember that a teacher needs a masters degree - so it's not like they are uneducated flunkies making $80,000 a year. The earn every penny of that money!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Shrek said:


> Fast food jobs should be only short term part time minimum wage plus a buck or so in raises jobs to prepare teenage workers for other jobs. Those who choose to restrict themselves to those fast food jobs should accept the lower wages those jobs typically offer.
> 
> I have known many with inadequate for the real world education who worked fast food jobs and furthered their education through night classes and eventually got away from the fast food jobs.
> 
> ...



The reason so many adults are in fast food jobs is because there aren't any other jobs. It's not like they just want to work at McDonald's.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> The reason so many adults are in fast food jobs is because there aren't any other jobs. It's not like they just want to work at McDonald's.


Sure there are! One has to want WORK instead of standing there asking "would you like mustard on that"! It's easier to work at a fast food joint and complain about the wages. It's also typically more convenient!


----------



## 65284 (Sep 17, 2003)

big rockpile said:


> Fast Food is no longer an entry level Job work by your Teenager after school and during the Summer. It is worked by your 30 year old Father of 3 trying to pay serious Bills.
> 
> Why because the Jobs these people were working left the country. Not saying $15 an hour but much more than they are making.
> 
> big rockpile


 
Why do you suppose those jobs left the country?


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

A small town independent soft serve ice crÃ¨me cone and hamburger and chicken finger dinner fast food joint owner where I eat when down south fishing never pays his employees more than minimum wage plus up to a quarter an hour raise for performance a few times a year and only wants employees to spend a maximum of four years or so with him. During their 2 years employment until they are 20 he finds which ones are planning to go to college and offers to pay their books and tuition if they show him a viable course of study and keep their grades at a 3.0. With his business connections through his diversified investments he usually helps open job opportunity doors for many of them.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> The reason so many adults are in fast food jobs is because there aren't any other jobs. It's not like they just want to work at McDonald's.


A lot of them DO want to work there. I personally know some, mainly women, who only want part time work with very little responsibility. I doubt any of them need the income. They just want something to get them out of the house and still be home with their kids after school.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

> ETA: And, and this isn't the workers' fault at all, but I just have to say that mcnuggets are bovine excrement since they switched to all white meat. I loved the dark, gristley mcnuggets. Stupid McD's.


My lady friend has considered protesting them because they stopped selling chicken selects. I don't think I ever had those, but apparently they were that good.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I just can't help but remember that not so long ago there were several people who felt that Wonder Bread employees weren't worth $12 an hour. Of course the Wonder Bread employees were full time and got benefits but that was a very difficult job.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

big rockpile said:


> Fast Food is no longer an entry level Job work by your Teenager after school and during the Summer. It is worked by your 30 year old Father of 3 trying to pay serious Bills.
> 
> Why because the Jobs these people were working left the country. Not saying $15 an hour but much more than they are making.
> 
> big rockpile


If that is the case then go get TWO jobs at fast food places.. You DO whatever it takes to make a living without DEMANDING a Out Of This World Wage`!
Entry Leverl is just THAT entry level. Get trained and move on~!


----------



## Mattemma (Jan 1, 2013)

Yes the are worth more.Try doing their job for a month. It is not easy.

In my opinion front line workers deserve far more pay than they are getting. Would it be sooo horrible for CEO's to limit THEIR income to 1 million or less a year,so the REAL workers of the company get a decent wage?

When did it become ok for bosses to openly screw the workers? Oh yeah that would be something that always has occured,but under the veil of democracy we somehow made it acceptable.The masses are kept at bay with food,entertainment,and drugs.Sure they complain about conditions,but in the end the CEO's and government workers still get their bonuses,and we pay for it.

Look at the recent VA scandal.They act like it is something new that veterns are screwed while the VA officals write bonuses for each other.It is not new.We use and abuse each other,and some do it while smiling.When it is exposed they acted shocked,and pick a fall guy so we move on.

Remember Hostess bakery and their financial woes?!? People were laid off,or had wages decreased while the CEO earned around 100k a month. Banks bailed out on our dime.Government subsidies to big farm companies while local farms are raided by the USDA.

So yeah workers deserve a raise,but if they get it the CEO's will pass the cost on to the working poor rather than take a cut from their millions.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

65284 said:


> I suppose you have no idea how much of an investment it takes to secure a franchise and open a McDonalds? I suppose the appropiate people to ask would the franchise owners that risk close to a million dollars by the time they open the doors, with absolutely no guarantee of any return on that investment or even to recoup it. Oh yeah, they also have to put up with whiny, demanding employees.
> 
> What do the protesting burger flippers have invested, bus fare to work? Boo hoo hoo the owners are making a lot of money, gimmie, gimmie, gimmie, another classic wealth redistribution demand.
> 
> ...


I know the investment of time and money McDonalds franchise owners make quite well. I am personally acquainted with more than a few of them. I've even had conversations about wages and working conditions with a few of them. The ones I've met and talked to aren't bad people intent on exploiting their workers. That's not to say there aren't bad owners out there who bend and break workplace regulations to benefit their bottom line. News reports suggest they exist. The owners I know are good business people. They realize the $1M or more invested in a new franchise or the $2M+ needed to buy out an existing franchise are pretty safe investments which is why many own multiple franchises or have brought their children into to business. Most seem to run their businesses well and derive a pretty good income from it and some pretty impressive perks at corporate events. I also know a few execs at Mcd's corporate headquarters. I've even eaten and drank quite lavishly on one if their expense accounts. They've worked hard to get where their at and are compensated quite well for their efforts. I simply pointed out a bit of the dichotomy between their lifestyle and that of most of their workers.

I don't presume to know what every worker is worth. I do know that the owners I know are proud of the successes of their employees and will tell anyone who will listen about those they've given scholarship help to and those who started out at the fryer and are now managers. I also know that they're less anxious to talk about those struggling to get by. I do have a problem with those here who seem to feel that no one has the right to ask more of their employer. That employees should be happy to accept whatever is offered them by the bosses. I feel that people have the right to ask for a bigger share of the pie that wouldn't exist without them and to organize with others to achieve their goal of that bigger slice.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

How about we look at this subject from a different light?

McDonalds has to stay cost competitive with it's competition right? If they try to get too greedy in profits on their products consumers will, and should, seek more attractive alternatives. Why not apply this same logic to an employee working a labor position?

A McDonalds worker will only be able to be obtain pay equal to the lowest someone else is willing to accept for the same job. That's the way it should be. While everyone is talking about the poor worker who can't afford shoes for their children on $7.25 an hour there are others who would be more than happy to work that job for that wage. Why should they be denied that opportunity?

This is the way it has been. It's why garbage collectors are well compensated; nobody else wants to work that job for less. It's why doctors are paid better; nobody is willing to invest that much in education and training for less. This is also why Unions are so powerful. Unions make it so others are _denied_ the opportunity to work for less. It gives bargaining power to the current work force by removing competition.

That is the problem McDonalds employees are facing in asking for higher wages. There are plenty of other people who can perform the same job and are willing to accept less pay. It's why they are seeking a legislative solution rather than a bargaining one.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

This isn't about if the workers are worth the money, but rather is the money worth the money?

I've been working at the same place now for 7 years making good money.. but I've had less and less money. Especially over the last couple years.. Yes, I've gotten between 2 and 3% raises, but everything else out there has gone up more than that. I'm not even making cost of living increases.. 

So, I say yes, they deserve more.. They are actually making less thanks to the federal reserve devaluing our money.. 

If the companies aren't happy about higher minimum wages, then maybe they need to rethink how our monetary system in this country works..


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

I just have to ask . How many people on here really eat at these places ???

I will admit I get a chili at Wendys once in a while because I cant make it that good.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I do every now and then.. usually when I'm on the road to the farm or back... fast and convenient... and it's not too hard to hold a cheezbooger while driving.. .


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

If the fast food worker gets a big raise then what about the person that is making $12.00 an hour? Doesn't he get an equal raise? Doesn't everyone? Fast food is an entry level job, if you choose to stay there is it McDonald's fault? It is certainly an easier job than many, a nurses aid doesn't make much more starting out, and that takes a lot more work and training. If someone doesn't like their job they can look for another one.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Coming soon to the US?

*Battling Higher Minimum Wages: McDonald's Just Bought Touch Screen Cashier Kiosks for Its 7,000 European Locations*

As government intervention via minimum wage laws and other labor regulations make it more expensive to higher low skilled employees, more and more employers are turning to automation.


http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/05/battling-higher-minimum-wages-mcdonalds.html


----------



## ErinP (Aug 23, 2007)

JeffreyD said:


> Sure there are! One has to want WORK instead of standing there asking "would you like mustard on that"! It's easier to work at a fast food joint and complain about the wages. It's also typically more convenient!


:huh:
I'm going to guess _you've_ never done fast food. (Or WalMart, or any of the other myriad of minimum wage jobs out there). Because the above reads like someone who doesn't have a clue what they're talking about. 

These types of jobs tend to be hard on your feet, your back and your shoulders because you're on your feet for 8-10 hours straight. And with fast food you smell perpetually of the fryer.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Molly Mckee said:


> If the fast food worker gets a big raise then what about the person that is making $12.00 an hour? Doesn't he get an equal raise? Doesn't everyone? Fast food is an entry level job, if you choose to stay there is it McDonald's fault? It is certainly an easier job than many, a nurses aid doesn't make much more starting out, and that takes a lot more work and training. If someone doesn't like their job they can look for another one.


 You bet it will FILE those malcontents and Eliminate their jobs all together. That will teach them now they can SIT home and collect Free Government Money. They won;t go out and better themselves just live off the tax payers.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> You pull into your local drive thru and does it really matter if your order taker is inside the building or in a call center in India? Think about that one for a while
> 
> I've seen places where you punch your order into a computer screen and put your money into the slot .
> 
> Taco Bell was actively working on a machine that made your menu items - not sure if they still are but it was the vision of the CEO a few years back. They stopped making food on premises a couple decades back and now just heat or reconstitute them on premises.


One of the fast food chains in the western U.S.already routes their drive thru orders to a multistate call center which then programs the orders to the overhead displays in the prep area of the store the customer is ordering from.

I forget which chain it was but their spokesman said in the article I read about 5 years back that use of a centralized call center and remote order programming allowed each store to eliminate three to 6 employees with less expense than making the drive thru order box a customer operated key entry station as the multistate network was less expensive to maintain than individual store intranets and it also streamlined the inventory restock network of the chain.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Shrek said:


> A small town independent soft serve ice crÃ¨me cone and hamburger and chicken finger dinner fast food joint owner where I eat when down south fishing never pays his employees more than minimum wage plus up to a quarter an hour raise for performance a few times a year and only wants employees to spend a maximum of four years or so with him. During their 2 years employment until they are 20 he finds which ones are planning to go to college and offers to pay their books and tuition if they show him a viable course of study and keep their grades at a 3.0. With his business connections through his diversified investments he usually helps open job opportunity doors for many of them.


Sounds like a great guy. And hopefully some of his proteges will pay it forward.

Small businesses do have more heart and soul than Corporate America. Do business with mom and pop every chance you get, it's good for everyone! Well, everyone except the 10 million a year CEOs, but they'll be OK.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Even national chains pay their GOOD HELP more then minimum.
I visit a Perkins quite often, and have since the mid 70's~!
And there are two waitresses there that have been there for over 40 years~! And so friendly and helpful. You can't tell me that huge chain like that keeps these good folks at a low wage`!
40 years is a very long time and that takes in some very good years in the US economy as well as WI and many companies that pay way over minimum wage YET these two have stuck to Perkins restaurant for all these years.
And one of them has a very very very good memory too`!
I was living in AZ for 10 years came back here and stopped in at my favorite Perkins and low and behold one of these that have stayed so long asked me if I want my normal order. She not only remembered me but what I order~!
Now that is a person worth keeping IMO, and Perkins has done just that~!
And I bet they make Way above minimum wage and make a lot of tips besides.

People have to learn to Improve themselves and be people friendly, not waiting on you with sideways cap on and a beard and dirty looking~!


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Shrek said:


> One of the fast food chains in the western U.S.already routes their drive thru orders to a multistate call center which then programs the orders to the overhead displays in the prep area of the store the customer is ordering from.
> 
> I forget which chain it was but their spokesman said in the article I read about 5 years back that use of a centralized call center and remote order programming allowed each store to eliminate three to 6 employees with less expense than making the drive thru order box a customer operated key entry station as the multistate network was less expensive to maintain than individual store intranets and it also streamlined the inventory restock network of the chain.


I can't see the call center working out for very long. It is hard enough to understand a person with good English on one of those squawk boxes, trying to muddle thru the accent to get a darn cheeseburger would cause people to say never mind and leave. When sales drop, all the advantages are lost. 

The wave of the future will be - semi self service! Pull up to a touch screen and place your order, swipe your card, and drive to the pickup window. Especially the places that already have 2 drive thru stations, easy peasy conversion. One for cash sales and/or you just want a person to take the order, the 2nd one for self order/self pay. 

There has been a lot of talk about how unskilled those fast food workers are, but at the McD's I visit once in a while, the person at the first window is wearing a head set and taking the orders, while taking payments/making change at the same time. That does take some grey matter and attention to detail. They aren't all mindless zombies.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

arabian knight said:


> Even national chains pay their GOOD HELP more then minimum.
> I visit a Perkins quite often, and have since the mid 70's~!
> And there are two waitresses there that have been there for over 40 years~! And so friendly and helpful. *You can't tell me that huge chain like that keeps these good folks at a low wage`!*
> 40 years is a very long time and that takes in some very good years in the US economy as well as WI and many companies that pay way over minimum wage YET these two have stuck to Perkins restaurant for all these years.
> ...


I'm telling you, they do! Ask one of your favorite long term waitresses, excuse me, if you don't mind saying, how much do they pay you an hour? You'll be shocked. 

When you are a server, your money is made via tips. Your paycheck is squat, it's how much you have in your pocket after every shift that matters. Especially because taxes are withheld from the paycheck for not just the salary but the tips too.

A good server, at a busy restaurant that turns a lot of tables, can take home $300 a shift easy. While they probably made $3 an hour for that same shift on their salary.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

To answer the question, I don't know if they're worth it. Probably not to me. I wouldn't pay more for that food than it is now. Paying the workers more will raise the price. If I'm going to pay more, I'll just get better food somewhere else.

But there's one very simple way to find out if they're worth it...give it to them and see what happens. They'll quickly find out the truth about whether they are worth it.


----------



## SLFarmMI (Feb 21, 2013)

Before you ask are fast food workers worth $15 (or whatever) an hour, you really need to ask the question "What skills do they bring to the table that are worth that rate?" And the honest answer is that the job really isn't that demanding skill-wise and does not justify that rate of pay. For those of you who are wondering why the CEOs make so much, ask the same question. Those CEOs bring certain managerial and financial skills to the table that make them that valuable to their companies. Additionally, much of their compensation is in the form of stock options so it isn't a true comparison to the salary of the minimum wage worker.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

ErinP said:


> :huh:
> I'm going to guess _you've_ never done fast food. (Or WalMart, or any of the other myriad of minimum wage jobs out there). Because the above reads like someone who doesn't have a clue what they're talking about.
> 
> These types of jobs tend to be hard on your feet, your back and your shoulders because you're on your feet for 8-10 hours straight. And with fast food you smell perpetually of the fryer.


You'll be guessing wrong! My first job was moving film in a depository when I was 12. Film is heavy. Next job was at KFC. Then making pizzas. I also worked at facility maintenance. .14 hrs a day, 6 or 7 days a week...never sat down. ..machines run at 400 to 600 degrees... building inside temp steady at 90 degrees year round. Over 3 months straight with no days off.

I choose those jobs and I'm glad I had the experience. I learned that I needed to get out of minimum wage jobs, so I got an education and experience. Now I own my own companies. If I can do it so can others....they just have to want to do it bad enough. Crying for more money....isn't the way to prosperity! Do you really think that a cashier at McDonald's who can't make change for a 10 spot when the bill is $9.85, should get paid more than a nurse? Really? It's absurd!


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

Well.. considering the CEO of McDonalds makes more than $9200 an hour... I say they should pay the employee's a little more.. I mean come on.. seriously.. who is really worth $9200 an hour????

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mcdonalds-starbucks-ceos-more-9-110100507.html


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> I'm telling you, they do! Ask one of your favorite long term waitresses, excuse me, if you don't mind saying, how much do they pay you an hour? You'll be shocked.
> 
> When you are a server, your money is made via tips. Your paycheck is squat, it's how much you have in your pocket after every shift that matters. Especially because taxes are withheld from the paycheck for not just the salary but the tips too.
> 
> A good server, at a busy restaurant that turns a lot of tables, can take home $300 a shift easy. While they probably made $3 an hour for that same shift on their salary.


I asked my favorite waitress how much do you take home! She works at Denny's and Chili's. She makes twice as much at Denny's because they turn seats over faster. And your right, at Denny's, she takes home about $1500.00 a week and another $800 from Chili's. That's pretty good pay if you ask me! Sure, she's on her feet a lot, but she likes it!

Eta: She also gets to eat free!!


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

TripleD said:


> I just have to ask . How many people on here really eat at these places ???
> 
> I will admit I get a chili at Wendys once in a while because I cant make it that good.


Sure you can!! Here's my recipe - it makes a TON and you could put enough in your freezer to feed you for months!! I put them in 2 cup containers which is roughly the size of a can so the kids can easily pull one out for dinner any time they want. 

http://cookingonthesound.blogspot.com/2011/04/annies-crockpot-chili.html


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

simi-steading said:


> Well.. considering the CEO of McDonalds makes more than $9200 an hour... I say they should pay the employee's a little more.. I mean come on.. seriously.. who is really worth $9200 an hour????
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mcdonalds-starbucks-ceos-more-9-110100507.html


Well, he certainly didn't drop out of high school and walk into that job. That's the difference. He got an education, absolutely worked hard hours and put a lot of time and effort into it. That's what people are forgetting when they say "CEO's make so much money - why can't their employees??" We're talking apples and oranges here!


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

Annsni said:


> Well, he certainly didn't drop out of high school and walk into that job. That's the difference. He got an education, absolutely worked hard hours and put a lot of time and effort into it. That's what people are forgetting when they say "CEO's make so much money - why can't their employees??" We're talking apples and oranges here!


Yeah. maybe, but no, not really.. 

Take a look at the chart on the site I posted... Mickey's has the highest paid CEO and the lowest paid employees of all the companies they list... The ratio pretty much sucks... To me, that decides how cheap a company is...


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

simi-steading said:


> Well.. considering the CEO of McDonalds makes more than $9200 an hour... I say they should pay the employee's a little more.. I mean come on.. seriously.. who is really worth $9200 an hour????
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mcdonalds-starbucks-ceos-more-9-110100507.html


I assume you are joking???

If not, I don't buy into the wealth envy concept.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

Somewhere along the line we have allowed the narrative to change from an entry level minimum wage job being a temporary stepping stone towards a living wage career, to an entry level job being a living wage job.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Oh ya once again those that have no argument drop back to War On The Rich.,
That is so old that it is moldy now. Just as bad as everything that has happened and is happening is Bush's fault. Can't find the truth and see the truth and let those that made something of themselves alone, just drop back and blame someone else besides blaming those lazy ones that can't even make change without the help of the computer let them stay in low pay cause they are not worth any more some even less~!


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

They can't make a living ==== Give up their Smart Phones.

They can't make a living ==== give up cable

They can't make a living on the wages=== Don't go out and get a new car or nearly new one as soon as you get that job at Mickey D's.

Can't make it at MC's==== then Move on. Get yourself WORTH something so a employer will pay you more~!
And the list goes on and on.


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> They can't make a living ==== Give up their Smart Phones.
> 
> They can't make a living ==== give up cable
> 
> ...


When we can go to a different country and get a true perspective of what poor really is, we're still going to have these people screaming how poor they are with satellite dishes and smart phones. Seriously - we go to Nicaragua where the people make a living sifting through the trash. Their water supply is the water on the ground in the dump. This is in Managua. Parents sell their daughters to the garbage truck drivers so that they have first dibs on what comes out of the truck. THAT is poor. I'm sorry but we have so many ways to get above that kind of poverty that it's ridiculous.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

arabian knight said:


> Oh ya once again those that have no argument drop back to War On The Rich.,
> That is so old that it is moldy now. Just as bad as everything that has happened and is happening is Bush's fault. Can't find the truth and see the truth and let those that made something of themselves alone, just drop back and blame someone else besides blaming those lazy ones that can't even make change without the help of the computer let them stay in low pay cause they are not worth any more some even less~!


If you are referring to Simi's post I didn't take it this way. It didn't sound as if he is begrudging the CEO that money.

I tend to agree that upper management is over valued in the US. The point is, not that I wish to limit how much the CEO makes, but _what does he / she bring to the table that warrents that compensation_. This is the same litmus test I apply to the minimum wage question.

I have met several CEOs which make more in a day than I do in a years time. A couple were highly intelligent and I considered smart leaders of their companies. Others seemed to just have this "machismo" about them but didn't demonstrate any more knowledge or ability than some high-school graduates.

The fact is, if I owned a company I believe I would take 9 people making 1000$/hr over the one making 9200$/hr. I think I would be able to find just as good of talent.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

> The fact is, if I owned a company I believe I would take 9 people making 1000$/hr over the one making 9200$/hr. I think I would be able to find just as good of talent.


Running a company by committee is a recipe for disaster, so you need someone to manage those nine people. The type of person able to manage a bunch of people who make $1000/hour is worth much more than $1000/hour.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

simi-steading said:


> Well.. considering the CEO of McDonalds makes more than $9200 an hour... I say they should pay the employee's a little more.. I mean come on.. seriously.. who is really worth $9200 an hour????
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mcdonalds-starbucks-ceos-more-9-110100507.html


And exactly what is the "proper" ratio between someone who can walk in off the street and be trained in a day to do the job, versus the "captain of the ship" who has the fate of the whole empire on their shoulders??? 

Personally, yes, I think a lot of CEOs are way overpaid, too, especially considering how their companies are doing profit-wise and also perception-wise. But that's the culture of corporate America. Anybody who is anybody has a big name CEO and pays them obscene amounts of money. Just like having a big shiny building with the logo on it and corporate jets. It's a symbol of the success and power of the company. 

It's up to the stockholders and the board of directors of each company to decide, not us and definitely not the govt, how much their CEO is worth.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

I am always amazed at the number of people who have never ran a business that know the best way to do it. If someone wants to redistribute the wealth they should lead by example. I'll wait for my check.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

JJ Grandits said:


> I am always amazed at the number of people who have never ran a business that know the best way to do it. If someone wants to redistribute the wealth they should lead by example. I'll wait for my check.


I'm not asking for wealth redistribution. I would however appreciate the government not bailing out companies when their high prices super duper CEO runs then into bankruptcy. Maybe then stockholders would think twice about where company money is being spent.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

I think the "big picture" answer is, don't go looking for work at the bottom rung of some huge corporation! They will chew you up and spit you out every time. 

Figure out what skills you have that are marketable and try to start a micro business. 

Network through your family, friends, family of friends, let everyone know you are looking for an "opportunity". A lot of jobs never even get advertised, they are filled by word of mouth. It's not what you know, it's who you know, is still true. 

If more people had the gumption to try their own little business, or put in the effort to network and explore all their opportunities, then those fast food jobs WOULD pay more because there wouldn't be an endless supply of warm bodies to fill them.


----------



## okiemom (May 12, 2002)

just because someone is a ceo doesn't mean they will stay one. they too get fired. not only that is they have no time off. yes they may be in exotic locals but they are on the phone laptop or whatever on call 24/7. Now the wives on the other hand..... sweet deal. if one wants to be married and alone.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I eat at fast food places. I don't cook or wash dishes during the weeks where I'm putting in more than 60 hours and I make no apologies for it.

Whah booh hoo, on their feet for their shift. So am I and my shifts are usually 12 hours. Nurses are on their feet for their entire shift. Many people are on their feet doing strenuous jobs for 8 hours or more a day. Should a cop make less than a McD's worker because he gets to sit in an air-conditioned car all day instead of being on his feet? 

McD's here pays very well, more than minimum wage. They paid well when my dh worked there to earn money so he could get his college degree. If employees aren't happy with their wages they can go somewhere else and do something else. Fast food jobs were never intended to be the kind of job you support a family on.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

JeffreyD said:


> Sure there are! One has to want WORK instead of standing there asking "would you like mustard on that"! It's easier to work at a fast food joint and complain about the wages. It's also typically more convenient!


Yeah because all of those 40 year olds with degrees and solid middle management work histories are just there because it is easier. 

Back in 2008 the economy crashed and a lot of jobs never came back.


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Yeah because all of those 40 year olds with degrees and solid middle management work histories are just there because it is easier.
> 
> Back in 2008 the economy crashed and a lot of jobs never came back.


How many McD workers are 40 year olds with solid middle management work histories?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Yeah because all of those 40 year olds with degrees and solid middle management work histories are just there because it is easier.
> 
> Back in 2008 the economy crashed and a lot of jobs never came back.


Well, I see plenty of good paying job openings, but it's hard work and some of those 40 year old are used to sitting and not hard physical labor, but, it is after all, their decision isn't it? :shrug: 

I have yet to experience McDonald's employees other than management, that are over 20. Just an observation!


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

simi-steading said:


> Well.. considering the CEO of McDonalds makes more than $9200 an hour... I say they should pay the employee's a little more.. I mean come on.. seriously.. who is really worth $9200 an hour????
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mcdonalds-starbucks-ceos-more-9-110100507.html


Let's do the math. The CEO makes $9200 an hour. McDonald's has 35,000 employees. If we fire the CEO and divide his pay among the workers, how much of a raise will they get? I don't think it will be quite enough to get them to $15.00 an hour. And, if we give them $15.00 an hour, prices will have to go up for burgers. What happens to the guy mowing yards for $12.00 an hour who likes to buy a burger for lunch? He and many like him will decide they can't afford it and just bring a peanut butter sandwich from home. The result? Sales will decline as people are priced out of the market and McDonald's will have fewer people on the payroll. Fast food joints are already hurting here. They have all raised prices due to inflation in food prices and aren't nearly as busy as they used to be.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

JeffreyD said:


> Well, I see plenty of good paying job openings, but it's hard work and some of those 40 year old are used to sitting and not hard physical labor, but, it is after all, their decision isn't it? :shrug:
> 
> I have yet to experience McDonald's employees other than management, that are over 20. Just an observation!


We have an 18 year old granddaughter working there since Pizza Hut went out of business a couple months ago. We joke that she drove their customers away. Beautiful girl with the personality of a rattlesnake. They do have an older lady who has worked the drive through for quite a while. She has a pained look on her face like it is torture to wait on you and she has that lazy eye thing going on. Can't ever tell if she is looking at you or something across the road.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

simi-steading said:


> Well.. considering the CEO of McDonalds makes more than $9200 an hour... I say they should pay the employee's a little more.. I mean come on.. seriously.. who is really worth $9200 an hour????
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/mcdonalds-starbucks-ceos-more-9-110100507.html


A guy who brings in billions for the investors maybe? I wish I could get him for 9200 an hour. He is worth every penny.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

Wayne02 said:


> Somewhere along the line we have allowed the narrative to change from an entry level minimum wage job being a temporary stepping stone towards a living wage career, to an entry level job being a living wage job.


Some like the easier work is my guess. My son and a friend both landed a job at a construction company a few years back, both making good pay $12 per hour. His friend worked there almost 2 weeks and quit, then got a job at Little Ceasar's for almost half the pay because it wasn't as hard.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

I worked at a fast food place for a short time when I was 16. Mainly because a couple of my friends did, the main problem for me was the mind numbing sameness of the work. Was it physically demanding not hardly. The pay was not bad, for what we did. Worked there 6 months, than decided it was a waste of time and went to work for the local feed store. Learned a lot more about business and customer service. Also good pay, but hard work.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Mattemma said:


> Yes the are worth more.Try doing their job for a month. It is not easy.


Are you kidding? I've worked in the industry from new hire picking the cigarette butts out of the gravel along the drive thru to management and it was some of the easiest work I've ever done. There were short periods of intense 'work' they were few and far between. 




Mattemma said:


> In my opinion front line workers deserve far more pay than they are getting. Would it be sooo horrible for CEO's to limit THEIR income to 1 million or less a year,so the REAL workers of the company get a decent wage?
> 
> Do you think its horrible that big league sports players get millions of dollars while the smuck hocking peanuts in the stands get next to nothing? Its called supply and demand. Only a very small number of people in the world can play sports at the pro level but almost anyone in the nation can hock peanuts. Its the same with burger flippers an CEOs.


As I said I worked in fast food and I could have counted the number of employees who could have even managed a single restaurant much less the entire company on both hands (and they were ALL students working their way through school).




Mattemma said:


> Look at the recent VA scandal.They act like it is something new that veterns are screwed while the VA officals write bonuses for each other.It is not new.We use and abuse each other,and some do it while smiling.When it is exposed they acted shocked,and pick a fall guy so we move on.


Government and private industry follow different rules.




Mattemma said:


> Remember Hostess bakery and their financial woes?!? People were laid off,or had wages decreased while the CEO earned around 100k a month. Banks bailed out on our dime.Government subsidies to big farm companies while local farms are raided by the USDA.


You think you could run a million dollar a year business? How about a multi-billion dollar multi-national one? Should you try to use cheaper ingredients so you can sell your cupcakes for less or do you keep the quality and expect that people will pay more for it? Remember if you make the wrong choice thousands of people will pay for your mistake.




Mattemma said:


> So yeah workers deserve a raise,but if they get it the CEO's will pass the cost on to the working poor rather than take a cut from their millions.


They deserve what they agree to when they take the job. If I offer you $10 to pick the dog poop out of my yard and you agree to do it don't start yelling about how you "deserve" more money, you agreed to the pay BEFORE you took the job and no one held a gun to your head to do it.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> Yeah because all of those 40 year olds with degrees and solid middle management work histories are just there because it is easier.
> 
> Back in 2008 the economy crashed and a lot of jobs never came back.


So, because those good paying jobs never came back, we need to upgrade entry level jobs to the pay level of those lost jobs? I don't even want to consider where that kind of logic would lead us.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Annsni said:


> How many McD workers are 40 year olds with solid middle management work histories?



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/n...increasingly-entering-fast-food-industry.html



> The classic image of the high-school student flipping Big Macs after class is sorely out of date. Because of lingering unemployment and a relative abundance of fast-food jobs, older workers are increasingly entering the industry. These days, according to the National Employment Law Project, the average age of fast-food workers is 29. Forty percent are 25 or older; 31 percent have at least attempted college; more than 26 percent are parents raising children. Union organizers say that one-third to one-half of them have more than one job â like Mr. Shoy, who is 58 and supports a wife and children.
> The fast-food industry says that what is going on here is a structural anomaly: that its wages were not intended to sustain a permanent work force â especially adults supporting families â and that it is happening because of larger economic forces. âThe minimum wage was never meant to be a living wage,â said Steve Caldeira, the president of the International Franchise Association, a trade group for restaurants and other franchised firms. âIt was meant, from the start, for entry-level workers and for those with lower skills.â


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/n...increasingly-entering-fast-food-industry.html


So, where's the middle management work history? That article says some attempted college. Fast food and other minimum wage jobs were never meant to be the sole source of income for a family. Folks need to stop complaining about how little their getting paid. If one job doesn't cut it, try 2 jobs. Taxpayers and the general public should not have to pay for the mistakes of others. I still don't see many folks over 25 working in these restaurants.


----------



## brreitsma (Jan 14, 2003)

Moo cluck moo and In and Out burger both prove the common worker can be paid decent and the restaurant still turn a decent profit. In retail Costco proves this well.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

brreitsma said:


> Moo cluck moo and In and Out burger both prove the common worker can be paid decent and the restaurant still turn a decent profit. In retail Costco proves this well.


What's a decent wage?


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

brreitsma said:


> Moo cluck moo and In and Out burger both prove the common worker can be paid decent and the restaurant still turn a decent profit. In retail Costco proves this well.


Great. Then before you know it McD's and Wal-Mart will be taken over by these other places and then all the workers can have their higher wages.


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

JeffreyD said:


> What's a decent wage?


Your daily bread (Matt. 6:11)


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I've seen older women working at Wendy's and there are some older women working at Long John Silvers. I don't go to McD's much because I don't speak enough Spanish to order food there. (seems like all our McD's jobs go to immigrants who can't speak English)


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

I remember back when Mercedes Benz took over Chrysler. The Chrysler boss made 6x (six times) as much as his German counterpart. And the mercedes guy was not poor. 
So was the Chrysler fella worth six times as much as the Mercedes boss? 

If someone works a full day, he ought to make enough money to make a living, maybe not a fancy living, but enough to keep body and soul together without having to resort to food stamps and basically having you and me subsidize the guy for wages he did not get from his company. 
Maybe the stockholders do not need to make so much off the labor of some poor sucker after all. Look at the profit margin.
The laborer is worthy of his hire..... so he is not as smart as you or did stupid things, missed opportunities, does not mean his labor should be exploited. 

PS Remember a few years ago a Home Depot CEO almost ran the company into the ground. We were shocked at the several millions he got severance pay. DH said if they hired him he would have ruined the company for half that amount.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Win07_351 said:


> Your daily bread (Matt. 6:11)


Not to be nasty but . . I've never seen anyone working at McDees who looked like they were starving, AAMOF most of them look like they should go a few days w/o their bread.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Tabitha said:


> I remember back when Mercedes Benz took over Chrysler. The Chrysler boss made 6x (six times) as much as his German counterpart. And the mercedes guy was not poor.
> So was the Chrysler fella worth six times as much as the Mercedes boss?
> 
> If someone works a full day, he ought to make enough money to make a living, maybe not a fancy living, but enough to keep body and soul together without having to resort to food stamps and basically having you and me subsidize the guy for wages he did not get from his company.
> ...


Ok why don't we make the minimum wage $25/hr? Or better yet set a minimum yearly wage of $50,000? After all if the least of us made $50K/yr then there would be no poverty and everyone would be able to afford all they need right?


----------



## aweegato (May 5, 2014)

MO_cows said:


> And exactly what is the "proper" ratio between someone who can walk in off the street and be trained in a day to do the job, versus the "captain of the ship" who has the fate of the whole empire on their shoulders???
> 
> Personally, yes, I think a lot of CEOs are way overpaid, too, especially considering how their companies are doing profit-wise and also perception-wise. But that's the culture of corporate America. Anybody who is anybody has a big name CEO and pays them obscene amounts of money. Just like having a big shiny building with the logo on it and corporate jets. It's a symbol of the success and power of the company.
> 
> It's up to the stockholders and the board of directors of each company to decide, not us and definitely not the govt, how much their CEO is worth.


 
Ben and jerries had a pretty good rule about this a while back. The top person made no more then 7 times the lowest paid. It was later pushed to 17. 

Employers are responsible for the well being of their employees. Instead of taking that seriously they rely on taxpayers to foot the bill by subsidizing their employment practices through well fair and other government programs. 

And by the way, the cost of a Big Mac would only go up 68 cents. I think that's a pretty small price to pay for allowing employees to have a living wage.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

aweegato said:


> Ben and jerries had a pretty good rule about this a while back. The top person made no more then 7 times the lowest paid. It was later pushed to 17.
> 
> Employers are responsible for the well being of their employees. Instead of taking that seriously they rely on taxpayers to foot the bill by subsidizing their employment practices through well fair and other government programs.
> 
> And by the way, the cost of a Big Mac would only go up 68 cents. I think that's a pretty small price to pay for allowing employees to have a living wage.


So who's responsible for the well being of the employers? 

If unskilled labor pay goes up how much of an increase should skilled labor get? You don't expect skilled labor to get paid the same as unskilled do you? If you can make as much flipping a burger why learn a trade?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Took my daughter to Travel Town. On the way home she wants Subway, fine. I'll go to Carl's jr. No drive through. End up at McDonald's. Ordered a diet Coke, said on the screen order was right. Here's what I got....really soggy fries, gross big Mac, and a Dr. Pepper. 

Yup, they need a raise cause their so competent!


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Coillte said:


> That's what the French do and when it comes to industrial action, they have it down to an art form!


Allow me to correct your grammatical error - That's what the French do and when it comes to industrial *inaction*, they have it down to an art form!


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

Mining is a perfect example of what higher wages does to employment. Coal mining went to greater and greater automation requiring fewer and fewr employees. The end result was the development of mountain top mining that employed no miners at all. Construction equipment operators simply rip the over burden off and extract the coal.

The sad part is the fast food jobs were used by entry level workers to get a toe hold in the job market. That will fade fast.


----------



## HerseyMI (Jul 22, 2012)

Maybe it would be a good thing... you think your job & wages suck... now you could quit and work the cushy fastfood job that pays more.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

aweegato said:


> Employers are responsible for the well being of their employees. Instead of taking that seriously they rely on taxpayers to foot the bill by subsidizing their employment practices through well fair and other government programs.


Wrong, wrong, wrong! You are responsible for your well being. An employer is responsible for trying to make all the money he wants and/or can. 




aweegato said:


> And by the way, the cost of a Big Mac would only go up 68 cents. I think that's a pretty small price to pay for allowing employees to have a living wage.


OH MY GOODNESS, you mean employees are DYING!!!!!!!!!!!!! I knew some of them were moving slow but I didn't know they were actually dying!

Just what the airborne rodent's rectum is a "living wage"? As I said why smuck around with a $15/hr why not raise it to $50? Don't you think a burger filpper deserves $100,000 a year (assuming 40 hr/wk with 2 weeks vacation a year) to live on?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

HerseyMI said:


> Maybe it would be a good thing... you think your job & wages suck... now you could quit and work the cushy fastfood job that pays more.


Work? Why would I do that when I could sit at home and let the government put money on my EBT and SNAP cards?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Here you don't get cash benefits like food stamps and Aid to dependent children unless you work. 

If McD's wages are so terrible why do people still work there?


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> The reason so many adults are in fast food jobs is because there aren't any other jobs. It's not like they just want to work at McDonald's.


 Got to agree. Here Fast Food, Float Outfitters or Cleaning Rooms. Most Seasonal Work.

big rockpile


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

JeffreyD said:


> So, where's the middle management work history? That article says some attempted college. Fast food and other minimum wage jobs were never meant to be the sole source of income for a family. Folks need to stop complaining about how little their getting paid. If one job doesn't cut it, try 2 jobs. Taxpayers and the general public should not have to pay for the mistakes of others. I still don't see many folks over 25 working in these restaurants.


There is more in this world than just what you see with your eyes. If you read that link you saw that 40% are 25 or older and that number is growing. 

You are correct that fast food jobs were never meant to be the sole source of income. As the article also pointed out unfortunately in our current economy and job situation the jobs that were meant to be family supporting went bye-bye and the jobs they were replaced with are minimum wage service jobs. That leaves us with a whole lot of fathers and mothers who are forced to try to support their families on minimum wage.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> Not to be nasty but . . I've never seen anyone working at McDees who looked like they were starving, AAMOF most of them look like they should go a few days w/o their bread.


I assume you are not aware as to how poverty and the foods the poor eat lead to obesity. May I suggest a link? 

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/1/6.full



> Many health disparities in the United States are linked to inequalities in education and income. This review focuses on the relation between obesity and diet quality, dietary energy density, and energy costs. Evidence is provided to support the following points. First, the highest rates of obesity occur among population groups with the highest poverty rates and the least education. Second, there is an inverse relation between energy density (MJ/kg) and energy cost ($/MJ), such that energy-dense foods composed of refined grains, added sugars, or fats may represent the lowest-cost option to the consumer. Third, the high energy density and palatability of sweets and fats are associated with higher energy intakes, at least in clinical and laboratory studies. Fourth, poverty and food insecurity are associated with lower food expenditures, low fruit and vegetable consumption, and lower-quality diets. A reduction in diet costs in linear programming models leads to high-fat, energy-dense diets that are similar in composition to those consumed by low-income groups. Such diets are more affordable than are prudent diets based on lean meats, fish, fresh vegetables, and fruit. The association between poverty and obesity may be mediated, in part, by the low cost of energy-dense foods and may be reinforced by the high palatability of sugar and fat. This economic framework provides an explanation for the observed links between socioeconomic variables and obesity when taste, dietary energy density, and diet costs are used as intervening variables. More and more Americans are becoming overweight and obese while consuming more added sugars and fats and spending a lower percentage of their disposable income on food.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

I don't think the government has shown us that they manage things so well that they should be telling private companies what they can do. When the federal budget is balanced, our debts are paid, the government officials getting a reasonable salary without all the extras, then maybe they can make a case for interfering in private business. Maybe.

If you don't like the pay, don't take the job. It's easy. You don't deserve the pay you want just because you are breathing. If you want a better job, make yourself more valuable.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Molly Mckee said:


> I don't think the government has shown us that they manage things so well that they should be telling private companies what they can do. When the federal budget is balanced, our debts are paid, the government officials getting a reasonable salary without all the extras, then maybe they can make a case for interfering in private business. Maybe.
> 
> If you don't like the pay, don't take the job. It's easy. You don't deserve the pay you want just because you are breathing. If you want a better job, make yourself more valuable.


Maybe you can point out all of these jobs just going wanting for workers?

Just out of curiosity do you think we should have any minimum wage at all?


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

Patchouli said:


> I assume you are not aware as to how poverty and the foods the poor eat lead to obesity. May I suggest a link?
> 
> http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/1/6.full


I see a link between lazy, unmotivated, stupid, poor, and dependent. The poor make the decision to eat eat poorly for the same reason they make the decision to remain poor.

I don't think that people realize how close to real civil war we are right now. And might I suggest that those lazy, unmotivated, uneducated slobs with their hands out are not going to be on the winning end of it? If they cannot be motivated to earn for their own families, they will not be motivated to fight for a cause. The only cause they have ever had, has been provided for them by a socialist agenda.

I came from nothing, earned my way through an education by working three of those crappy service and fast food jobs, and took a position in very dangerous field so I could make very good money. 

How dare anyone assume that I could not have achieved this without a government to enable me. I think the reason the liberal power brokers hate, "rich" people like me so much is they can't dictate how or when or how much I earn because they have not figured out how to legislate motivation yet. Therefore, the socialist liberals attempt to demotivate me by stealing my earnings and selling it to the mob for votes. It aint working folks.


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

hawgsquatch said:


> I see a link between lazy, unmotivated, stupid, poor, and dependent. The poor make the decision to eat eat poorly for the same reason they make the decision to remain poor.
> 
> I don't think that people realize how close to real civil war we are right now. And might I suggest that those lazy, unmotivated, uneducated slobs with their hands out are not going to be on the winning end of it? If they cannot be motivated to earn for their own families, they will not be motivated to fight for a cause. The only cause they have ever had, has been provided for them by a socialist agenda.
> 
> ...


Do you think that the majority of the poor choose to be poor?


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

I believe they choose to REMAIN poor. No other place has opportunity like this one. I started with literally nothing, built it up, lost it by being stupid and making poor decisions, and built it back up again by making correct decisions. By lying around and waiting for assistance you are enslaving yourself to those who control such "assistance." I wasn't able to do this by working a 40 hour week or by having things handed to me I earned it by taking risks, out-competing my rivals, and applying God's principals of saying what I am going to do and then doing it. It is a very simple formula.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

A lot of them sure want to be. We are now raising up the 3rd generations of wanting to live off the government and get al those freebies because of it. Many girls while even in HS have a baby of PURPOSE to get money from the tax payers. Just ask them they will tell you. I have and was shocked at what is now going on. get fat live off SSDI. Get on FS and get a free cell phone, have kids and get all sorts of bennies. Yes Stay poor and you can get all sorts of things for free. 
In Wi if disabled, all you have to do is work a few hours a Month, don't even have to get paid in cash just receive something of value for your time, and bingo you can "Buy" your way into the Medicaid program as that way you don;t have to be destitute.
The assets for most medicates in WI is 1999.00.
Well get on this buy in program and that then is raised to 8500, one car is even exempt, so you can have a high priced car and it does not count as a asset, neither is your home.
All sorts of things then open up for you.


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

hawgsquatch said:


> I believe they choose to REMAIN poor. No other place has opportunity like this one. I started with literally nothing, built it up, lost it by being stupid and making poor decisions, and built it back up again by making correct decisions. By lying around and waiting for assistance you are enslaving yourself to those who control such "assistance." I wasn't able to do this by working a 40 hour week or by having things handed to me I earned it by taking risks, out-competing my rivals, and applying God's principals of saying what I am going to do and then doing it. It is a very simple formula.


What about those who seriously cannot work? Right now I have a friend who just got foodstamps and is losing her home. She will be needing housing for herself and her family - when she and her husband finally get out of the hospital. He is in for stage 4 cancer (currently battling pneumonia) and she is in for sepsis (and will be in for 6 weeks). Their 13 year old son is staying with grandma who is on disability. Not everyone chooses to remain poor. Some are just stuck in a hard place and do not have the ability to get out of it.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

I think your friend is a rare exception and someone we should help as a society.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> I believe they choose to REMAIN poor.


Exactly. And the system, as it currently exists, incentivizes them to do so.

The differential between what a person typically can earn as an unskilled and/or uneducated laborer, and the amount it's possible to receive from government handouts, is very small. When you factor in the cost of transportation needed to get to and from a job, and the value of leisure time, it hardly seems worth the trouble.


----------



## wes917 (Sep 26, 2011)

Annsni said:


> What about those who seriously cannot work? Right now I have a friend who just got foodstamps and is losing her home. She will be needing housing for herself and her family - when she and her husband finally get out of the hospital. He is in for stage 4 cancer (currently battling pneumonia) and she is in for sepsis (and will be in for 6 weeks). Their 13 year old son is staying with grandma who is on disability. Not everyone chooses to remain poor. Some are just stuck in a hard place and do not have the ability to get out of it.


I think this is the exception.

Funny how when I hurt my back, required surgery after years of working through the pain, I was not eligible for any type of assistance while revovering( did I mention my
Place of employment closed while recovering) but others just need to be fat to "get help"


----------



## gweny (Feb 10, 2014)

And this is what happens when you give every kid a trophy. Now we've got a bunch of entitled brats in the workforce that don't understand that you are only worth the cost to train your replacement.


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

aweegato said:


> Employers are responsible for the well being of their employees.
> 
> And by the way, the cost of a Big Mac would only go up 68 cents. I think that's a pretty small price to pay for allowing employees to have a living wage.



I call *shenanigans*.

Employers are *only* responsible to compensate their employees at an agreed rate for an agreed job, not to make sure they can 'afford' a new car, and new 4WD truck, a big screen TV and a plan where their 5 year old has unlimited WIFI on their new smart phone........

We don't eat McCrappies (or any other fast food).

I make 17.25/hr

I have 30+ years of industrial maintanence experince. If the Min Wage is raised $2.80/hr, does that mean that *my* wage goes up?

If not, am I worth *that much less*?

Guess I should go on welfare and work part time for min wage.

I would have a better standard of living................


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> Maybe you can point out all of these jobs just going wanting for workers?
> 
> Just out of curiosity do you think we should have any minimum wage at all?



No.

If *you* are having an addition done to your home (or a barn built, etc), do *you* go by lowest (and/or best price) or whatever is the price to "keep all the children safe"?

Free Market.

This country has lost it, sadley. 

Used to be such a nice place, now it is a national Cabrini Green :bored:


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

willow_girl said:


> Exactly. And the system, as it currently exists, incentivizes them to do so.
> 
> The differential between what a person typically can earn as an unskilled and/or uneducated laborer, and the amount it's possible to receive from government handouts, is very small. When you factor in the cost of transportation needed to get to and from a job, and the value of leisure time, it hardly seems worth the trouble.


WG, you know the world is gonna end. Because we agree :nanner:

I see *lazy* people at work every day. 

Don't know how much they make.

I am "on call" when ever the shop is open.

One of the lazy people complained that I was *making so much more than him*. (I'm not, afaik)

My reply was, "If the shop called at 2 am, what would you do?"

His reply, "Let the machine answer it"

Mine, "I'll be there in 20 minutes"

What do you all think, should I make more more money being able to fix the stuff they screw up, pretty much 24/5, doing the parts ordering and inventory
and not getting a full nights sleep (at times for a week) or be paid the same as a person that calls in once every two weeks, punches in at 8:04 every day, leaves his job unfinished because "my relief wasn't here on time" :umno:

People who *stay* in min wage jobs have a reason. They *CHOOSE* to. Note I say *stay.*


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Annsni said:


> Do you think that the majority of the poor choose to be poor?


Actually yes most do:
They choose not to get good grades in school
They choose not to get a higher education 
They choose to stay in areas where there are no good paying jobs for the uneducated
They choose to get: expensive cell phones, big screen TV's, tattoos, expensive hairdo's and nails, etc rather than saving their money to better themselves.
They choose convenience foods, soda's and chips over actually cooking.

And yes I managed restaurants for 25 years, saw all that and more.


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

mnn2501 said:


> Actually yes most do:
> They choose not to get good grades in school
> They choose not to get a higher education
> They choose to stay in areas where there are no good paying jobs for the uneducated
> ...


And more damning, they *choose* not to improve their own 'lot in life'.

Gimme, Gimme, Gimme.

As Ãsop implied "Be and ant, not a grasshopper"


----------



## HerseyMI (Jul 22, 2012)

hawgsquatch said:


> I don't think that people realize how close to real civil war we are right now. And might I suggest that those lazy, unmotivated, uneducated slobs with their hands out are not going to be on the winning end of it? If they cannot be motivated to earn for their own families, they will not be motivated to fight for a cause. The only cause they have ever had, has been provided for them by a socialist agenda.


Gotta call B.S.... United States citizens are divided so we will never see a a revolutionary movement survive. State citizens might but it too is very divided.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

TripleD said:


> I just have to ask . How many people on here really eat at these places ???
> 
> I will admit I get a chili at Wendys once in a while because I cant make it that good.


I worked at KFC for two years when I was in high school. I did everything in that store, cooked, cashier, drove a catering truck, I could do it all. Made minimum wage and was happy to get it.

I still eat KFC and Bojangles and will grab a burger or breakfast at some places cause I know what I am getting.

I say to anyone, make a choice and make the best of it and don't expect the government or anyone other than yourself to raise your standard of living.

BTW - I don't care how they do it France.

The whole minimum wage income equality thing is nothing more than political theater by socialist (aka Democrats). 

All the world is a stage, pick your role and play it the best you can. Be happy to do it, or find something else that makes you happy.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> And more damning, they *choose* not to improve their own 'lot in life'.
> 
> Gimme, Gimme, Gimme.


And for some people -- at least the way the system is currently structured -- they're making the best choice available to them, from an objective point of view. 

They really CAN have a better quality of life by living off welfare, disability, etc., rather than working a low-paying job. 

I don't blame them for doing what's best for them; I blame society for giving them this option.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I assume you are not aware as to how poverty and the foods the poor eat lead to obesity. May I suggest a link?
> 
> http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/1/6.full


So the poor can earn enough to buy not only enough food to keep them alive but to keep them fat therefore I'm guessing they are getting a "living wage".


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Annsni said:


> Do you think that the majority of the poor choose to be poor?


For the most part, yes. They make decisions which keep them poor. I've told this before but here goes again.

I have a friend who grew up a sharecropper's son and had next to nothing. He worked his butt off to get an education and today he owns his own business, lives in a huge house, for her birthday he bought his wife a new Mustang and while he was at it he bought himself a new truck to pull his bass boat.

On the other hand I have a guy I deal with who is poor, 25ish, still living at home, working a sucky dead end job and he will most likely always be poor and work in a sucky dead end job. Why? Because he has no desire to get any type of education to make himself more valuable AND he rather spend his money on smokes, parts for his truck and going to the movies almost every week. I have talked to him over and over about how much money he'd have if he stopped the smoking and movies and put the money a box. I've pointed out to him if he spent the down times at the job studying anything from HVAC to computer programing in that same year he could most likely have a job making 2-3 times what he's making now. But he chooses to do the things which will keep him poor the rest of his life.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Annsni said:


> What about those who seriously cannot work? Right now I have a friend who just got foodstamps and is losing her home. She will be needing housing for herself and her family - when she and her husband finally get out of the hospital. He is in for stage 4 cancer (currently battling pneumonia) and she is in for sepsis (and will be in for 6 weeks). Their 13 year old son is staying with grandma who is on disability. Not everyone chooses to remain poor. Some are just stuck in a hard place and do not have the ability to get out of it.


That's what family, friends and church are for. The government does not have the right to take my money by force and give it to them just because it thinks they need it more than me and my family does.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

HerseyMI said:


> Gotta call B.S.... United States citizens are divided so we will never see a a revolutionary movement survive. State citizens might but it too is very divided.


It won't reach that point. The government/nation will fail because of the financial situation. At some point even the most stupid person will realize there's no way that the US can continue to make interest payments on the money it already owes much less pay off any more and there will be no more money to borrow. At that point the government find itself unable to pay 45+% of its budget, then what happens?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

hawgsquatch said:


> I believe they choose to REMAIN poor. No other place has opportunity like this one. I started with literally nothing, built it up, lost it by being stupid and making poor decisions, and built it back up again by making correct decisions. By lying around and waiting for assistance you are enslaving yourself to those who control such "assistance." I wasn't able to do this by working a 40 hour week or by having things handed to me I earned it by taking risks, out-competing my rivals, and applying God's principals of saying what I am going to do and then doing it. It is a very simple formula.


God's principals? I think you may have missed a fairly good sized chunk of the Bible. All that stuff about caring for the poor. You would be surprised how much is in there. Along with a whole lot about humility and how nothing we have comes from ourselves but by the grace of God. Oh and my signature quote is from Ecclesiastes too.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> So the poor can earn enough to buy not only enough food to keep them alive but to keep them fat therefore I'm guessing they are getting a "living wage".


Obviously you did not read the link. You can actually starve on what they are eating. They may put on fat but they suffer severe nutritional deficiencies due to the poor quality of the food like substances they eat.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

I hear some saying move to better Jobs. Not that easy when you have a Good Job when economy is Good, you and the Bank own everything. They had no reason not to loan, good paying Jobs had been in the area for years they will never leave.

The economy turns, Jobs leave, you sell all you can get 20+ year old car. Your Kids and Grandkids live close by. You can not sell your house for what you still owe on it.

You check Jobs in other areas, they don't pay enough to justify driving to work and pay Rent much less put food on the table. You are too far up in years to go to school and expect to get a Job. Besides the Jobs are going to Family, Friends and Younger people, even the Jobs paying Low Wages.

big rockpile


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Annsni said:


> What about those who seriously cannot work? Right now I have a friend who just got foodstamps and is losing her home. She will be needing housing for herself and her family - when she and her husband finally get out of the hospital. He is in for stage 4 cancer (currently battling pneumonia) and she is in for sepsis (and will be in for 6 weeks). Their 13 year old son is staying with grandma who is on disability. Not everyone chooses to remain poor. Some are just stuck in a hard place and do not have the ability to get out of it.


It must be hard to watch your friend suffer, and I'm truly sorry for what they are going thru.

They aren't "poor", they are in crisis! If they were poor, they wouldn't have a home to lose. Stage 4 cancer should get the husband approved for disability right away. They might be able to work out an "interest only" or some other arrangement on their mortgage, or a short sale. Some local publicity about their plight might help make the lender more "gracious". Nobody wants to make the news for foreclosing on seriously ill people, down on their luck. Especially if they have had the home for awhile.

Watcher is right, this is where family, friends, church and community need to step up and help them. If fast food paid $100 an hour it isn't going to help people too sick to work.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> Obviously you did not read the link. You can actually starve on what they are eating. They may put on fat but they suffer severe nutritional deficiencies due to the poor quality of the food like substances they eat.


 Yes me and my wife use to work Chopping Cotton and Beans. People in the area very hard workers but because of the diet they had to eat they were very over weight.

big rockpile


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

MO_cows said:


> It must be hard to watch your friend suffer, and I'm truly sorry for what they are going thru.
> 
> They aren't "poor", they are in crisis! If they were poor, they wouldn't have a home to lose. Stage 4 cancer should get the husband approved for disability right away. They might be able to work out an "interest only" or some other arrangement on their mortgage, or a short sale. Some local publicity about their plight might help make the lender more "gracious". Nobody wants to make the news for foreclosing on seriously ill people, down on their luck. Especially if they have had the home for awhile.
> 
> Watcher is right, this is where family, friends, church and community need to step up and help them. If fast food paid $100 an hour it isn't going to help people too sick to work.


 
Stage 4 Cancer if there is not Insurance to cover it they will step in and take any property. Seen so many lose Big Farms in the area because of this.

big rockpile


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Obviously you did not read the link. You can actually starve on what they are eating. They may put on fat but they suffer severe nutritional deficiencies due to the poor quality of the food like substances they eat.


But there is no one holding a gun to their heads, forcing them to buy Doritos and Pepsi. My BF is on SSI and gets about a hundred bucks a month in SNAP, and I'm ashamed to admit that he eats healthier than I do. 

Yes, some people live in inner-city "food deserts," but I'd guess if there were a demand in their area for fresh fruits and vegetables, etc., someone would step in to supply them. I'll bet that stores are stocking the kinds of foods that people in the area want to buy, which in turn is what they like to eat. 

And yes, you can say that the poor need more nutritional education and the like, but I think most people actually have an inkling that something like a package of Hostess cupcakes has little to no nutritional value. _It's not that they don't know; they simply don't care. _

Incidentally, there's a long history of upper-class people trying to coerce poor ones into improving their eating habits. I read a piece awhile back; I think it was about one of the early-20th-century settlement houses -- perhaps Hull House? -- having a restaurant that was set up to make wholesome meals available to the poor at prices they could afford. It failed miserably. A contemporary commentator asked a poor woman why she didn't frequent the restaurant and she replied something to the effect that, "We like to eat the foods we like -- not that stuff." And so it goes, down to the present day. :shrug:


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

big rockpile said:


> I hear some saying move to better Jobs. Not that easy when you have a Good Job when economy is Good, you and the Bank own everything. They had no reason not to loan, good paying Jobs had been in the area for years they will never leave.
> 
> The economy turns, Jobs leave, you sell all you can get 20+ year old car. Your Kids and Grandkids live close by. You can not sell your house for what you still owe on it.
> 
> ...


If people didn't get in over their heads, they'd be able to sell. Used to be you put 20% down on a house you could afford. Today many put 3-5% down on twice the house they need.
Cars are the same way, used to be you had a good sized down payment, now you're usually financing what you still owe on your previous vehicle into the new one.

Sorry, but its easy to move if you are following the jobs, however the government has made it to easy to collect for sitting on your rear.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

willow_girl said:


> But there is no one holding a gun to their heads, forcing them to buy Doritos and Pepsi. My BF is on SSI and gets about a hundred bucks a month in SNAP, and I'm ashamed to admit that he eats healthier than I do.
> 
> Yes, some people live in inner-city "food deserts," but I'd guess if there were a demand in their area for fresh fruits and vegetables, etc., someone would step in to supply them. I'll bet that stores are stocking the kinds of foods that people in the area want to buy, which in turn is what they like to eat.
> 
> ...


I guess it just makes everyone feel better to put people down and attack them on every possible level rather than spend a little time studying the issue and seeing the true facts. The facts are right there in the study I linked. It is complex and the solutions are difficult. 

They start with the Farm bill skewing the system to make the least nutritional items with the highest calories the cheapest. Add to that the stress that the working poor are under. The fact that the human body evolved to crave sugar, salt and fat whenever under stress and to put on fat when under stress. The fact that a lot of times the working poor do not live near reasonably priced quality foods and they do not have the transportation needed to get to it and you have a nearly insurmountable problem. 

But please tell me how they should all just move to farms or work 120 hour work weeks at minimum wage jobs and then come home and cook everything from scratch. Or whatever other sanctimonious ideas you have bashing them for their poor choices and their laziness.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

I read where some of the protestors at Mickey Ds headquarters tried to equate the fact that many executives and franchise owners started out as crew kids at local Mickey Ds in high school as justification for their demand for $15 an hour wages.

They forgot the part that those crew kids turned franchise owners chose the path to promotion in the franchise or corporate stores they were employed in, later attended McDonald's Hamburger University which is the corporate management training program that graduates about 6000 management graduates per year, returned to working in a store as a third person manager with 401k, moved up to assistant manager and got financing for their own franchise venture instead of spending their lives studying non productive interests while asking if customers wanted fries or an apple to go with their order.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

mnn2501 said:


> If people didn't get in over their heads, they'd be able to sell. Used to be you put 20% down on a house you could afford. Today many put 3-5% down on twice the house they need.
> Cars are the same way, used to be you had a good sized down payment, now you're usually financing what you still owe on your previous vehicle into the new one.
> 
> Sorry, but its easy to move if you are following the jobs, however the government has made it to easy to collect for sitting on your rear.


There are people losing their houses that have half or more of them paid off. In some places houses just aren't selling. And no it is not easy to move and follow jobs if your jobs left and never came back anywhere. And no not everyone can run off to the oilfields and work. Following jobs when the economy was better is what has left a lot people in a world of hurt. Look at the state of Nevada for example.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> I guess it just makes everyone feel better to put people down and attack them on every possible level rather than spend a little time studying the issue and seeing the true facts. The facts are right there in the study I linked. It is complex and the solutions are difficult.
> 
> They start with the Farm bill skewing the system to make the least nutritional items with the highest calories the cheapest. Add to that the stress that the working poor are under. The fact that the human body evolved to crave sugar, salt and fat whenever under stress and to put on fat when under stress. The fact that a lot of times the working poor do not live near reasonably priced quality foods and they do not have the transportation needed to get to it and you have a nearly insurmountable problem.
> 
> But please tell me how they should all just move to farms or work 120 hour work weeks at minimum wage jobs and then come home and cook everything from scratch. Or whatever other sanctimonious ideas you have bashing them for their poor choices and their laziness.


Yes, it's a giant conspiracy to keep people poor and unhealthy.

Because, you know, starches have NEVER been the cheapest food sources -- until the Farm Bill came along.

And "food deserts" couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that regular grocery stores have pulled out of some neighborhoods due to theft of product and out and out robbery. 

The little town we live in could be described as a "food desert" for people who can't drive to another town to shop. The grocery store isn't much more than a convenience store - hardly any fresh stuff and not a lot of frozen veg. either. There are older people who can't drive out of town any more, people who don't own cars, etc. Last year a farmer's market was started on Fridays and here comes fresh locally grown produce at great prices. There was very little support for the growers, it looked like a ghost town most of the time. I bought stuff we didn't even need just to try and help it get going and encourage the vendors to come back. Nice butternut squash for $1 each, etc. The prices couldn't be the problem. 

You just can't save everyone....especially from themselves. Sometimes the best "help" a person can get is a rotten low paying job to motivate them to better themselves. Put some of our "poor" on the streets of India for awhile, other places where "poor" is a life or death situation.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> Yes, it's a giant conspiracy to keep people poor and unhealthy.
> 
> Because, you know, starches have NEVER been the cheapest food sources -- until the Farm Bill came along.
> 
> ...


It's not a conspiracy to keep people poor and unhealthy. The Farm bill has a lot of big ag interests lobbying for it. And the food companies push to keep the junk funded too so they make money off of it every way possible. It's about greed and the poor getting terrible nutrition is just a side effect. 

There is a vast difference between the sorts of cheap starches our great grand parents were eating during the Depression and the junk on the shelves today. The stuff today is no longer food. Your grandma's bread was made from real stuff and it molded after a week. Not so with Wonder bread.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

*Prov. 29:7.* The righteous is concerned for the rights of the poor; the wicked does not understand such concern.

*1 John 3:17.* But whoever has the world's goods, and beholds his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him? 



*Luke 6:33* "And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, in order to receive back the same."


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

Patchouli said:


> God's principals? I think you may have missed a fairly good sized chunk of the Bible. All that stuff about caring for the poor. You would be surprised how much is in there. Along with a whole lot about humility and how nothing we have comes from ourselves but by the grace of God. Oh and my signature quote is from Ecclesiastes too.


Jesus said pick up your cross and follow me. Not, "lets take that guy and force him through governmental tyranny to carry it for you as long as you vote for me."


I know forgiveness is free and am thankful for it. I believe in charity, compassion, and grace. I do not believe in enforcing these things through law and at the point of a gun.

I see many on here that say people who put in a full days work deserve to make a living. Nope, people who work a "full day" get the mediocracy the economy today provides. When I was in school full time I worked three jobs and a hundred hours a week plus I took ten to forteen units. (3.9 cumulative gpa). 

I pay my tuition in cash every semester instead of owing on a student loan. 

I bought used cars used clothes and used furniture for myself and better things for my kids.

I built a business that the employees learned to run better than me so I made it an employee owned Co-Op and only take an hourly wage when I consult for them. They are successful.

I work a very dangerous job in a very dangerous place, but I got this job before I got my education. Anyone willing to work hard can break 6 figures here within a year of starting. We have a very hard time finding enough people who can pass a drug test let alone a background or psych exam.

I got educated for two reasons. First I wanted my kids to understand that education is important regardless of whether one applies it directly in ones vocation. Second was to hedge my bet. I have acquaintances who sit around collecting unemployment because they are electricians not framers or drywallers, when the framers and drywallers are hiring. This is where our society has gone. 

My employer could fold right now and I would have a job tomorrow. I can continue in what I do with another agency, I can teach wildlife management, constitutional law, and political science at the community college level, I am a welder and machinist, and I am an accomplished mechanic and businessman. I can also fall a tree, catch a fish, and drive a tractor. What skills does ole burger flipper have? Plenty, if he or she gets motivated and educated.

My choices made me who I am today. Good choices made me debt free, educated and employable. Poor choices made me divorced and broke for a while. I shall persevere.

BTW I have always dreamed of living in Alaska so right now I am going to more school to hedge that bet a little too. I still work 60+ hours a week. Sleep is for the unmotivated. I started college at age 30.


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

willow_girl said:


> But there is no one holding a gun to their heads, forcing them to buy Doritos and Pepsi. My BF is on SSI and gets about a hundred bucks a month in SNAP, and I'm ashamed to admit that he eats healthier than I do.
> 
> Yes, some people live in inner-city "food deserts," but I'd guess if there were a demand in their area for fresh fruits and vegetables, etc., someone would step in to supply them. I'll bet that stores are stocking the kinds of foods that people in the area want to buy, which in turn is what they like to eat.
> 
> ...



WG, the gimme, gimme, gimme I refered to.

Have a guy at work who "can't afford" to eat breakfast, but has a $70/month unlimited talk/data/text plan and the latest smart phone. So does his wife. And 8 year old son.

And he takes a day off every other week or so. (We accumulate 7.7 hours PTO time per pay period). In a few weeks, we will be shut down for a week (ending 7/4). He *will not* have enough time to cover the time off, and will want to work with us (maintenance) for 4 days. 

Well, since he signed up for 4 days at Christmas last year, and called in on 2 of them, I doubt he will be picked.

Then he will whine because he *is broke*.


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> It's not a conspiracy to keep people poor and unhealthy. The Farm bill has a lot of big ag interests lobbying for it. And the food companies push to keep the junk funded too so they make money off of it every way possible. It's about greed and the poor getting terrible nutrition is just a side effect.
> 
> There is a vast difference between the sorts of cheap starches our great grand parents were eating during the Depression and the junk on the shelves today. The stuff today is no longer food. Your grandma's bread was made from real stuff and it molded after a week. Not so with Wonder bread.


I am still trying to wrap my head around *why* the Federal Government needs to, or *should have* anything to do with this.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> It's not a conspiracy to keep people poor and unhealthy. The Farm bill has a lot of big ag interests lobbying for it. And the food companies push to keep the junk funded too so they make money off of it every way possible. It's about greed and the poor getting terrible nutrition is just a side effect.
> 
> There is a vast difference between the sorts of cheap starches our great grand parents were eating during the Depression and the junk on the shelves today. The stuff today is no longer food. Your grandma's bread was made from real stuff and it molded after a week. Not so with Wonder bread.


The poor getting poor nutrition is about poor choices as much as anything. Even people who have a comfortable income are not eating a healthy diet much of the time. And I don't think it's simply because the evil food companies make crappy over processed food. Grandma's ingredients are still in the store, along with food items from around the world so you can cook almost any cuisine. I think it's because we as a society have convinced ourselves we "don't have time" to cook, we're too tired, etc. But we have time to plop our butts in front of the tv or computer screen!


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> I guess it just makes everyone feel better to put people down and attack them on every possible level rather than spend a little time studying the issue and seeing the true facts. The facts are right there in the study I linked. It is complex and the solutions are difficult.


No, the solution is really quite simple: Put down the box of Twinkies and pick up a bag of apples! The problem is that most people don't want to do that. They want to eat what they want to eat, and our present SNAP food policies allow them to buy whatever they like. 



> They start with the Farm bill skewing the system to make the least nutritional items with the highest calories the cheapest. Add to that the stress that the working poor are under. The fact that the human body evolved to crave sugar, salt and fat whenever under stress and to put on fat when under stress. The fact that a lot of times the working poor do not live near reasonably priced quality foods and they do not have the transportation needed to get to it and you have a nearly insurmountable problem.


Let's look at how the free market works. (We don't really have one, but close enough to suffice for this example.) When there is a demand for a product, coming from people who can afford to buy it, usually a merchant sees an opportunity and steps up to fill that demand. 

SNAP recipients have a pocket full of virtual money to spend every month, and I have no doubt that if they were going into Joe's corner store daily, clamoring for fresh grapefruit or organic arugula, Joe would hasten to stock those products. 

What's actually on the shelves reflects what Joe's customers want, what they'll spend their money on, and what Joe thus can profit from selling.

Ha, I saw this play out in real life once. The Indian tribe I worked for (which had a large and successful casino) built a gas station with a quick-foods component on the reservation. The inaugural manager was a tribal member himself, and had diabetes -- a huge problem among Native Americans -- and envisioned creating a place where the Indian community could get fresh, wholesome foods, as they did live in something of a food desert, with nothing but a conventional party store within a five-mile radius. So he installed a salad bar, and stocked the refrigerator cases with fresh juices and other healthy foods, and was roundly applauded. 

And the store lost money, hand over fist, until finally the tribal council fired him, and hired an experienced C-store manager to take over.

The salad bar was the first thing to go, replaced by a pizza oven and a fryer. The juices made way for fountain drinks and Icees. And people actually began to shop there. :hysterical:



> But please tell me how they should all just move to farms or work 120 hour work weeks at minimum wage jobs and then come home and cook everything from scratch. Or whatever other sanctimonious ideas you have bashing them for their poor choices and their laziness.


I'm not being sanctimonious, I'm simply being realistic. My BF is poor; he lives on SSI and SNAP. He has a family history of diabetes, too, and is very careful in his eating habits because he doesn't want to develop a full-blown case like most of his immediate relatives. So he spends his SNAP money on stuff like, yes, bags of apples. So it _can_ be done. The fact that many people choose to do otherwise is, well, their choice!


----------



## Bellyman (Jul 6, 2013)

What's "fast food"?

Seriously, I'm not a person of high income. I don't eat at fast food places other than the occasional social event, and then it's only to be sociable. 

I think I can count the number of fast food places I've visited in the last 2 years on the fingers of one hand and have fingers left over. 

Some months of the year, I probably make less than those fast food workers. Some months, I make more. (I do some seasonal work.) But I tend to be fussy about what I eat. It probably costs me more to eat because I want to know what I'm eating. Fast food generally leaves me wondering just what I'm eating, and that's not a good thing to me. Sorry, but "pink slime" just isn't something I wanna eat, no matter how it's dressed up.

I'm all for the free market dictating wages. Then again, with things like minimum wage to ag subsidies to unions, when was the last time we really had a free market in the US? 

A person has to do what a person has to do. And we pretty much figure out what we're willing to do for what amount of compensation. Fast food doesn't hold much interest to me. Then again, neither does sports...


----------



## ErinP (Aug 23, 2007)

Guys, you can spout all the sanctimonious, self-important stories you want. 
The fact still remains that the American taxpayer is heavily subsidizing McDonald's, WalMart's, etc. bottom line as well as the minimum wage.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> There are people losing their houses that have half or more of them paid off. In some places houses just aren't selling. And no it is not easy to move and follow jobs if your jobs left and never came back anywhere. And no not everyone can run off to the oilfields and work. Following jobs when the economy was better is what has left a lot people in a world of hurt. Look at the state of Nevada for example.


I've moved halfway across the country twice to better myself. Borrowed money from family last time we moved, we're making 6 figures now (and living like we only make 5)
People just use excuses all the time (can't move away from my family, can't sell my house, etc) -- pure unadulterated bovine end product!
If you want to better yourself you can -- but you have to get up off your rear end to do so!


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

I sure don't know why some are saying just because people are on FS they buy are sorts of junk foods instead of foods that are healthy.
You can buy can't FOOD item, from fresh veggies, to fresh meats, to even some farmers markets now are taking FS.
But the thing of it is They DON'T want to cook they want those that are easy boxed items.
Simple thrown them in a microwave and there you have a meal, to even frozen pizzas.

But it ins't the food stamp program that is at fault it is the low educated and lazy folks that want a fast meal in just a few minutes. Period~!
It is not the fault of FS that people don't buy good food stuffs and are getting fat they are fat and Lazy with one hand on the remote control and the other one around a soda or beer.
So putting the blame on ST is not the issue at all.


----------



## tarbe (Apr 7, 2007)

mnn2501 said:


> You pull into your local drive thru and does it really matter if your order taker is inside the building or in a call center in India? T*hink about that one for a while*


Unfortunately, many of the folks screaming for $15/hour for entry-level fast food jobs do precious little thinking!

Noodling out unintended consequences is a particular weak-spot for the left.

I don't know why some folks want to destroy these jobs. They are actually quite valuable to young folks learning to work.

If you are 25+, have two kids and still work an entry-level job at a fast-food restaurant, you have other, larger issues to work on.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

I want to apologize for making this conversation into something negative. What I am seeing when I re-read all of the posts is that there is opportunity everywhere and also that there is goodwill and compassion everywhere. We live in a pretty darn good country don't we? Just the fact that I get to post my opinions on here without negative consequences is unique. Lets hold onto that uniqueness while we motivate one another to excel.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Guys, you can spout all the sanctimonious, self-important stories you want.
> The fact still remains that the American taxpayer is heavily subsidizing McDonald's, WalMart's, etc. bottom line


I agree, and believe this is the reason that so many of these jobs are low-paying and organized labor hasn't been able to make much headway. 

Humans are, let's face it, somewhat lazy, and risk-adverse. It's easier to apply for SNAP and CHIP (etc.) than it is to ask your boss for a raise, or try to organize a union and run the risk of being fired, or worse. 

People mostly care whether their needs are met, and once they are, they're not all that concerned as to whether the funds come from their employer or the government. And so many people are receiving assistance nowadays that there's hardly any stigma attached. The Wal-Mart cashier won't give you a dirty look when you swipe your government EBT card -- she probably has one, too.

In the old days, men and women worked hard, often at dangerous jobs, and frequently went home to children who went hungry despite their best efforts to provide for them. That motivated them to organize and demand better from their employers.

Nowadays, the government is making sure that doesn't happen!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Riverdale said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around *why* the Federal Government needs to, or *should have* anything to do with this.


It shouldn't. If it must we would be better off with the original system that just supported decent prices for farmers by buying up gluts and selling them when there was less. 

If they killed the farm bill tomorrow it would create a food mess but eventually we would see things right themselves. Problem is people right here on this forum are already shouting about food prices and they would have a fit of biblical proportions if they were forced to pay true costs for their food and feed for their animals. Every single American gets subsidized food even those raising their own if they feed any store bought feed at all.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

hawgsquatch said:


> Jesus said pick up your cross and follow me. Not, "lets take that guy and force him through governmental tyranny to carry it for you as long as you vote for me."
> 
> 
> I know forgiveness is free and am thankful for it. I believe in charity, compassion, and grace. I do not believe in enforcing these things through law and at the point of a gun.
> ...


That's all great until disaster hits. I don't know how many hard working big men I know around here who worked dangerous jobs and now can't do anything because the danger caught up with them. But I am sure you have a plan for that too. Personally I have found that God has a way of taking the stuffing out of people who think they have complete control of their lives and fortunes.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

You know I believe you are right. I shall pray and meditate upon this. Text communication lacks the inflection and emotion of voice and I see how my post seemed self serving rather than motivational. Thank you for making me think Patchouli. Have a very blessed day.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> . Personally I have found that God has a way of taking the stuffing out of people who think they have complete control of their lives and fortunes.


Most of us have found God helps those that help themselves.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

mnn2501 said:


> Most of us have found God helps those that help themselves.


Nope I think she was right. Not once in my big long bragging story did I acknowledge the Lord or what he has done for me. Jesus was the epitome of humility and I missed that in this conversation somehow. I don't know where I would be without my faith, and even that he gave me. In fact sometimes my ambition outpaced my faith and I didn't acknowledge that in my rather abbreviated list of failures. I would rather ask for the wisdom and ability to humble myself rather than be humbled. I have experienced that one and it aint fun.


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> Personally I have found that God has a way of taking the stuffing out of people who think they have complete control of their lives and fortunes.


James 4:13-15 would agree with that.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

mnn2501 said:


> Most of us have found God helps those that help themselves.


That is Ben Franklin not the Bible.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

hawgsquatch said:


> Nope I think she was right. Not once in my big long bragging story did I acknowledge the Lord or what he has done for me. Jesus was the epitome of humility and I missed that in this conversation somehow. I don't know where I would be without my faith, and even that he gave me. In fact sometimes my ambition outpaced my faith and I didn't acknowledge that in my rather abbreviated list of failures. I would rather ask for the wisdom and ability to humble myself rather than be humbled. I have experienced that one and it aint fun.


 I have been on the receiving end of the 2 x 4 of humility myself so my post was made with sincere concern.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Coillte said:


> In general I agree with some of what you are saying. The praise goes to the man in the arena. He is taking the risk. There are different kinds of risks however, from the silly to the calculated. If an individual calls himself a business man and wishes to invest a small fortune in a franchise, one would think his risk is calculated. If not, another profession might be more suited to him. None of this translates as employees not being permitted to ask for a wage rise. Whether they are right or wrong in such an endeavour is really irrelevant. Whether they are worth more or less is also irrelevant. They can ask, demand, protest and whine all they want and that's a wonderful thing. In this respect mmoetc is spot on!


I agree that any employee has the right to ask, or even demand a pay raise.... and if the employer says no... they have every right to hit the road and find another job more suited to their liking. What really chaps me is that some folks believe they also have the right to not only walk off the job.... but to prevent someone who wants to work for that wage the right to do so. cmon people... this is burger flippin... not rocket surgery!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mnn2501 said:


> Most of us have found God helps those that help themselves.


I have also heard that all good things cometh to he who waiteth..... providing he who waiteth worketh his tail off while he waiteth.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

ErinP said:


> Guys, you can spout all the sanctimonious, self-important stories you want.
> The fact still remains that the American taxpayer is heavily subsidizing McDonald's, WalMart's, etc. bottom line as well as the minimum wage.


And if a person is content to work a part time low end job and subsidize their lifestyle with entitlements, what should be done about that? Punish the consumers with higher prices by making a part time low end job a "living wage"?


----------



## ErinP (Aug 23, 2007)

I think the concern is more for those who are working *full* time and stuck...
But either way, we pay. Or rather, those of us who make enough to pay taxes, pay.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> And if a person is content to work a part time low end job and subsidize their lifestyle with entitlements, what should be done about that?


Umm, I could use a new truck!

Just sayin' ... :teehee:


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

tarbe said:


> If you are 25+, have two kids and still work an entry-level job at a fast-food restaurant, you have other, larger issues to work on.


Amen!


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> I sure don't know why some are saying just because people are on FS they buy are sorts of junk foods instead of foods that are healthy.
> You can buy can't FOOD item, from fresh veggies, to fresh meats, to even some farmers markets now are taking FS.
> But the thing of it is They DON'T want to cook they want those that are easy boxed items.
> Simple thrown them in a microwave and there you have a meal, to even frozen pizzas.
> ...


Unfortunately, I'm aware of families who lost their homes (owned or rented) and are now in emergency housing - in a motel. So there they are with their children and a small dorm sized fridge and maybe a microwave. Unless they were able to bring in a crockpot or electric fry pan (which the motel won't let you use anyway), you are stuck with convenience or take-out food. It's terrible but that's what it is.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> That is Ben Franklin not the Bible.


Never said it was in the Bible, nevertheless it is true.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Annsni said:


> Unfortunately, I'm aware of families who lost their homes (owned or rented) and are now in emergency housing - in a motel. So there they are with their children and a small dorm sized fridge and maybe a microwave. Unless they were able to bring in a crockpot or electric fry pan (which the motel won't let you use anyway), you are stuck with convenience or take-out food. It's terrible but that's what it is.


And for every one of those there are 1000 or more with their own apartment still making bad choices.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

It's, always a chuckle, in these threads where the Right, in one, harps endlessly, that there are no jobs and if there are any, they are part time, minimum wage and the real unemployment rate is actually 18%.

Then, in another, if the best you can do, to support your family, is work a fast food gig, for minimum wage, part time, and think it would be nice, to make few more buck per week, then maybe you are the problem, perhaps unambitious, even a bit greedy, expecting something for nothing. 

Usually, when I get that hungry, to actually partake in nasty fast food, workers appear to be working pretty hard and taking a lot of carp from rude customers.

Aught to be some value in that.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

plowjockey said:


> It's, always a chuckle, in these threads where the Right, in one, harps endlessly, that there are no jobs and if there are any, they are part time, minimum wage and the real unemployment rate is actually 18%.
> 
> Then, in another, if the best you can do, to support your family, is work a fast food gig, for minimum wage, part time, and think it would be nice, to make few more buck per week, then maybe you are the problem, perhaps unambitious, even a bit greedy, expecting something for nothing.
> 
> ...


Maybe they just appear to be working hard!

McDonald's on Saturday got gross soggy fries and a Dr. Pepper instead of a diet Coke. Today at Fatburger I asked for cheese, lettuce, and relish. Got relish and onions!


----------



## DaleK (Sep 23, 2004)

Value is relative. The last time our minimum wage increased, it reached the threshold where it became economical for Lowes and Home Depot to replace half of their cashiers with auto checkouts. My friend, who managed a Walmart before moving on to bigger things, tells me they're about 20 cents/hour from the point where they're further ahead to dump 60-70% of their cashiers for robots and he's convinced most other big box stores and supermarkets are in the same position. Some fast food restaurants are already automating order taking and the kitchens are next. The problem with so many minimum wage jobs is it becomes very easy to price them out of existence


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I'll admit I like the self check-outs at the grocery store. I would use the regular ones if the clerk didn't insist on thumping bananas and apples around like they were tennis balls and placing a refrigerated item in with tissues or shampoo. 

I don't like ordering a pizza from pizzaplace.com or setting inside the restaurant and having to place an order by phone at the table. I have to order on a greasy unwashed table phone and you still want a tip? And their prices didn't go down when they automated. I can still get a whole baked pizza at Sam's Club for much less than the big pizza place and Sam's makes just as much of their pizza in the store as pizzaplace.com.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

Some people it doesn't matter how much they make they just can't manage money. My sister and her husband together make $25 an hour, they both work 40 hour weeks. no house payments as he got his Mom's house, only 1 car payment which they had to buy from one of those weekly pay bad credit car lots, no kids to support and they are always broke. They have nothing to show for it either I guess they just blow it all because they have no fancy furnishings, no fancy cars, no nice clothes. No money saved. I can't for the life of me figure out how someone goes through that much money with nothing to show for it. The only thing they do have to show for it is lots of fancy restaurant visits, movies, trips to Nashville vacations and constant whining to us that they can't pay their bills and make ends meet.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

plowjockey said:


> It's, always a chuckle, in these threads where the Right, in one, harps endlessly, that there are no jobs and if there are any, they are part time, minimum wage and the real unemployment rate is actually 18%.
> 
> Then, in another, if the best you can do, to support your family, is work a fast food gig, for minimum wage, part time, and think it would be nice, to make few more buck per week, then maybe you are the problem, perhaps unambitious, even a bit greedy, expecting something for nothing.
> 
> ...


Exactly! I am still scratching my head over the fact that the people yelling the loudest about go get a better job are also the ones claiming the economy is shot and the jobs are all gone.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

DaleK said:


> Value is relative. The last time our minimum wage increased, it reached the threshold where it became economical for Lowes and Home Depot to replace half of their cashiers with auto checkouts. My friend, who managed a Walmart before moving on to bigger things, tells me they're about 20 cents/hour from the point where they're further ahead to dump 60-70% of their cashiers for robots and he's convinced most other big box stores and supermarkets are in the same position. Some fast food restaurants are already automating order taking and the kitchens are next. The problem with so many minimum wage jobs is it becomes very easy to price them out of existence


The store level managers may genuinely believe that but it is a lie from corporate. 

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/11/12/wal-mart-pay-raise/

This article sorts out pretty nicely exactly why Walmart can afford to pay it's employees more and why it should and it is written from a Wall Street perspective.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

DaleK said:


> Value is relative. The last time our minimum wage increased, it reached the threshold where it became economical for Lowes and Home Depot to replace half of their cashiers with auto checkouts. My friend, who managed a Walmart before moving on to bigger things, tells me they're about 20 cents/hour from the point where they're further ahead to dump 60-70% of their cashiers for robots and he's convinced most other big box stores and supermarkets are in the same position. Some fast food restaurants are already automating order taking and the kitchens are next. The problem with so many minimum wage jobs is it becomes very easy to price them out of existence


At the the local Wallyworld which I visit infrequently this would mean going from two full service and two "express service" lines open at any given time to one? Hardly seems like a great cost saving considering the twenty or more unstaffed registers already existent. Walmart is already starting to learn the lessons of understaffing and removing more won't help their position.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

tarbe said:


> Unfortunately, many of the folks screaming for $15/hour for entry-level fast food jobs do precious little thinking!
> 
> Noodling out unintended consequences is a particular weak-spot for the left.
> 
> ...


You probably do have some other issues but simple things like providing food, shelter, clothing and other things for yourself and your offspring might impact how much time and energy you have to address them. You could get another job but who cares for your kids while you're not there? You could go to school and gain better job skills but who pays? We all know people who have overcome things like this and gone on to bigger and better things. Some here claim to be those those very people and use themselves as examples. All seem to know someone who is failing because of bad choices and latch on to them as representative examples of all minimum wage workers. Many also likely know more than a few who are trudging through life at these jobs trying to do what is right by them and theirs but are far less noticeable and don't support their ideals.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

mnn2501 said:


> And for every one of those there are 1000 or more with their own apartment still making bad choices.


Let's get specific here. What would be good choices right now? Invest in corporate stock, precious metals, or simply bank cash? Is that long term or short term advice, and what do you consider long & short term?


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> Obviously you did not read the link. You can actually starve on what they are eating. They may put on fat but they suffer severe nutritional deficiencies due to the poor quality of the food like substances they eat.


Good grief. Eating things that make you fat is not starving. Hint: Look at poor starving people in places like Ethiopia and see how many are fat. People, including poor folks, eat fattening food because that is what they like. There is absolutely no reason a poor fat person can't buy a head of lettuce for a buck and eat 2 or 3 nice salads instead of paying 4 bucks for a bag of chips. Liberals always try to put the faults of the poor off on society. Canned tuna is cheap, as are eggs most of the time. There are many healthy choices cheaper than the processed foods you see in shopping carts of poor people. They generally have multiple 12 packs of soda when they could pay far less for tea and drink it unsweetened. Is that societies fault?


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Let's get specific here. What would be good choices right now? Invest in corporate stock, precious metals, or simply bank cash? Is that long term or short term advice, and what do you consider long & short term?


Here's some good choices right now or any time:

1. Stop spending money on tattoos.
2. Stop spending money on piercings.
3. Stop buying lottery tickets.
4. Cut back on spending for drugs and booze.
5. If you are idle, get busy doing something constructive even if it is 
something like fishing. It ain't rocket science or hard work but will put 
some good protein on your plate.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

poppy said:


> Good grief. Eating things that make you fat is not starving. Hint: Look at poor starving people in places like Ethiopia and see how many are fat. People, including poor folks, eat fattening food because that is what they like. There is absolutely no reason a poor fat person can't buy a head of lettuce for a buck and eat 2 or 3 nice salads instead of paying 4 bucks for a bag of chips. Liberals always try to put the faults of the poor off on society. Canned tuna is cheap, as are eggs most of the time. There are many healthy choices cheaper than the processed foods you see in shopping carts of poor people. They generally have multiple 12 packs of soda when they could pay far less for tea and drink it unsweetened. Is that societies fault?


 I saw a woman last week ahead of me at the IGA. She had $94 left on her snap card. She put 2 packs of ground beef back in the clerks hands and kept (9) 2 liter Pepsi when she hit her max.:hair


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

mnn2501 said:


> Most of us have found God helps those that help themselves.


I've read the Bible through many times, and although this statement sounds good, it's simply not Biblical. Think of Daniel in the den of lions. God helps those who call upon him with a humble heart.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Let's get specific here. What would be good choices right now? Invest in corporate stock, precious metals, or simply bank cash? Is that long term or short term advice, and what do you consider long & short term?


Specifically:
Don't live above your means.
Someone who can barely make ends meet should probably not have the latest and greatest unlimited cell phone plan, should not get tattoo's and expensive hairdo's. Should not have the latest game console and a big screen TV and play video games all day. Should not customize their car. Not have multiple kids when they can't afford the ones they already have. shouldn't be doing; Drugs, booze, gambling.

Do I really need to go on?


----------



## notwyse (Feb 16, 2014)

My my. Well I think if they can figure out how to make their lives better more power to them. As for low pay for nurses.. You too could move. I made 40 plus when I quit. And this isn't a high paying area for nurses. When you take the numbers that 30 percent of meals are ate "out" it seems to me that a lot of people are working those jobs. And no....I don't need to watch another person struggle because I did. We all make poor choices. That is how you learn to make better choices. People do not generally choose poverty. That may be all they know. If so that is hardly a choice rather succumbing to the expected.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Win07_351 said:


> I've read the Bible through many times, and although this statement sounds good, it's simply not Biblical. Think of Daniel in the den of lions. God helps those who call upon him with a humble heart.


Can you point out any where I EVER said it was Biblical??

It is however TRUE! Ever read the story of the ant and the grasshopper? (oh and thats not in the Bible either)


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> The store level managers may genuinely believe that but it is a lie from corporate.
> 
> http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/11/12/wal-mart-pay-raise/
> 
> This article sorts out pretty nicely exactly why Walmart can afford to pay it's employees more and why it should and it is written from a Wall Street perspective.


Even if you believe that the writer knows more about Wal Mart's business from the outside looking in, than Wal Mart's own leadership, what would you propose to do about it? Boycott Wal-Mart to punish them? And see people lose their jobs if it's an effective boycott and sales drop? Or do you want to see government intervention, or what?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> God's principals? I think you may have missed a fairly good sized chunk of the Bible. All that stuff about caring for the poor. You would be surprised how much is in there. Along with a whole lot about humility and how nothing we have comes from ourselves but by the grace of God. Oh and my signature quote is from Ecclesiastes too.


Care to show me where it is where Christ told us we should *take* by force from someone so we can give to the poor?

If you read you will also find that we are told to take care of OLD widows and orphans. Not young healthy adults.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Obviously you did not read the link. You can actually starve on what they are eating. They may put on fat but they suffer severe nutritional deficiencies due to the poor quality of the food like substances they eat.


You CAN die from drinking too much water but VERY few people do. You care to point out to me the mass graves of these starved to death fat poor people?

BTW, you can not starve and put on fat. Its physically impossible.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

big rockpile said:


> I hear some saying move to better Jobs. Not that easy when you have a Good Job when economy is Good, you and the Bank own everything. They had no reason not to loan, good paying Jobs had been in the area for years they will never leave.
> 
> The economy turns, Jobs leave, you sell all you can get 20+ year old car. Your Kids and Grandkids live close by. You can not sell your house for what you still owe on it.
> 
> ...


I know three guys who have moved and are make BIG bucks for semi-skilled labor (truck driving). Two are in the Dakotas and the third is in a foreign land with lots of sand.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

big rockpile said:


> Stage 4 Cancer if there is not Insurance to cover it they will step in and take any property. Seen so many lose Big Farms in the area because of this.
> 
> big rockpile


Its not insurance if you are already sick. Its like trying to get someone to "insure" your house when its already burning.


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

watcher said:


> Care to show me where it is where Christ told us we should *take* by force from someone so we can give to the poor?
> 
> If you read you will also find that we are told to take care of OLD widows and orphans. Not young healthy adults.


It also says that if a man will not work, he shouldn't eat and if a man does not support his family, he is worse than an infidel. The widows are to be cared for by their families and it is the widows who have no family who should be cared for by the church. You can see more in 1 Timothy 5 and 2 Thessalonians 3:10.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I guess it just makes everyone feel better to put people down and attack them on every possible level rather than spend a little time studying the issue and seeing the true facts. The facts are right there in the study I linked. It is complex and the solutions are difficult.
> 
> They start with the Farm bill skewing the system to make the least nutritional items with the highest calories the cheapest. Add to that the stress that the working poor are under. The fact that the human body evolved to crave sugar, salt and fat whenever under stress and to put on fat when under stress. The fact that a lot of times the working poor do not live near reasonably priced quality foods and they do not have the transportation needed to get to it and you have a nearly insurmountable problem.
> 
> But please tell me how they should all just move to farms or work 120 hour work weeks at minimum wage jobs and then come home and cook everything from scratch. Or whatever other sanctimonious ideas you have bashing them for their poor choices and their laziness.


The number of 'poor' people I have met who are NOT poor due to their own actions can be counted on my toes with little piggies left over. The number who are poor and will remain poor directly because of their actions I couldn't count using every toe within 2 miles of me.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

poppy said:


> Here's some good choices right now or any time:
> 
> 1. Stop spending money on tattoos.
> 2. Stop spending money on piercings.
> ...





mnn2501 said:


> Specifically:
> Don't live above your means.
> Someone who can barely make ends meet should probably not have the latest and greatest unlimited cell phone plan, should not get tattoo's and expensive hairdo's. Should not have the latest game console and a big screen TV and play video games all day. Should not customize their car. Not have multiple kids when they can't afford the ones they already have. shouldn't be doing; Drugs, booze, gambling.
> 
> Do I really need to go on?


No investment advice...

Not to put either of you on the spot, but what to you consider to be the trigger event that caused the mortgage crisis in the autumn of 2008? I'm not asking what the underlying cause was, but why it happened when it did, and not a year before or after.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Nevada said:


> No investment advice...
> 
> Not to put either of you on the spot, but what to you consider to be the trigger event that caused the mortgage crisis in the autumn of 2008? I'm not asking what the underlying cause was, but why it happened when it did, and not a year before or after.


When I was poor, I had no money to invest. Right now I would keep some cash for emergencies and put the rest into things I can use to provide food if need be or long term storage food. Those items will go up due to inflation far greater than any gain you will get from any investment.

All bubbles burst eventually and the housing bubble was no exception. Neither will this debt bubble be an exception.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Nevada said:


> No investment advice...


 People living paycheck to paycheck don't have money to invest, first thing they need to do is to stop their stupid spending and then maybe they COULD put some money in savings.



Nevada said:


> Not to put either of you on the spot, but what to you consider to be the trigger event that caused the mortgage crisis in the autumn of 2008? I'm not asking what the underlying cause was, but why it happened when it did, and not a year before or after.


 What difference does it make to this conversation?
---
The trigger was the government pushing home buying to people who could not afford them via a loosening of regulations. Their (Clinton administration) stated goal was to get low income people into homes of their own.

Then it was greed: People buying more home than they could reasonably afford, banks loaning more than people could reasonably pay, Real Estate agents pushing expensive homes. Yes, there was GREED enough to go around.

When we bought our last house both the RE agent and the mortgage company was pushing to show us $400,000+ homes. We bought one we could afford at $189,000. even if either DW or I lost our job we could still pay for it (which is my financial goal - we're never more in debt than one of us could comfortably handle that's ALL debt combined)


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Nevada said:


> No investment advice...
> 
> Not to put either of you on the spot, but what to you consider to be the trigger event that caused the mortgage crisis in the autumn of 2008? I'm not asking what the underlying cause was, but why it happened when it did, and not a year before or after.


this is another of your attempts to divert a thread. it is immaterial to min wage law


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

mnn2501 said:


> When we bought our last house both the RE agent and the mortgage company was pushing to show us $400,000+ homes. We bought one we could afford at $189,000.


What year was that?


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Let's get specific here. What would be good choices right now? Invest in corporate stock, precious metals, or simply bank cash? Is that long term or short term advice, and what do you consider long & short term?


If you can't afford to buy your groceries without a SNAP card, none of those are good choices.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> If you can't afford to buy your groceries without a SNAP card, none of those are good choices.


I wouldn't know. I've never qualified for SNAP benefits.


----------



## Adisiwaya (Nov 27, 2013)

badlander said:


> I think it's an atrocity when somebody flipping burgers is making as much as health care professionals who are handling precious human lives.
> 
> I started my nursing career in 1975 making a whopping 7.59 an hour. That was with shift differential and working a specialized nursing floor (OB). If I hadn't chosen that option, I would have started at 7 dollars an hour.
> 
> ...


 McDonalds no I don't agree they should make that much. Let's put it this way inflation increases yes, not to that high. But here's the 2Â¢ from the comment I have made 16$ hour flipping hamburgers and other items in a sit down family restaraunt. That's more than cnas make starting more than a lot of health care proffesions and I don't see a lot of people lining up to stand by a flat top and charbroiler all day long, kitchen being extremely hot. I managed to have my own house 2 vehicles insurance and didn't go on snap or other gov aide working at the casino bussing tables for 7.50 hour and I worked 40-50 hours a week and school when I was 16. Now my ex saying as much from cities couldn't find work other than McDonald and supporting a child on that wage is impossible... end of rant. Minnesota min wage is jumping to 9.50 in 2016 I think? That's a good wage

20 years ago my dad started welding/assembly at 5$ hour and yes retiring next year and his final wage is 15.50$ hour. So times changed


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Nevada said:


> What year was that?


it was 2005


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

mnn2501 said:


> it was 2005


You bought only months from the peak of the housing bubble. You didn't know that?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Let's get specific here. What would be good choices right now? Invest in corporate stock, precious metals, or simply bank cash? Is that long term or short term advice, and what do you consider long & short term?


corporate stock is pretty risky business, precious metals are similar to corporate stock... they are only precious because the ptb say they are precious. Bank cash gets eaten up by inflation. All of these are very poor investments on the best day. Dirt... just plain old farmable dirt, by the acre has long been one of the most sound investments going. There are more people every day looking for some of it, (for a place to live and grow stuff) and they simply aint making much more of it anywhere.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I wouldn't know. I've never qualified for SNAP benefits.


The "you" was generic, not actually referring to you. Point is, why are you looking for investment advice for people who don't have money to invest?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> The "you" was generic, not actually referring to you. Point is, why are you looking for investment advice for people who don't have money to invest?


I wasn't looking for investment advice at all. I was trying to determine is anyone here had an understanding of what went wrong in the autumn of 2008. So far all I'm hearing are Fox News talking points. Nobody has come close.

The first step in fixing a problem is understanding what went wrong.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I wasn't looking for investment advice at all. I was trying to determine is anyone here had an understanding of what went wrong in the autumn of 2008.


So why did you ask what I responded to, quoted again below? What the heck does this have to do with what happened in 2008? I think your points are so hard to follow even you can't do it, so you just switch to a completely different one midstream. Are you aware this thread is about fast food workers making minimum wage?



Nevada said:


> Let's get specific here. What would be good choices right now? Invest in corporate stock, precious metals, or simply bank cash? Is that long term or short term advice, and what do you consider long & short term?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> corporate stock is pretty risky business, precious metals are similar to corporate stock... they are only precious because the ptb say they are precious. Bank cash gets eaten up by inflation. All of these are very poor investments on the best day. Dirt... just plain old farmable dirt, by the acre has long been one of the most sound investments going. There are more people every day looking for some of it, (for a place to live and grow stuff) and they simply aint making much more of it anywhere.


Not surprising advice, coming from a realtor. But then realtors have no training or licensing for providing investment advice. I recall your advice against buying distressed residential property in Las Vegas a few years ago, but my home has doubled in value since that time. Not a bad return during a deep recession like this.

Did you notice the S&P 500 blasting past it's all time record today? Stocks and oil commodities are dominating the markets right now. The thing is that investors like what the Fed is dong with QE right now. You can hardly blame them. The Fed is basically pumping money into corporate America. What's not for them to like?

Precious metals have both investment and industrial value, which is more intrinsic than speculative. The values are based mostly on scarcity and consumption. There can be runaways on speculation, but that's obviously not happening now. I expect both gold & silver to lose about 15% in value this summer (gold drop to $1100 and silver down to $16), then see gold double over the next 18 months. I expect silver to triple in value during the same time. I see this summer as a tremendous buying opportunity for precious metals.

Over the next 18 months, I don't expect real property acreage appreciation to even make up for inflation. Maybe in 5 years, but not anytime soon.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> So why did you ask what I responded to, quoted again below? What the heck does this have to do with what happened in 2008? I think your points are so hard to follow even you can't do it, so you just switch to a completely different one midstream. Are you aware this thread is about fast food workers making minimum wage?


I was responding to a post about making choices. I wanted to hear what a smart conservative choice might be.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

poppy said:


> Good grief. Eating things that make you fat is not starving. Hint: Look at poor starving people in places like Ethiopia and see how many are fat. People, including poor folks, eat fattening food because that is what they like. There is absolutely no reason a poor fat person can't buy a head of lettuce for a buck and eat 2 or 3 nice salads instead of paying 4 bucks for a bag of chips. Liberals always try to put the faults of the poor off on society. Canned tuna is cheap, as are eggs most of the time. There are many healthy choices cheaper than the processed foods you see in shopping carts of poor people. They generally have multiple 12 packs of soda when they could pay far less for tea and drink it unsweetened. Is that societies fault?


https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2009...cy-overweight-and-obesity-importance-nutrient



> Abstract
> 
> 
> Overweight and obese patients may develop paradoxical nutritional deficiency from eating high-energy foods with a poor nutrient content. In such patients, this condition is probably under-recognised, and thus untreated.
> ...


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> Even if you believe that the writer knows more about Wal Mart's business from the outside looking in, than Wal Mart's own leadership, what would you propose to do about it? Boycott Wal-Mart to punish them? And see people lose their jobs if it's an effective boycott and sales drop? Or do you want to see government intervention, or what?


Do you honestly think Walmart cares more about it's employees than it's profits? There are plenty of stores and restaurants that pay a living wage and thrive. Walmart is busily killing itself, it doesn't need any help from me. And I very rarely shop there.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

MAY just like other so called studies that use that NOW Famous word MAY May develop my not be good for a person, May May May. Not something that to take literally. May this May That.
And Good you don;t shop at WM I did shop there and bought more then my share so I spent for us both. WM is doing great things And in the next few years they are going to SPEND MONEY in this country to help Get And Keep AMERICAN workers working. Good for them, and the millions they employ all over this country.
Investing in American Jobs

At Walmart, we believe in making a difference on the issues our customers and communities care about. We believe we can create more American jobs by supporting more American manufacturing. Jump-starting the manufacturing industry and rebuilding the middle class requires a national effort by companies, industry leaders, lawmakers and others.

Together, we can help spark a revitalization of U.S.-based manufacturing. By making production more affordable and feasible in the United States, we can bring our customers more U.S.-made products and manufacturers can create more jobs in America.
So all these folks that still diss at WM can now take a deep breath and try to go after another multi billion dollar company if you have a mind to. LOL


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> Care to show me where it is where Christ told us we should *take* by force from someone so we can give to the poor?
> 
> If you read you will also find that we are told to take care of OLD widows and orphans. Not young healthy adults.


I presume you mean should we tax our citizens to then take that money to help the poor like we do in America? 

"At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year's produce and store it in your towns, so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the aliens, the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied." Deuteronomy 14:28-29 

Some of the Levites were healthy young adults as were the aliens (non-Jews in Israel). 

There were plenty of rules that also applied to feeding the poor like the gleaning laws, etc.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> I was responding to a post about making choices. I wanted to hear what a smart conservative choice might be.


And my responses were about THAT post of your (asking for investment advice for people without money to invest) not your later one where you decided to change the subject entirely. You still haven't clued us in to the missing link that got you talking about 2008.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Not surprising advice, coming from a realtor. But then realtors have no training or licensing for providing investment advice. I recall your advice against buying distressed residential property in Las Vegas a few years ago, but my home has doubled in value since that time. Not a bad return during a deep recession like this.
> 
> Did you notice the S&P 500 blasting past it's all time record today? Stocks and oil commodities are dominating the markets right now. The thing is that investors like what the Fed is dong with QE right now. You can hardly blame them. The Fed is basically pumping money into corporate America. What's not for them to like?
> 
> ...


Well there you go. Add previous metals to McDonald's 401k and let's end the discussion on raising the wage.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> I presume you mean should we tax our citizens to then take that money to help the poor like we do in America?
> 
> "At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year's produce and store it in your towns, so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the aliens, the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied." Deuteronomy 14:28-29
> 
> ...


That's all nice, but what does it have to do with the United States? I don't think it backs up your point anyway, but even if it does how does it apply to me? I'm not bound by the rules or instructions in the Bible.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Nevada said:


> You bought only months from the peak of the housing bubble. You didn't know that?


Gee you must really think you're smart.
Yes I knew that and know that and I took about a 10% hit on valuation for a while, however it was only on paper, as I had a home I like AND could afford it and now today I am up about 15% over what I paid (or 25% over its perceived low value.

Note that I did not buy a McMansion when all indicators said I could. Well all indicators besides Common Sense. I bought a good solid house in a good solid area. I knew it would eventually go up in value, housing (real quality housing in a good location) almost always does

Anyway, what does any of this have to do with fast food workers wanting $15 an hour - *lets get back to the subject of this thread*.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

jtbrandt said:


> That's all nice, but what does it have to do with the United States? I don't think it backs up your point anyway, but even if it does how does it apply to me? I'm not bound by the rules or instructions in the Bible.


It's kind of pointless to hop into a conversation between 2 people discussing their personal religious beliefs and then ask how that applies to you. It doesn't. I was responding to Watcher. He asked what Jesus said about the subject and I responded with a passage from the bible.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> Do you honestly think Walmart cares more about it's employees than it's profits? There are plenty of stores and restaurants that pay a living wage and thrive. Walmart is busily killing itself, it doesn't need any help from me. And I very rarely shop there.


Well there ya go. You vote with your dollars and don't shop there. Glad to see you sticking to your principles. But somehow that isn't enough, you still feel the need to publicly bash them, too. 

If WalMart didn't care about it's profits, soon it wouldn't be able to afford employees. They are the king of the hill with others nipping at their heels and trying to knock them off the top spot. Once you reach the top there is nowhere to go but down. And if you think they are a cheap company, talk to someone who works at Dollar General!

As soon as there is not a long line of warm bodies to fill these low paying jobs at entry level in fast food and retail, wages will go up. We are seeing supply and demand at work in the labor market. Even jobs that used to start at $14 an hour or so, like warehouse worker with forklift credentials, are now hiring for $10 and getting the slots filled.


----------



## Adisiwaya (Nov 27, 2013)

MO_cows said:


> Well there ya go. You vote with your dollars and don't shop there. Glad to see you sticking to your principles. But somehow that isn't enough, you still feel the need to publicly bash them, too.
> 
> If WalMart didn't care about it's profits, soon it wouldn't be able to afford employees. They are the king of the hill with others nipping at their heels and trying to knock them off the top spot. Once you reach the top there is nowhere to go but down. And if you think they are a cheap company, talk to someone who works at Dollar General!
> 
> As soon as there is not a long line of warm bodies to fill these low paying jobs at entry level in fast food and retail, wages will go up. We are seeing supply and demand at work in the labor market. Even jobs that used to start at $14 an hour or so, like warehouse worker with forklift credentials, are now hiring for $10 and getting the slots filled.



Well meaning Walmart around my area starts at 14$ an hour cleaning, 11$ for grocery section with restaraunt experience ---yes that means McDonalds included--- Walmart does pay pretty decent have a few friends that have been working there for 5+ years and 2 are working as a truck driving. 80k plus a year for truck driving. That's a heck lot better than most places. 

Gotta stick up for Walmart sometimes they do offer a good store, just never seems to have lanes opened. Yet there still making huge profits.... places like family dollar, dollar general they buy products from places and repackage. I forget what it is called but that's how they make money. And Walmart hires vets like crazy, hires mental disabled etc etc. McDonalds does none of that, there workers deserve a pay grade but not to 15, they do that because they can have leeway in talks later. 9$ an hour is a good wage that should be minimum wage. Times are changing. Things cost more. There is a monopoly in company's hence fuel prices and look at then price of the barrel....


----------



## ErinP (Aug 23, 2007)

Patchouli said:


> It's kind of pointless to hop into a conversation between 2 people discussing their personal religious beliefs and then ask how that applies to you. It doesn't. I was responding to Watcher. He asked what Jesus said about the subject and I responded with a passage from the bible.



Though to be fair, the Leviticus laws predate Jesus. 
Jesus, however, said: Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. Mk 12:17 (speaking _specifically_ about paying your taxes! lol)


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Nate_in_IN said:


> Well there you go. Add previous metals to McDonald's 401k and let's end the discussion on raising the wage.


You're willing to put their money where your mouth is? Are you willing to take responsibility if I'm mistaken?


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> It's kind of pointless to hop into a conversation between 2 people discussing their personal religious beliefs and then ask how that applies to you. It doesn't. I was responding to Watcher. He asked what Jesus said about the subject and I responded with a passage from the bible.


I apologize for jumping into that conversation. There are so many tangents in these threads it's hard to keep up.

As long as you're not suggesting that the U.S. government should take my money to give to the poor because the Bible says so, I'll jump back out of the conversation. But if you were suggesting that, I'm pretty sure the passage you quoted doesn't say that anyway.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

Nevada said:


> You're willing to put their money where your mouth is? Are you willing to take responsibility if I'm mistaken?


I'm not putting their money anywhere. That is their business, not mine.

Why would I take responsibility if your investment advice doesn't pan out?

I was just trying to pull the thread back on topic.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Not surprising advice, coming from a realtor. But then realtors have no training or licensing for providing investment advice. I recall your advice against buying distressed residential property in Las Vegas a few years ago, but my home has doubled in value since that time. Not a bad return during a deep recession like this.
> 
> Over the next 18 months, I don't expect real property acreage appreciation to even make up for inflation. Maybe in 5 years, but not anytime soon.


Nope, I was never licensed to give investment advise. I am not real sure just what qualifies you to do it either.  I also do NOT RECALL ever telling you or anyone else not to invest in any real estate at any time. I am curious as to how you know the value of your home has doubled since you inherited it? The only accurate method of determining real value of property is upon a successful closing of a sale. Even that only gives you the value of that particular property on a given day. If I remember correctly your home was purchased as a bank repo using someone elses cash, (an award from a lawsuit if I am not mistaken) and you wound up getting the home basically for free upon the death of said person. I suppose its pretty easy to double and triple the value of something you have nothing invested in. I had a lot of property that doubled and tripled its value within days, or weeks after I purchased it back when I was in the game. I know it did because I cashed the checks on closing day. Anyone can guess at real property values.... and what they will or will not be, but until you have cashed the check.... you dont really "know".


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

jtbrandt said:


> I apologize for jumping into that conversation. There are so many tangents in these threads it's hard to keep up.
> 
> As long as you're not suggesting that the U.S. government should take my money to give to the poor because the Bible says so, I'll jump back out of the conversation. But if you were suggesting that, I'm pretty sure the passage you quoted doesn't say that anyway.


First no I do not think the US government should make it's laws based on anyone's religion. So we are agreed there.

My point was purely for Christians who think that God specifically says it is wrong for money to be taken from them to give to the poor rather than just freely given as charity. God instituted a tithe, basically a religious tax that every 3 years 10% of their increase had to be given to support those in need. The poor, the widowed, the orphans, those who were not Jews and could not own land and the Levites who also could not own land. Tithes were not optional in Israel. They were required. So yes God did actually take from those who had and then gave it to the poor. Parts of the other 2 tithes were also collected and used for the poor. On top that the people were also encouraged to give on their own.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Nope, I was never licensed to give investment advise. I am not real sure just what qualifies you to do it either.  I also do NOT RECALL ever telling you or anyone else not to invest in any real estate at any time. I am curious as to how you know the value of your home has doubled since you inherited it? The only accurate method of determining real value of property is upon a successful closing of a sale. Even that only gives you the value of that particular property on a given day. If I remember correctly your home was purchased as a bank repo using someone elses cash, (an award from a lawsuit if I am not mistaken) and you wound up getting the home basically for free upon the death of said person. I suppose its pretty easy to double and triple the value of something you have nothing invested in. I had a lot of property that doubled and tripled its value within days, or weeks after I purchased it back when I was in the game. I know it did because I cashed the checks on closing day. Anyone can guess at real property values.... and what they will or will not be, but until you have cashed the check.... you dont really "know".


1. You need to think again about your opinion of buying a home in Las Vegas in the 25K to 30K range back in 2010. You thought it was a terrible buy, and would stay at that low price for a very long time.

2. If you want an idea of what a property is worth, or will even rent for, just punch the street address into zillow.com and see what it tells you. You'll be in the ballpark.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

poppy said:


> Those items will go up due to inflation far greater than any gain you will get from any investment.


Speak for yourself, of course. If you investments can't keep pace with inflation, particularly when inflation is only about 1.5%, you need to rethink your strategy.

But a certain amount of inflation is a good thing. I know that Peter Schiff will disagree with me on that, but I've observed both high inflation and virtually no inflation. People prefer inflation.

You see, during times of high inflation people's salaries grow and their homes are suddenly worth more. You can argue that the actual money is worth less, but the fact is that when people have bigger paychecks and their assets are worth more they feel rich. They're happier, they buy more consumer goods, and the economy soars. People always look back on times with high inflation as good times.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> 1. You need to think again about your opinion of buying a home in Las Vegas in the 25K to 30K range back in 2010. You thought it was a terrible buy, and would stay at that low price for a very long time.
> 
> 2. If you want an idea of what a property is worth, or will even rent for, just punch the street address into zillow.com and see what it tells you. You'll be in the ballpark.


Nope, I didnt think it was a terrible buy.... I thought it was a rather rotten thing to do. (ethics and like that) As to zillow? :hysterical: :rotfl: Remind me again your qualifications for giving financial and investment advise! Zillow???? sheesh!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> People always look back on times with high inflation as good times.


right.... somehow my Yvonne's grandmother (and quite few other older folks I have talked to who lived in Germany) didnt seem to think it was any fun taking a bread box filled with inflated marks to the bakery..... hoping it would be enough to purchase the same loaf of bread it did yesterday. Your view of economics cracks me up sometimes.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Nevada said:


> People always look back on times with high inflation as good times.



:facepalm:


I contemplated many responses to that statement, but I think I prefer to just let it sit out there like a skunk in the garage.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

DEKE01 said:


> I contemplated many responses to that statement, but I think I prefer to just let it sit out there like a skunk in the garage.


Not only that, but the opposite is true. People see times with low inflation as bad times. With low inflation you get small raises and your investments don't grow much in value. Compared to healthy inflation, people actually feel cheated.

Reasonable or not, when your house doubles in value you don't care what the dollar is worth. All you care about is that your home is apparently worth twice as much. It seems like a good thing.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> right.... somehow my Yvonne's grandmother (and quite few other older folks I have talked to who lived in Germany) didnt seem to think it was any fun taking a bread box filled with inflated marks to the bakery..... hoping it would be enough to purchase the same loaf of bread it did yesterday. Your view of economics cracks me up sometimes.


We saw really high inflation (perhaps 10% annually) during the Carter years and the first Regan term. During that time salaries doubled, home prices doubled, and the stock market soared. When the Reagan recession hit in the early to mid 1980s Americans were shocked that their salaries and investments didn't grow much. They weren't used to that. Americans wanted their big raises and property appreciation back.

I suppose it's sort of like looking back on the Bush housing bubble. Regardless of how artificial or destructive the bubble might have been in the long run, Americans look back on the housing bubble as good times. Dangerous bubble or not, unemployment was low and everyone seemed to have plenty of money to spend. Good times were rolling.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

What does the price of homes have to do with fast food workers wanting $15 an hour???

You want to talk about homes and investing start another thread.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

mnn2501 said:


> What does the price of homes have to do with fast food workers wanting $15 an hour???


Inflation is at the heart of the minimum wage debate.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nate_in_IN said:


> If you are referring to Simi's post I didn't take it this way. It didn't sound as if he is begrudging the CEO that money.
> 
> I tend to agree that upper management is over valued in the US. The point is, not that I wish to limit how much the CEO makes, but _what does he / she bring to the table that warrents that compensation_. This is the same litmus test I apply to the minimum wage question.
> 
> ...


Think of a pro sport. What does one player bring to the table that warrants them making tens of millions of dollars a year? After all can't everyone in the pros shoot/hit/catch/pass/kick?

The reason is the team's owners THINK that player will help them make more money than the others. 

As for CEOs who get millions when the company loses money. If you had a company which was losing $10,000,000 a year. How are you going to get a high quality person who has the ability to turn things around to take charge of it? You are going to have to offer him a lot of money and bonuses if he does manage to turn it around. Now say the guy manages to turn things around so you only lose $1,000,000 this year would you not want to thank him for "saving" you $9,000,000 and, more importantly, keep him working for you not going to another in trouble company? How are you doing to that? You are going to have to pay him more money than the other companies.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Inflation is at the heart of the minimum wage debate.


No, its not. Most fast food workers do not own their own home, so your tying home pricing inflation to fast food workers misses the mark entirely.
And while inflation does hit everyone, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour will *instantly *cause massive inflation.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Inflation is at the heart of the minimum wage debate.


They are connected, but I think it would be more accurate to say that the minimum wage is at the heart of the inflation debate.... being one of the primary causes of inflation.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> *Prov. 29:7.* The righteous is concerned for the rights of the poor; the wicked does not understand such concern.
> 
> *1 John 3:17.* But whoever has the world's goods, and beholds his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him?
> 
> ...


Here's a couple for you (with context):

2 Thessalonians 3 (NIV)
_
__6 In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers and sisters, to keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teaching you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, 8 nor did we eat anyoneâs food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. 9 We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you to imitate. 10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: âThe one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.â_
_11 We hear that some among you are idle and disruptive. They are not busy; they are busybodies. 12 Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the food they eat. 13 And as for you, brothers and sisters, never tire of doing what is good._
_ 14 Take special note of anyone who does not obey our instruction in this letter. Do not associate with them, in order that they may feel ashamed. 15 Yet do not regard them as an enemy, but warn them as you would a fellow believer._


1 Tim 5 (NIV)

_9 No widow may be put on the list of widows unless she is over sixty, has been faithful to her husband, 10 and is well known for her good deeds, such as bringing up children, showing hospitality, washing the feet of the Lordâs people, helping those in trouble and devoting herself to all kinds of good deeds._
_ 11 As for younger widows, do not put them on such a list. For when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry. 12 Thus they bring judgment on themselves, because they have broken their first pledge. 13 Besides, they get into the habit of being idle and going about from house to house. And not only do they become idlers, but also busybodies who talk nonsense, saying things they ought not to. 14 So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander. 15 Some have in fact already turned away to follow Satan._

To me that says its against the teachings of Christ to give young healthy people free food, housing, money etc for doing nothing.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Not only that, but the opposite is true. People see times with low inflation as bad times. With low inflation you get small raises and your investments don't grow much in value. Compared to healthy inflation, people actually feel cheated.
> 
> Reasonable or not, when your house doubles in value you don't care what the dollar is worth. All you care about is that your home is apparently worth twice as much. It seems like a good thing.


Its only a good thing if yours is the only home that has doubled in value... which very seldom is the case, and then only if you actually sell the home! In reality higher property values just add to your expenses.... higher taxes while you own it, capital gains when you sell it, and then of course everyone elses homes have also doubled, so you get to pay double for your new place. Inflation is a loser every time. But there are those that eat it up with a spoon.... they "think" 20 dollars an hour is better than five bucks a day. even though a brand new model t ford could be had for 500 bucks.... or 100 days pay. Try the math at 20 bucks an hour (100 a day take home) and the 20k automobile of your choice today You will soon discover that your 20 bucks and hour is worth HALF of that 5 bucks a day Ford paid his people. (and most of them complained about that too)


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

watcher said:


> Think of a pro sport. What does one player bring to the table that warrants them making tens of millions of dollars a year? After all can't everyone in the pros shoot/hit/catch/pass/kick?
> 
> The reason is the team's owners THINK that player will help them make more money than the others.
> 
> As for CEOs who get millions when the company loses money. If you had a company which was losing $10,000,000 a year. How are you going to get a high quality person who has the ability to turn things around to take charge of it? You are going to have to offer him a lot of money and bonuses if he does manage to turn it around. Now say the guy manages to turn things around so you only lose $1,000,000 this year would you not want to thank him for "saving" you $9,000,000 and, more importantly, keep him working for you not going to another in trouble company? How are you doing to that? You are going to have to pay him more money than the other companies.


I consider professional atheletes differently than CEOs. The career expectation of an athelete is much shorter than that of a business person.

Just to be clear. I don't think there should be restrictions placed on the amount of money someone can make. If someone can sell themselves to a group of shareholders and establish a billion dollar salary it's none of my business. I wish both sides the best of luck.

It has been my experience however as an engineering consultant who has worked closely with many companies that having very high costs in upper management hurts a company more than it helps it. As I said I have met many CEOs from large companies and very few struck me as being worth the salary they draw. In fact the ones I hold in highest esteem tend to be the lower paid of the group.

What I don't like is when Government insists on tampering with a free market. For instance I still believe the bailouts (yes both wall street and main street) were a very bad thing to do. It's taking the risk away from the company stock-holders in stewardship of their companies. In fact I think it changed the role of the CEO from someone able to grow a business to someone who is able to get the most government bennies.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

ErinP said:


> Guys, you can spout all the sanctimonious, self-important stories you want.
> The fact still remains that the American taxpayer is heavily subsidizing McDonald's, WalMart's, etc. bottom line as well as the minimum wage.


Sorry but you have it backwards. This government is doing what fascist government always do, they are forcing McDees, WM et al to pay kick backs to be allowed to stay in business.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Did someone already post the $15/hr fast food worker? If not here he is.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> Here's a couple for you (with context):
> 
> 2 Thessalonians 3 (NIV)
> _
> ...


There is a difference between what is required of the individual followers of Christ vs. the general citizens of a country. My examples from the Law are what God set up to run the best possible country. Your rules are for the charitable donations of a Church. Two vastly different situations. 

Do you really think the government should withhold the social security benefits of any widow under 60 and force her to remarry? Or require anyone applying for their SS benefits to provide a complete religious resume proving they have lived a spotless life? I certainly hope not!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> I agree, and believe this is the reason that so many of these jobs are low-paying and organized labor hasn't been able to make much headway.
> 
> Humans are, let's face it, somewhat lazy, and risk-adverse. It's easier to apply for SNAP and CHIP (etc.) than it is to ask your boss for a raise, or try to organize a union and run the risk of being fired, or worse.
> 
> ...


Lazy workers LOVE unions. After all in a union job if you do JUST enough to not get fired long enough you get a raise. If you do just enough to not get fired long enough you can get promoted. If you don't do enough to not get fired you probably won't get fired because the union will not let the evil company fire a unfairly treated union member.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

It is The Unions that are the heart of this matter and no twisting tweaking or fabricating the truth at what is causing this uproar on minimum wage. It IS THE Unions.
There are There polical parties at work in todays government

The Republican Party

The Democratic party

AFL-CIO and all its affiliated sides as well as International Labor Movement
All pretty much support the liberal democratic side of things.

Don't be fooled by those that say it is inflation that is at the center of things it is NOT.
The Unions have been losing members right and left over the years and now is down to 7%
This is their way of getting MORE MONEY in their pockets.
The unions are not for the worker as they once were, Nope they are for themselves and how much dues they can collect and how many political figures they can brainwash over to their way of thinking.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Let's get specific here. What would be good choices right now? Invest in corporate stock, precious metals, or simply bank cash? Is that long term or short term advice, and what do you consider long & short term?


Short/medium term. . .Learn a trade. Around here anyone with any HVAC training can find a job in a week. If you have a class A CDL and NO EXPERIENCE you can start making $35K/hr tomorrow. 

Move. I know several people who have moved to get jobs. The last I heard there is still a huge demand for all kinds of workers in the Dakotas.


For long term. . .Invest in yourself and in stuff other people NEED not want. When things go bad you aren't going to be be able to eat your stocks, clothe yourself with your precious metals nor shelter yourself with cash and neither is anyone else. You'll be able to survive and trade for stuff you need if you have stuff or skills others need.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

watcher said:


> Did someone already post the $15/hr fast food worker? If not here he is.


But...but...but...(arms crossed, pouting) you have no proof raising the min wage eliminates jobs. 

:rock:


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> If you have a class A CDL and NO EXPERIENCE you can start making $35K/hr tomorrow.


$35K an hour? sign me up!

:rock:


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

watcher said:


> Lazy workers LOVE unions. After all in a union job if you do JUST enough to not get fired long enough you get a raise. If you do just enough to not get fired long enough you can get promoted. If you don't do enough to not get fired you probably won't get fired because the union will not let the evil company fire a unfairly treated union member.


To cross this with another current thread...

And supposedly, the VA is 80% union. Go figger.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> We saw really high inflation (perhaps 10% annually) during the Carter years and the first Regan term. *During that time salaries doubled*, home prices doubled, and the stock market soared. When the Reagan recession hit in the early to mid 1980s Americans were shocked that their salaries and investments didn't grow much. They weren't used to that.
> 
> I suppose it's sort of like looking back on the Bush housing bubble. Regardless of how artificial or destructive the bubble might have been in the long run, Americans look back on the housing bubble as good times. Dangerous bubble or not, unemployment was low and everyone seemed to have plenty of money to spend. Good times were rolling.


Maybe yours did, but nobody I know kept up with that inflation on their wages. A lot of us really felt the pinch of those years! When we were trying to buy our first house, interest on the mortgage was 14%, boy howdy does that cut into your buying power.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I was responding to a post about making choices. I wanted to hear what a smart conservative choice might be.


Here's some choices this conservative told his kids to make:


Put your trust in Christ and follow His teachings in your life.

Don't risk more than you can afford to lose.

Make yourself valuable by getting education and/or training.

Make yourself stand out, try to give more than a dollar's work for a dollar's pay and there will almost always be job for you somewhere.

Learn how to live 'poor' even if you aren't. 

If you want something, ask. The worse that can happen is they will say "no".

Don't routinely spend more than you make.

Have a plan to pay off any debt you must take on and follow that plan.

Buy with your brain not your feelings.

Don't get married until you are mature and able to financially able to support a home.

If you can't afford to feed them don't breed them. IOW don't have kids until you are financially able to pay to raise them.

All actions have consequences so think about what's going to happen before you take any action.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> Did someone already post the $15/hr fast food worker? If not here he is.


You're right more and more places are going to that.
I walked into a Hardee's in OK once that had that. I stood near the counter for a minute never saw a soul so I walked out and went elsewhere.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I presume you mean should we tax our citizens to then take that money to help the poor like we do in America?


Yep. And while you are at it check the Constitution and show me where it gives the federal government power to give tax money a person who is not providing a good nor service to the government for that money.




Patchouli said:


> "At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year's produce and store it in your towns, so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the aliens, the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied." Deuteronomy 14:28-29
> 
> Some of the Levites were healthy young adults as were the aliens (non-Jews in Israel).
> 
> There were plenty of rules that also applied to feeding the poor like the gleaning laws, etc.


Do you REALLY want to live under the law and not under grace?

Show me where Christ supported using force to take money from one person and give it to another. I posted where we are told if someone isn't willing to work they should not be allowed to take food from those who are and only 'old' widows should be supported. And in neither of those cases does it say "if someone doesn't want to support a widow you should take form him at the point of a sword".


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Its only a good thing if yours is the only home that has doubled in value... which very seldom is the case, and then only if you actually sell the home! In reality higher property values just add to your expenses.... higher taxes while you own it, capital gains when you sell it, and then of course everyone elses homes have also doubled, so you get to pay double for your new place. Inflation is a loser every time.


While all that's true, it's not how it works. You only profit from investments of you sell, but people don't need to sell to get a sense that things are ok. When people see their investment grow on paper they feel better about the financial situation, so they are quicker to buy things. They see gains on paper so they feel richer.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

watcher said:


> Short/medium term. . .Learn a trade. Around here anyone with any HVAC training can find a job in a week. If you have a class A CDL and NO EXPERIENCE you can start making $35K/hr tomorrow.
> 
> Move. I know several people who have moved to get jobs. The last I heard there is still a huge demand for all kinds of workers in the Dakotas.
> 
> ...


Where I grew up in southeastern VA, like me, it seemed that most everyone was a first or second generation immigrant from NC mostly, but SC, WV, and a few other southern states. They had all moved there during WW2 to work in the shipyards, rail yards, military base support, etc. They moved to where the jobs were and lived in cheap-0 housing that had been throw up to accommodate them. That's what people did because their country and families needed them to go where the work was. 

That's what responsible adults have done for eons. Part of what made the USA great was all those immigrants from 1607 to the 1960s who came to work, risk takers who were not guaranteed gov't handouts (except maybe raw land that had to be worked and worked hard) or a mandatory min wage for a lifetime of entry level work.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> They see gains on paper so they feel richer.


FEELING richer is NOT a good thing unless you ARE richer!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

jtbrandt said:


> FEELING richer is NOT a good thing unless you ARE richer!


No, but it greases the economy in the same way. It boosts consumer confidence, which goes a long way towards resolving this recession.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nate_in_IN said:


> It has been my experience however as an engineering consultant who has worked closely with many companies that having very high costs in upper management hurts a company more than it helps it. As I said I have met many CEOs from large companies and very few struck me as being worth the salary they draw. In fact the ones I hold in highest esteem tend to be the lower paid of the group.


Do you know what they actually do and how much they work. At my current job I hear people yapping about how "it must be nice" to be the boss and get paid well and an expensive company car and. . . . The thing is they go home at 1600 and don't see that most nights its 1900 or later before he leaves (I know because I have to lock up the office and gate after he leaves). They don't realize that he has to coordinate with manufactures on 4 continents, trucking companies, maritime companies, rail companies plus dealing with making sure there is enough toilet paper ordered. If I had to guess I'd say there's not one person in 10,000 who could do that job.




Nate_in_IN said:


> What I don't like is when Government insists on tampering with a free market. For instance I still believe the bailouts (yes both wall street and main street) were a very bad thing to do. It's taking the risk away from the company stock-holders in stewardship of their companies. In fact I think it changed the role of the CEO from someone able to grow a business to someone who is able to get the most government bennies.


When you live under a fascist government you have to play footsie with the government if you want to stay in business.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> There is a difference between what is required of the individual followers of Christ vs. the general citizens of a country. My examples from the Law are what God set up to run the best possible country. Your rules are for the charitable donations of a Church. Two vastly different situations.
> 
> Hey, I didn't bring God into the conversion I only responded.
> 
> ...


I don't think the government should be giving "benefits" to anyone for any reason. I think its completely and totally unconstitutional to do so.

Let's look at the supreme law of the land, the US Constitution. Show me where the federal government has the legal power (please cite the exact working and location in the USC) to use force of arms to take money from one citizen, via taxes, and give it DIRECTLY to another if the second person is not providing a good and/or service to the government in exchange for the money.

If you can not then its clear that its unconstitutional and therefore illegal.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> $35K an hour? sign me up!
> 
> :rock:


You are not my wife therefore you do not get to make fun of my mistakes.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

jtbrandt said:


> FEELING richer is NOT a good thing unless you ARE richer!


Actually, there are lots of economists who will disagree with that statement. There is an economic theory (called New Classical I think) that says that consumer sentiment is often the biggest driver in economic change. When people feel richer, they spend more, which makes people richer, which makes them spend more, which makes people feel richer...

And vice versa. 

Which is why that sometimes no matter what the fed or the gov't does to stimulate the economy, when consumers (the people) feel poor, the largest segment of GDP slows way down and cause Keynesian and Monetarist economic models to temporarily fail.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

watcher said:


> If I had to guess I'd say there's not one person in 10,000 who could do that job.


What you have to understand is that upper management in large businesses is a closed club. They appoint each other to their boards and hire each other to be CEOs of each other's companies.

These jobs are not competitive. When you hear that a CEO was hired for $150 million per year they didn't really shop the job around. Could they have found someone qualified to do it for $125 million? Sure, but it wasn't about salary, it was about who owed whom a favor.

A lot of these appointments are the product of alliances forged at ivy league colleges decades ago. You aren't going to become CEO of a Fortune 500 company by being good at what you do, you'll become a CEO because of who you know and what you can do for them.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> No, but it greases the economy in the same way. It boosts consumer confidence, which goes a long way towards resolving this recession.


But sometimes consumers should be LESS confident. I realize our economy depends on ever increasing consumption, but that is not a healthy foundation. Confidence feels good, but it just leads us further down the path to collapse.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

DEKE01 said:


> Actually, there are lots of economists who will disagree with that statement. There is an economic theory (called New Classical I think) that says that consumer sentiment is often the biggest driver in economic change. When people feel richer, they spend more, which makes people richer, which makes them spend more, which makes people feel richer...
> 
> And vice versa.
> 
> Which is why that sometimes no matter what the fed or the gov't does to stimulate the economy, when consumers (the people) feel poor, the largest segment of GDP slows way down and cause Keynesian and Monetarist economic models to temporarily fail.


You just said some things that go over my head, but isn't there such a thing as consumer OVER-confidence? Isn't that what creates bubbles that always inevitably burst? Spending more when you don't actually HAVE more sounds like it would necessarily increase debt.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Nevada said:


> What you have to understand is that upper management in large businesses is a closed club. They appoint each other to their boards and hire each other to be CEOs of each other's companies.
> 
> These jobs are not competitive. When you hear that a CEO was hired for $150 million per year they didn't really shop the job around. Could they have found someone qualified to do it for $125 million. Sure, but it wasn't about salary, it was about who owed whom a favor.
> 
> A lot of these appointments are the product of alliances forged at ivy league colleges decades ago. You aren't going to become CEO of a Fortune 500 company by being good at what you do, you'll become a CEO because of who you know and what you can do for them.


And based on your vast experience in those circles, who can argue with your informed facts. 

I disagree with your first paragraph about the jobs being competitive, but the second one I think you stumble blindly into the truth. If you were responsible for hiring a CEO, where would you go? Someone you knew or had knowledge of that had success elsewhere in a similar role? I've hired and assisted in hiring 1000s of people over the years, from hotel maids to Chief level business leaders and the only times I hired completely unknown, untested folks was for entry level work. The higher the responsibility, the more I needed to have known of them and their work for a long time. Those chief jobs were the most competitive hires on the basis of experience, skills, aptitude, and abilities. 

That being said, I have no experience with public company C level hires, as I suspect is the same with you.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> What you have to understand is that upper management in large businesses is a closed club. They appoint each other to their boards and hire each other to be CEOs of each other's companies.
> 
> These jobs are not competitive. When you hear that a CEO was hired for $150 million per year they didn't really shop the job around. Could they have found someone qualified to do it for $125 million? Sure, but it wasn't about salary, it was about who owed whom a favor.
> 
> A lot of these appointments are the product of alliances forged at ivy league colleges decades ago. You aren't going to become CEO of a Fortune 500 company by being good at what you do, you'll become a CEO because of who you know and what you can do for them.


There is some truth to that, but it isn't an absolute. I'm sure there are plenty of CEOs of Fortune 500 companies who have gotten there by being good at their job. And I don't think any in the U.S. make $150 million a year. Last I heard the top earners were around half that.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

jtbrandt said:


> You just said some things that go over my head, but isn't there such a thing as consumer OVER-confidence? Isn't that what creates bubbles that always inevitably burst? Spending more when you don't actually HAVE more sounds like it would necessarily increase debt.


Yep. You are correct. Sometimes more debt is good. After our last housing bubble burst, consumer debt shrank which meant consumer spending slowed, which meant businesses sold less and laid off folks, which made consumers feel poorer. This is why is takes a long time to change economic directions sometimes. 

There are lots of folks who will tell you one economic school of thought is best, but the real truth from my studies is that they are all right...sometimes. The hard part is knowing when.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

DEKE01 said:


> Yep. You are correct. Sometimes more debt is good. After our last housing bubble burst, consumer debt shrank which meant consumer spending slowed, which meant businesses sold less and laid off folks, which made consumers feel poorer. This is why is takes a long time to change economic directions sometimes.
> 
> There are lots of folks who will tell you one economic school of thought is best, but the real truth from my studies is that they are all right...sometimes. The hard part is knowing when.


I think you just gave me a lot to think about. I haven't studied economics much at all so my ideas are mostly just what "seems" to make sense. It just seems that consumer confidence in a system propped up by enormous amounts of debt (consumer and government) is very dangerous, and without the artificial influences it would probably not be quite so slow to change...which would probably make for a bumpy ride sometimes, but better than not knowing what the heck is going on. I might spend the rest of my life pondering these things, and probably won't come to any conclusions. But interesting nonetheless. Thanks for the explanation.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

DEKE01 said:


> Actually, there are lots of economists who will disagree with that statement. There is an economic theory (called New Classical I think) that says that consumer sentiment is often the biggest driver in economic change. When people feel richer, they spend more, which makes people richer, which makes them spend more, which makes people feel richer...
> 
> And vice versa.
> 
> Which is why that sometimes no matter what the fed or the gov't does to stimulate the economy, when consumers (the people) feel poor, the largest segment of GDP slows way down and cause Keynesian and Monetarist economic models to temporarily fail.


This is true. There is also a "speed of money". As consumers gain confidence and spend more money the money _accelerates_. This gives the effect of having more currency in the marketplace and can create inflation without even needing more printed currency.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

DEKE01 said:


> Sometimes more debt is good. .


Not to the person in debt.
Does it stimulate the economy? yes it does, but its a false and unsustainable stimulation. 
The economy did fine in the 1940's- 1960's when cash was king.


----------



## unregistered353870 (Jan 16, 2013)

Nevada said:


> A lot of these appointments are the product of alliances forged at ivy league colleges decades ago. You aren't going to become CEO of a Fortune 500 company by being good at what you do, you'll become a CEO because of who you know and what you can do for them.


Your post piqued my interest in this so I started doing some reading. The #1 company on the Fortune 500 last year was Walmart...led by CEO Mike Duke (he has since been replaced) who has an industrial engineering degree from Georgia Tech. That's a good school, but far from Ivy League...and sounds similar to your chemical engineering degree from Ohio State. Just an anecdote I found interesting, not meant to prove or disprove anything.

ETA: And #2 was Exxon, whose CEO has a civil engineering degree from University of Texas...even more similar to your background. Started as an engineer at Exxon and worked his way up. Looks like about half of the top 10 companies' CEOs have engineering degrees from state schools.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> While all that's true, it's not how it works. You only profit from investments of you sell, but people don't need to sell to get a sense that things are ok. When people see their investment grow on paper they feel better about the financial situation, so they are quicker to buy things. They see gains on paper so they feel richer.


Not necessarily... it all depends upon the investment... my grandfather invested time labor and money into his farm... and turned a tidy profit every year he owned it.... along with a major profit when he sold out and retired. I have some rental properties... that turn a profit every year with out selling them. The difference is some investments pay regular returns, others only when you sell. Some stocks pay dividends, others dont. Gold and silver??? nope, you pretty much gotta sell it to see a return. The point is that a whole lotta folks that think they are doing great..... and sadly they are rapidly going broke and dont even know it. That pay raise they just got is going to cost them more in the long run than it will be worth. Anytime someone makes more money for the same production it devalues everyones money. inflation is never a good thing.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> inflation is never a good thing.


For the consumer, you are 100% correct.

The government however is another story, high inflation allows them to pay off old debt with devalued money, allows them to collect more taxes (tax rates never are adjusted for inflation)


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

mnn2501 said:


> For the consumer, you are 100% correct.
> 
> The government however is another story, high inflation allows them to pay off old debt with devalued money, allows them to collect more taxes (tax rates never are adjusted for inflation)


Sure. If you have $17 trillion in debt and 10% inflation for just 1 year, that effectively cancels $1.7 trillion in debt. If you have that for 8 years running like we had in the late 1970s and early 1980s, that would effectively cancel half the national debt.

But it's not true that an individual can't also take advantage of inflation. Mortgage debt is effectively canceled by inflation, and there are investments that meet or beat even the highest inflation.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> Yep. And while you are at it check the Constitution and show me where it gives the federal government power to give tax money a person who is not providing a good nor service to the government for that money.
> 
> Do you REALLY want to live under the law and not under grace?
> 
> Show me where Christ supported using force to take money from one person and give it to another. I posted where we are told if someone isn't willing to work they should not be allowed to take food from those who are and only 'old' widows should be supported. And in neither of those cases does it say "if someone doesn't want to support a widow you should take form him at the point of a sword".


I presume you don't think God and Jesus are the same person? The Law is the stick to smack people who won't take the carrot.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> I don't think the government should be giving "benefits" to anyone for any reason. I think its completely and totally unconstitutional to do so.
> 
> Let's look at the supreme law of the land, the US Constitution. Show me where the federal government has the legal power (please cite the exact working and location in the USC) to use force of arms to take money from one citizen, via taxes, and give it DIRECTLY to another if the second person is not providing a good and/or service to the government in exchange for the money.
> 
> If you can not then its clear that its unconstitutional and therefore illegal.


When you quote me please do not add your words in the middle of mine. It's not really my quote anymore. 

Your argument was that taking care of the poor through taxes was unbiblical. We were never discussing if it was constitutional only if it was biblical. Any time you want to go back to that let me know. I already addressed whether or not our laws in America should be based on religion.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> I presume you don't think God and Jesus are the same person?


God is a title and Jesus is a name, but the Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father.

What does this have to do with fast food workers?

:hijacked:


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I presume you don't think God and Jesus are the same person? The Law is the stick to smack people who won't take the carrot.


The law was fulfilled by Christ. It it were not we would still have to sacrifice sheep and bulls to cover our sins.

Since the law was fulfilled we are not bound by it. Therefore if you cause an accident which blinds someone in one eye you don't have to have one of your eyes gouged out.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

watcher said:


> The law was fulfilled by Christ. It it were not we would still have to sacrifice sheep and bulls to cover our sins.


You really believe animal sacrifice was effective to cover our sins?



watcher said:


> Since the law was fulfilled we are not bound by it. Therefore if you cause an accident which blinds someone in one eye you don't have to have one of your eyes gouged out.


So why do we have lawsuits? Is seems that it would be enough to say that an accident that blinds someone in one eye doesn't require compensation because Biblical law was fulfilled. No?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> You really believe animal sacrifice was effective to cover our sins?
> 
> 
> 
> So why do we have lawsuits? Is seems that it would be enough to say that an accident that blinds someone in one eye doesn't require compensation because Biblical law was fulfilled. No?


I don't think most lawyers are religious! So, they don't care about anything but cash!!!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

mnn2501 said:


> God is a title and Jesus is a name, but the Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father.
> 
> What does this have to do with fast food workers?
> 
> :hijacked:


Are you the official thread policeman? I was under the impression thread drift was perfectly acceptable. And this is pertinent to some of us, you are welcome to go back and read the discussion if you like.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> The law was fulfilled by Christ. It it were not we would still have to sacrifice sheep and bulls to cover our sins.
> 
> Since the law was fulfilled we are not bound by it. Therefore if you cause an accident which blinds someone in one eye you don't have to have one of your eyes gouged out.


Nobody said we were bound by it. That does not mean it is no longer instructive.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

mnn2501 said:


> God is a title and Jesus is a name, but the Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father.
> 
> What does this have to do with fast food workers?
> 
> :hijacked:


You got that right this has nothing to do with the OP.
This country don't not have a religion. Which is a good thing.
We may be a Christ like nation but not a Christian nation.
So This union backed wage increase in pay has nothing to do if this county believes in Christ or not.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

Now I don't know if this has been addressed here or not. I haven't ready all 11 pages of posts.

Who is the biggest culprit of not paying a "living" wage and just barely minimum wage? Note they are also the same ones who have the biggest disparity of pay between men and women.



If you guessed the US Government, then you would be correct.. So what gives the Government the Right to dictate (yes that is what it is) what companies pay?

A private in the military makes about $18000 a year, that equates to $8 and change an hour based on a 40 hour week and we know that they work more than that...

So Government has no standing in dictating what wage is paid to workers..
If you still believe that Government does have that right, then I'm assuming you would take investment advice from Bernie Madoff..


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

beowoulf90 said:


> Now I don't know if this has been addressed here or not. I haven't ready all 11 pages of posts.
> 
> Who is the biggest culprit of not paying a "living" wage and just barely minimum wage? Note they are also the same ones who have the biggest disparity of pay between men and women.
> 
> ...


I'd say the situations are pretty analogous and do give the government some standing in setting private wages. Included above that private's paycheck are things like food, housing and health care. The government provides many of these same things to private sector workers through a variety of social programs. As long as the government is going to provide these benefits and thus subsidize wages and remove a portion of the true cost of business from employers it certainly has an obligation to set a minimum floor for pay.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

beowoulf90 said:


> Now I don't know if this has been addressed here or not. I haven't ready all 11 pages of posts.
> 
> Who is the biggest culprit of not paying a "living" wage and just barely minimum wage? Note they are also the same ones who have the biggest disparity of pay between men and women.
> 
> ...


 They should not be in any of companies business. That is whats wrong in todays business climate. Too many government rules and regulations and red tape bureaucracy


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

mmoetc said:


> I'd say the situations are pretty analogous and do give the government some standing in setting private wages. Included above that private's paycheck are things like food, housing and health care. The government provides many of these same things to private sector workers through a variety of social programs. As long as the government is going to provide these benefits and thus subsidize wages and remove a portion of the true cost of business from employers it certainly has an obligation to set a minimum floor for pay.


If your argument is that, since Government is providing for necessities that employees are lacking from their employer, they should set a level to limit how much employers can lean upon this resource then shouldn't the minimum wage be _decreased_ since Obamacare is picking up the tab on health insurance?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Nate_in_IN said:


> If your argument is that, since Government is providing for necessities that employees are lacking from their employer, they should set a level to limit how much employers can lean upon this resource then shouldn't the minimum wage be _decreased_ since Obamacare is picking up the tab on health insurance?


Actually my argument would be that businesses should provide a level of income high enough that the government wouldn't need to provide subsidies for any of these things, putting the burden for negotiating the level of compensation solely between employer and employee. Had every employer been providing health insurance to every employee your premise would have merit. They didn't and it doesn't.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

mmoetc said:


> Actually my argument would be that businesses should provide a level of income high enough that the government wouldn't need to provide subsidies for any of these things, putting the burden for negotiating the level of compensation solely between employer and employee. Had every employer been providing health insurance to every employee your premise would have merit. They didn't and it doesn't.


But doesn't removing the need for employees to seek further compensation from employers lead to lower wages? I stated in an earlier post that employees are generally compensated to the level of the value it takes to replace them. As an engineer I know there are very few other people who will perform the same service as I and would not require health insurance as a benefit. Therefore I can easily make the same demand and expect, with a fair amount of confidence, to receive it.

Now, let's hypothetically suppose Obamacare is a huge success and it's subsidies allow people like myself to have a viable alternate source for health insurance. Do you think engineers will continue to keep health insurance as a requirement for their employment? I think this will lead to a reduction of employer provided health benefits.

Applying this same logic to minimum wage workers, the more resources the government provides to the employees, the less they will demand from their employer and the lower their private sector compensation will become. Kind of a self fulfilling prophecy for the progressive mentality.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Nate_in_IN said:


> Now, let's hypothetically suppose Obamacare is a huge success


:shocked:

Now you're just being ridiculous. Please keep this thread out of the realm of fantasy. 

:happy:


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> Actually my argument would be that businesses should provide a level of income high enough that the government wouldn't need to provide subsidies for any of these things, putting the burden for negotiating the level of compensation solely between employer and employee. Had every employer been providing health insurance to every employee your premise would have merit. They didn't and it doesn't.


The government need not provide any subsidies for anyone. as a matter of fact such practice is actually forbidden by our Constitution.... not that any one cares about that old outdated piece of paper. No citizen in this country should be automatically entitled to health care insurance just because they are breathing. We all should have the same right to purchase our own, have an employer or our rich aunt Sally provide it for us IF THEY SO DESIRE, but no employer nor other citizen should be forced to provide it for us, and we should have the right to just walk away from it and not carry any if we dont want it.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

DEKE01 said:


> :shocked:
> 
> Now you're just being ridiculous. Please keep this thread out of the realm of fantasy.
> 
> :happy:


Actually it's not ridiculous at all; at least not in the short term. The success of the ACA has such huge political ramifications currently that it will have vast sums of money thrown at it. Enough to keep it afloat long enough to do the damage I am anticipating.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> You really believe animal sacrifice was effective to cover our sins?


According to God blood must be used to make atonement for sin.




Nevada said:


> So why do we have lawsuits? Is seems that it would be enough to say that an accident that blinds someone in one eye doesn't require compensation because Biblical law was fulfilled. No?


An eye for an eye wasn't compensation therefore your logic fails.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Nobody said we were bound by it. That does not mean it is no longer instructive.


Only to show us, as much as possible, the heart of God. 

It shows that He cares about His people and wants them to stay healthy. If you read the laws on food and cleanliness you will see following them would prevent a lot of the common diseases of old. One reason Jews were view as strange in places was because they did not get the sicknesses the rest of the population did_.

_You will also see something most people DO NOT want to see. You'll see God has very strict 'rules' and is very harsh to those who break those rules.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Does it stimulate the economy? yes it does, but its a false and unsustainable stimulation.



The CBO projects that by 2024 -- just 10 years from now -- the interest on the national debt will consume 3.3% of the GDP, and will be roughly equal to what we spend on Medicare. 



We are saddling our children and grandchildren with a huge debt burden. A wise man once said something to the effect that if trouble was inevitable, let it be in his time, so his children could live in peace. We've taken the opposite tack -- we're saying, "If there is going to be hardship, let it be in my children's time, so I can enjoy myself now!"




> Since the law was fulfilled we are not bound by it. Therefore if you cause an accident which blinds someone in one eye you don't have to have one of your eyes gouged out.



You still can't be gay, though, as we learned in a recent thread. It seems the Law has been fulfilled in all respects but that one! :hysterical:




> Actually my argument would be that businesses should provide a level of income high enough that the government wouldn't need to provide subsidies for any of these things, putting the burden for negotiating the level of compensation solely between employer and employee.



But employees are unlikely to pluck up the courage to make demands of their employers as long as they can receive the same benefits risk-free from the government.




> Applying this same logic to minimum wage workers, the more resources the government provides to the employees, the less they will demand from their employer and the lower their private sector compensation will become. Kind of a self fulfilling prophecy for the progressive mentality.



DING DING DING, we have a winner! Incidentally, I've been making this argument for a good 6 months over on a liberal forum, and they insist I'm just a big meanie who wants to take welfare away from the poor.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

willow_girl said:


> DING DING DING, we have a winner! Incidentally, I've been making this argument for a good 6 months over on a liberal forum, and they insist I'm just a big meanie who wants to take welfare away from the poor.


Taking welfare from the poor is not being a meanie..... its called tough love.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

willow_girl said:


> The CBO projects that by 2024 -- just 10 years from now -- the interest on the national debt will consume 3.3% of the GDP, and will be roughly equal to what we spend on Medicare.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The difficulty comes in finding the balance between helping those those who truly need the help and not disincentivising those who have the ability to help themselves. I don't deny that the current safety net is too large. But it doesn't just benefit those directly receiving the benefits. It is a boon to every business that doesn't pay the true cost of their labor. It props up the profits of those companies, their stock prices and dividends, and the salaries and bonuses paid to top executives. It benefits everyone who has a retirement account invested in the stock market. All of these are powerful interests and all of these interests will exert what influence they can to maintain the status quo. Everyone votes their self interest.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> The difficulty comes in finding the balance between helping those those who truly need the help and not disincentivising those who have the ability to help themselves. I don't deny that the current safety net is too large. But it doesn't just benefit those directly receiving the benefits. It is a boon to every business that doesn't pay the true cost of their labor. It props up the profits of those companies, their stock prices and dividends, and the salaries and bonuses paid to top executives. It benefits everyone who has a retirement account invested in the stock market. All of these are powerful interests and all of these interests will exert what influence they can to maintain the status quo. Everyone votes their self interest.


The difficulty comes in finding where in the constitution the federal government is given the power to give away tax dollars.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

watcher said:


> The difficulty comes in finding where in the constitution the federal government is given the power to give away tax dollars.


Its not that difficult, they simply ignore the Constitution and keep giving the money away. It buys lots of votes!


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Its not that difficult, they simply ignore the Constitution and keep giving the money away. It buys lots of votes!


And keeps corporate money flowing into their campaign coffers.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> Only to show us, as much as possible, the heart of God.
> 
> It shows that He cares about His people and wants them to stay healthy. If you read the laws on food and cleanliness you will see following them would prevent a lot of the common diseases of old. One reason Jews were view as strange in places was because they did not get the sicknesses the rest of the population did_.
> 
> _You will also see something most people DO NOT want to see. You'll see God has very strict 'rules' and is very harsh to those who break those rules.


Exactly! Now you are on the right track. The Laws show us the heart of God and what he feels a country should do for it's people. He looks out for their health, their food, their families and most especially the poor. He made law after law to protect those at the bottom of the ladder. To make sure they were not abused, they were fed and clothed, etc. And one of the ways he did that was by taking a tithe from those who had and giving it to the poor and strangers and those with no land.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> Exactly! Now you are on the right track. The Laws show us the heart of God and what he feels a country should do for it's people. He looks out for their health, their food, their families and most especially the poor. He made law after law to protect those at the bottom of the ladder. To make sure they were not abused, they were fed and clothed, etc. And one of the ways he did that was by taking a tithe from those who had and giving it to the poor and strangers and those with no land.


Ah, but were these secular laws or religious laws? I think the goal should be for _government_ to stay out of religious law. It's fine for your shurch to require a tithe to distribute to the poor but not the Federal Government. Why? Because not everyone follows the same religious beliefs.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> Exactly! Now you are on the right track. The Laws show us the heart of God and what he feels a country should do for it's people. He looks out for their health, their food, their families and most especially the poor. He made law after law to protect those at the bottom of the ladder. To make sure they were not abused, they were fed and clothed, etc. And one of the ways he did that was by taking a tithe from those who had and giving it to the poor and strangers and those with no land.


let's be clear, God does not equal gov't. Tithe to whatever religion suits you, including if you put your faith in the gov't to do the right thing. But God did not threaten non tithers with SWAT teams and imprisonment.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

DEKE01 said:


> let's be clear, God does not equal gov't. Tithe to whatever religion suits you, including if you put your faith in the gov't to do the right thing. But God did not threaten non tithers with SWAT teams and imprisonment.


Thats true... God didnt threaten with swat teams and imprisonment.... He had a better game going than that.... like roasting your stingy hide in hades for eternity!


----------



## Win07_351 (Dec 7, 2008)

It's interesting to note that when God asked for a tithe and for freewill offerings he promised abundant blessings to his people for obedience to his laws. (Mal. 3:10-12)

This is quite different to the government of man who only knows forced taxation by threats at end of a gun barrel and thru liens/property seizure.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Thats true... God didnt threaten with swat teams and imprisonment.... He had a better game going than that.... like roasting your stingy hide in hades for eternity!


Let's be clear, if you failed to tithe and lied about it you were stricken dead. Acts 5:5-6


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Let's be clear, if you failed to tithe and lied about it you were stricken dead. Acts 5:5-6


I worked out a system for tithing years ago. got tired of trying to figure it all out... is it 10 percent of gross or take home... what to do with those odd bonus checks and found money? heres what I did... anytime I came into a few bucks... on payday or selling something... even found money, I put it ALL on a plate and toss it up in the air to God.... He keeps what He needs and whatever falls back to the floor is mine.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> And keeps corporate money flowing into their campaign coffers.


Yep, when you have the power to put a business out of business you can bet those businesses will be more than willing to pay money to you.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Exactly! Now you are on the right track. The Laws show us the heart of God and what he feels a country should do for it's people. He looks out for their health, their food, their families and most especially the poor. He made law after law to protect those at the bottom of the ladder. To make sure they were not abused, they were fed and clothed, etc. And one of the ways he did that was by taking a tithe from those who had and giving it to the poor and strangers and those with no land.


But did He instruct the Jews to use their swords to force those who didn't believe to pay tithes? 

To cheapen it a lot think of a Home Owner's Association. If you want to live in an area you have to agree to join and follow the rules of the HOA and that HOA has the right to force you to do so. But that HOA does not have the right to force someone living across town to pay dues nor follow their rules.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Let's be clear, if you failed to tithe and lied about it you were stricken dead. Acts 5:5-6


You might want to read a little more, start in Acts 4:35 and read to Acts 5:10. That stor_y_ has NOTHING to do with tithing.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Was


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Was


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Was


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

DEKE01 said:


> let's be clear, God does not equal gov't. Tithe to whatever religion suits you, including if you put your faith in the gov't to do the right thing. But God did not threaten non tithers with SWAT teams and imprisonment.


No just stoning.....


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

here is another was / is, thanks in part to high labor costs. But the Dems will keep assuring us that min wage law does not cost jobs.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> The difficulty comes in finding the balance between helping those those who truly need the help and not disincentivising those who have the ability to help themselves.


It's actually pretty easy if we had the political will to do it. You say you need charity? Fine, but in return for it, you'll be required to spend your days performing some menial tasks, like emptying trash barrels in the park or picking up trash alongside the highway. If you say you're too handicapped to do even that, fine; we require only that you show up at our facility and warm a chair for 8 hours a day. Please leave all electronic devices at the door ...

Under those conditions, everyone who truly needs help will comply; but those who actually are capable of taking care of themselves will say, "Screw this -- if I'm going to work all day, I'm going to go out and make some _real_ money," and will do so.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

That sounds good, but by the time you pay people to supervise the recipients, the programs become much more expensive. Maybe in the long haul the savings would materialize if people leave the programs like we think logic dictates they should, but in the short term you are talking about expanding the govt payroll by a whole bunch. 

And prisoners already do a lot of those tasks in some areas. We have had a crew from the Cameron facility in town this week helping clean up tornado debris, they earn a whopping $7 per day. I know they still use prisoners for work in Wyoming, too, not sure about other places, maybe the practice has fallen out of favor?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

If you put 100 people in a room one will be the smartest and one will be the dumbest. Everyone else will fall somewhere between those two.

Motivated smart people earn more money than lazy dumb people.


----------



## abbrewer (Dec 24, 2013)

I agree that there will be the smartest and dumbest in the room, and the smartest will typically be the most successful, but how is this different than India's class system that marginalizes those who were born into a lower class and relegated them to a life of poverty? We just have a capitalist class structure relegating those who were born into a "less intelligent" or less educated, or less driven family "class" to a life of working a McDonald's type job.

I don't know if raising their wages is the answer or not, it's a complicated issue, but the best society is a society where everyone is allowed to feed their family, even if they don't get ahead like an "intelligent" individual. 

Remember, often your intelligence level is simply a mental block in someones head because nobody told them that they were intelligent or could be successful.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

abbrewer said:


> the best society is a society where everyone is allowed to feed their family,


And we know this because???? it sounds good?? or because some people want to live in the land of flying unicorns and think everyone else should too?


----------



## wes917 (Sep 26, 2011)

HDRider said:


> If you put 100 people in a room one will be the smartest and one will be the dumbest. Everyone else will fall somewhere between those two.
> 
> Motivated smart people earn more money than lazy dumb people.



I think it should read "Motivated people earn more than lazy people". 

I know many a motivated person who has done well for themselves but are not the smartest in the room, they simply wanted it more and put in the effort.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

wes917 said:


> I think it should read "Motivated people earn more than lazy people".
> 
> I know many a motivated person who has done well for themselves but are not the smartest in the room, they simply wanted it more and put in the effort.


Exactly!

My 13-year old DD is academically gifted. Her IQ is about 145, and she's just an unbelievable thinker. 

Her sister is 12, has an IQ of 100 on the nose, and is learning disabled in Math. She's also got a processing disorder so she thinks very very slowly.

However my "smart" DD is unmotivated to do well, hates to do work, and wants to sit on her rear end all day and be catered to . My "not so smart" DD has an incredible work ethic and is willing to jump thru the hoops and do whatever it takes to get the job done.

Guess which one of my girls I worry about the most? I'll give you a hint - it's NOT the one with the genius-level IQ.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> It's actually pretty easy if we had the political will to do it. You say you need charity? Fine, but in return for it, you'll be required to spend your days performing some menial tasks, like emptying trash barrels in the park or picking up trash alongside the highway. If you say you're too handicapped to do even that, fine; we require only that you show up at our facility and warm a chair for 8 hours a day. Please leave all electronic devices at the door ...
> 
> Under those conditions, everyone who truly needs help will comply; but those who actually are capable of taking care of themselves will say, "Screw this -- if I'm going to work all day, I'm going to go out and make some _real_ money," and will do so.


You can't do that because you'd put all of those unionized civil service workers out of work.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

abbrewer said:


> I agree that there will be the smartest and dumbest in the room, and the smartest will typically be the most successful, but how is this different than India's class system that marginalizes those who were born into a lower class and relegated them to a life of poverty? We just have a capitalist class structure relegating those who were born into a "less intelligent" or less educated, or less driven family "class" to a life of working a McDonald's type job.
> 
> I don't know if raising their wages is the answer or not, it's a complicated issue, but the best society is a society where everyone is allowed to feed their family, even if they don't get ahead like an "intelligent" individual.
> 
> Remember, often your intelligence level is simply a mental block in someones head because nobody told them that they were intelligent or could be successful.


The value of a job in the free market is base on two things. One, how much the employer is willing to pay and two, the number of people who are willing and able to do the job.

Its a fact of life that intelligent people are able to do more jobs than "dumber" people. For example almost anyone can 'cook' at McDees but fewer people are able to track inventory, project future needs and order the correct amount of supplies. That means the people able to do inventory have the ability to demand more pay than those looking to cook.

There are some people who no matter how much you help them will never be able to do much more than be a cook.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

abbrewer said:


> I agree that there will be the smartest and dumbest in the room, and the smartest will typically be the most successful, but how is this different than India's class system that marginalizes those who were born into a lower class and relegated them to a life of poverty? We just have a capitalist class structure relegating those who were born into a "less intelligent" or less educated, or less driven family "class" to a life of working a McDonald's type job.
> 
> I don't know if raising their wages is the answer or not, it's a complicated issue, but the best society is a society where everyone is allowed to feed their family, even if they don't get ahead like an "intelligent" individual.
> 
> Remember, often your intelligence level is simply a mental block in someones head because nobody told them that they were intelligent or could be successful.


Sorry I wasn't more specific. I was talking about America.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> but the best society is a society where everyone is allowed to feed their family,


So if I'm a high school dropout without any marketable skills, and I nevertheless choose to have six children, I magically should be provided with the opportunity to earn enough to feed my family?

How, exactly, does that work?

I think most single adults, in most places, could manage to keep a roof over their heads by working full-time at the minimum wage. No, you might not be able to live in San Francisco, Seattle or Manhattan. You might have to share an apartment or even rent a room. You may need to get around by bicycle or use public transportation rather than owning a car. But you probably won't starve to death.

The problem I see is that too many people have more "family" than they can support, given their educational/skills level and earning potential. And whose fault, really, is that?


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> You can't do that because you'd put all of those unionized civil service workers out of work.


Hey, I get to make up the rules as to how things are done in Willow's Libertarian Utopia.


----------



## NJ Rich (Dec 14, 2005)

Shrek said:


> Fast food jobs should be only short term part time minimum wage plus a buck or so in raises jobs to prepare teenage workers for other jobs. Those who choose to restrict themselves to those fast food jobs should accept the lower wages those jobs typically offer.
> 
> I have known many with inadequate for the real world education who worked fast food jobs and furthered their education through night classes and eventually got away from the fast food jobs.
> 
> ...


The minimum wage was made to give entry level people some experience working and making some money. It was for mostly teenagers and low or no experience workers. It was never meant to be a wage to support a family.

Most of the fast food places here have hispanic workers and many don't even speak English. They work in the back or make fries and all their orders are given to them in Spanish. Many times the order comes out wrong. I seldom go to those places.

The hispanic population here has destroyed the construction job market. How can a good skilled workers live here on the money paid to, in many cases, illegal workers. You know they are illegal if a van topped by a pile of ladders and full of people, are in and accident and by the time the police arrive only the driver is there.

You want to go to the front of a line at Motor vehicles? Wear a hat the says, ICE. Wear that in a fast food place and most the help would run for the doors. LOL :clap:


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

NJ Rich said:


> *The minimum wage was made to give entry level people some experience working and making some money*. It was for mostly teenagers and low or no experience workers. It was never meant to be a wage to support a family.
> 
> Most of the fast food places here have hispanic workers and many don't even speak English. They work in the back or make fries and all their orders are given to them in Spanish. Many times the order comes out wrong. I seldom go to those places.
> 
> ...


No, the minimum wage was instituted to keep employers from exploiting or taking unfair advantage of workers. Supporting a family got nothing to do with it, it just sets a base because there are employers that would squeeze their workers down to 3rd world wages if it wasn't there.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

NJ Rich said:


> The minimum wage was made to give entry level people some experience working and making some money. It was for mostly teenagers and low or no experience workers. It was never meant to be a wage to support a family.
> 
> Most of the fast food places here have hispanic workers and many don't even speak English. They work in the back or make fries and all their orders are given to them in Spanish. Many times the order comes out wrong. I seldom go to those places.
> 
> ...


 So true. There never should be a Law stating what a place HAS to pay, it will get higher as companies want to KEEP good employees. And that is what it should be, entry level Yes have that low for a good reason, Training costs companies money, if some can't learn what they are to do why in the world should the employer be FORCED to pay a higher wage. A wage that is equal to the ones that work hard, is there on time and wants to Improve Themselves, so many now days just want to stay put on the lower rung of the ladder knowing the government swill come alone and get them a raise without them working for it or applying themselves to do better to EARN a higher wage.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Minimum wage is about supply and demand. 
If the USA didn't have a unlimited supply of immigrants and a demand that working people be able to live in a civilized mannor there wouldn't be a demand for a minimum wage.


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

This minimum wage argument is ridiculous. These jobs were never intended to be full time and support an individual, keep a roof over their heads, etc. Such jobs were intended for kids and part timers who just wanted a little supplemental income. People in these jobs screaming for a big increase should do what it takes to position themselves into a better line of work.


My company pays an average of $20 per hour and we struggle to get help.
Biggest challenges are; they have to look presentable in front of clients, can't use tobacco on job, have to be drug free, need some basic reading, writing & math skills, need to be reliable and have a good attitude. If they have this, we will train the job skills. 

You would be surprised how small the pool that can meet the above criteria is.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Fishindude said:


> This minimum wage argument is ridiculous. These jobs were never intended to be full time and support an individual, keep a roof over their heads, etc. Such jobs were intended for kids and part timers who just wanted a little supplemental income. People in these jobs screaming for a big increase should do what it takes to position themselves into a better line or work.
> 
> 
> My company pays an average of $20 per hour and we struggle to get help.
> ...



In the first paragraph you say that you intended jobs for kids and those part timers that need a little supplemental income. 
That insinuates that you ccreated these jobs with those people's needs in mind. 
I don't believe it
Those jobs are created because the work needs done. It's that simple. Of course because those jobs are simple industry has discovered that they can take advantage of certain portions of the population to do that work and pay those portions of the population less money. 
If those jobs were intended to be entry-level jobs there would be a clear career track leading upward from there. 

In your second paragraph you then go ahead and list a bunch of reasons for those not to be entry-level jobs because you want more than an entry-level person ,so you justify paying more.


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

*In the first paragraph you say that you intended jobs for kids and those part timers that need a little supplemental income. 
That insinuates that you ccreated these jobs with those people's needs in mind. 
I don't believe it
Those jobs are created because the work needs done. It's that simple. Of course because those jobs are simple industry has discovered that they can take advantage of certain portions of the population to do that work and pay those portions of the population less money. 
If those jobs were intended to be entry-level jobs there would be a clear career track leading upward from there. *

Sorry, but most minimum wage simply require very little skill. The main requirement is that you show up. There is no "career track" for MacDonalds employees. They need one decently paid manager per store, per shift, and the rest are pretty much "bodies" assembling and handing out food orders. Same story at these light manufacturing plants where it's simple manual labor, connecting part A to part B. No skills required, just get to work and do your thing. They don't need a bunch more managers.

*In your second paragraph you then go ahead and list a bunch of reasons for those not to be entry-level jobs because you want more than an entry-level person ,so you justify paying more.*
Since when are the following anything more than entry level requirements:

Can't use tobacco on job
Drug free
Need some basic reading, writing & math skills
Need to be reliable
Need to have a good attitude.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

AmericanStand said:


> In the first paragraph you say that you intended jobs for kids and those part timers that need a little supplemental income.
> That insinuates that you ccreated these jobs with those people's needs in mind.
> I don't believe it
> Those jobs are created because the work needs done. It's that simple. Of course because those jobs are simple industry has discovered that they can take advantage of certain portions of the population to do that work and pay those portions of the population less money.
> If those jobs were intended to be entry-level jobs there would be a clear career track leading upward from there. [/I][/B]





Fishindude said:


> *[Sorry, but most minimum wage simply require very little skill. The main requirement is that you show up. There is no "career track" for MacDonalds employees. They need one decently paid manager per store, per shift, and the rest are pretty much "bodies" assembling and handing out food orders. Same story at these light manufacturing plants where it's simple manual labor, connecting part A to part B. No skills required, just get to work and do your thing. They don't need a bunch more managers.*


*



AmericanStand said:



[ inyour second paragraph you then go ahead and list a bunch of reasons for those not to be entry-level jobs because you want more than an entry-level person ,so you justify paying more.[/I]

Click to expand...

*


Fishindude said:


> *[ISince when are the following anything more than entry level requirements:
> 
> Can't use tobacco on job
> Drug free
> ...


*
Ummm since forever.*


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Originally Posted by Fishindude View Post
> *[ISince when are the following anything more than entry level requirements:
> Can't use tobacco on job
> Drug free
> ...


*
I can think of many jobs where none of those are strict requirements.

If employers can get them to show up most days, they will often overlook the other things.*


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Ummm since forever.


Not quite that long. During my work history I have never been drug tested, I smoked and no one cared, worked along side people who could not read and write, many who could not speak a word of English. I found that knowing how to do the job with a positive attitude counted for a lot.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

I think the implied question of the post is wrong.

To answer it as stated, some are worth just what they are paid, some are worth more and some are worth less. 

What we should be looking at is how much is how much is a fast food job worth. Jobs are a community just like the goods on a store shelf. The value of a job is based on supply and demand just like the value of those goods.

I've used this example before but. . .look at a major league baseball organization. Do you think the job of mopping the locker room floor is just as valuable as a pitcher? Sure both are needed for the organization to work but there are millions of people out there who could mop the floor but there are very few who can pitch at the ML level. That means the value of the job is less because the supply of the laborers is much greater.

Back many, many years ago I worked fast food and I can tell you there are millions upon millions of people who are capable of doing the basic jobs, i.e. cashier and cook. There are fewer but still millions out there who can be shift managers. The number who can be assisted managers is smaller still and as you work your way up the ladder the number of people with the drive and ability to do the jobs gets smaller and smaller. By the time you get to the board of directors the pool of capable people is quite small.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Watcher I think you hit the important point when there are millions and millions of people that can do a job it's not worth much. 
The true value of the job would be found by eliminating immigration so there was a shortage of workers and then seeing how much was bid for help for that job.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

The minimum wage is sort of a floor on how much the government is willing to subsidize business. 

Look at it this way a worker making $.35 an hour would still be eligible for almost all government aid programs. Well a worker earning $25 an hour is eligible for only a few government aid programs. 
And one working for 40 an hour is eligible for almost nothing.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> The minimum wage is sort of a floor on how much the government is willing to subsidize business.
> 
> Look at it this way a worker making $.35 an hour would still be eligible for almost all government aid programs. Well a worker earning $25 an hour is eligible for only a few government aid programs.
> And one working for 40 an hour is eligible for almost nothing.


Good golly miss Molly! Why on earth is someone making $25 per hour qualifying for any government assistance!?!


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Lol one making $40 a hour get stuff. In fact in this country every body can get something!
I once saw a chart on homesteading today that shows the distribution of benifits so you could see the welfare cliffs. 
Things like babysitting assistance and Tuition , child care, earned income and child tax deductions go way up there.


----------



## colourfastt (Nov 11, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Good golly miss Molly! Why on earth is someone making $25 per hour qualifying for any government assistance!?!


$25 really isn't THAT much. I make $40,000/yr (roughly $20/hr) and even with the $200/month employer stipend and the ACA supplement I still can't afford an even halfway decent health ins. policy.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I've heard repeatedly that $75,000 a year is the optimum income for happieness. 
Shouldn't we as a nation have the goal of reaching that at a reasonable time after entering the workforce ?


----------



## Annsni (Oct 27, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> I've heard repeatedly that $75,000 a year is the optimum income for happieness.
> Shouldn't we as a nation have the goal of reaching that at a reasonable time after entering the workforce ?


What would be a reasonable time and what effort should be made to reach that? My daughter will make that immediately upon leaving school because she chose a field where after 8 years of schooling, she will have her doctorate and a guaranteed job (the field has 100% employment within 6 months of graduating and her particular school has a 100% employment rate within 3 months). So after spending about $20,000 on undergrad (along with scholarships to make up the rest) and $35,000 for grad school, she put in a lot of time and a decent but not disgusting amount of money to get there. She will have her doctorate of audiology in 1.5 years and $75,000 is about the starting salary for audiologists.

So now how long and how much effort should a fast food worker put in to make as much as she does?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> I've heard repeatedly that $75,000 a year is the optimum income for happieness.
> Shouldn't we as a nation have the goal of reaching that at a reasonable time after entering the workforce ?


No. You the INDIVIDUAL should set that as a goal if that's what you want. We don't make anywhere that much but we are quite happy. If we wanted we could put in effort and be making close to twice that but it would not make us twice as happy. 

Plus its quite an obtainable goal with many paths to reach it. Well it is obtainable if you are willing to WORK toward it. You are not going to make $75K/yr even if you work behind a cash register at a fastfood place for 30 years. The same goes for any other no/low skill required job. Want to make $75K/yr? Get an education or training in an area where your time is worth that to a company. Or better yet start your own business.


----------



## Michael W. Smith (Jun 2, 2002)

AmericanStand said:


> I've heard repeatedly that $75,000 a year is the optimum income for happieness.
> Shouldn't we as a nation have the goal of reaching that at a reasonable time after entering the workforce ?


 So, that amount will make everyone happy in all areas of the U.S.?

There's a big difference in cost of living all across the U.S. While $75,000.00 would be a good salary for someone where I live - rural Pennsylvania, that $75,000.00 probably wouldn't go as far as say in Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, New York, or Washington D.C.

The American Dream is what you make of it. 
Work hard, and strive to do well . . . . . you should do well.
Expect high wages for doing nothing - or as little as possible . . . . . you probably aren't going to go far or get paid much.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

Michael W. Smith said:


> The American Dream is what you make of it.
> Work hard, and strive to do well . . . . . you should do well.
> Expect high wages for doing nothing - or as little as possible . . . . . you probably aren't going to go far or get paid much.


Yes indeed. Some years ago I had a fellow who was recently hired as a drafter. At least that's what we called them back in the day. They did all the technical drawings for the engineers.

This young guy had great initiative. He asked me point blank what specifically he had to do to get to the next level. It involved additional education, ability to demonstrate xyz skill set appropriate for that next level etc. He applied himself diligently, attending night school, self-teaching using his company computer during off hours, bugging his co-workers to help him along with learning the skills. Made use of the company offered contribution to ongoing education etc. And he would ask frequently how he was doing along the way.

About 2 years later we had an opening for a senior drafter (I can't remember the exact position title but you get the picture). He applied for the position as did one of the longer term employees (drafter) (4 years if I recall) as well as the other drafter in the department at the time. The 4 year employee was a nice enough fellow, good attendance, decent skills and such, but he never really went beyond the bare minimum required for the position. These things were discussed with him in detail during every single evaluation.

All companies need some people like the 4 year guy - apparently satisfied with the status quo, reliable but never going beyond the minimum. 

The younger fellow was given the senior drafter position as he was the best qualified for it. He was the best qualified for it because he took initiative and applied himself.

Companies need people who earn their higher wages by making themselves more valuable to the company, not by just existing for X number of years.


----------

