# SEIU Backed Idiots Demand $15/hr



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

SEIU backed idiots demand $15 an hour pay from fast-food companies. At the same time, Momentum Machines announces a robot to replace fast food workers.



> The company's robot can "slice toppings like tomatoes and pickles immediately before it places the slice onto your burger, giving you the freshest burger possible." The robot is "more consistent, more sanitary, and can produce ~360 hamburgers per hour." That's one burger every 10 seconds.





> Momentum Machines cofounder Alexandros Vardakostas told Xconomy his "device isnât meant to make employees more efficient. Itâs meant to completely obviate them." Indeed, marketing copy on the company's site reads that their automaton "does everything employees can do, except better."


http://www.businessinsider.com/momentum-machines-burger-robot-2014-8

It should be criminal that organizations like SEIU are able to manipulate people like this. All SEIU is after is more dues.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

hhhmm.. wonder if they have a cleaning robot, and one to do the bathrooms.. and I wonder who will have to service the robot, and who builds them.. and and and.. .

Yeah, if you're a fast food worker, you probably don't have the skills to build or maintain the robot, but what's happening is jobs are shifting.. not so much being reduced... 

I used to work in fast foods, but I eventually learned to run CNC machines, how to work on equipment, and became an IT nerd.... 

Only those who truly want to work will survive, all the others who want a ton of money for mindless work will be left behind..


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

simi-steading said:


> ..
> Only those who truly want to work will survive, all the others who want a ton of money for mindless work will be left behind..


So you're suggesting we should just get a robot to be President?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Yes and yes. Robots can do amazing things now days.
Robotics replaced what took 16 of us to make computer hard drive parts all the way down to 2 people Per Unit, instead of 16. It would not take much time to replace a human with a robot to put a burger on a revolving chain driven grill like Burger King has. They put those burgers on that thing and the chain driven grill goes over the flames and cooks the burgers. A robot on the other end could very easily take them off place on a pre prepared bun and lift that over to a say conveyor of some type and Out To The Customer.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

MoonRiver said:


> So you're suggesting we should just get a robot to be President?


 We already have one that just plays golf and does fund raisers......


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Anybody who is at least willing to get off their butt and work for their living, doesn't deserve to be called an "idiot". They seem to need some guidance and information/education, but not scorn. Unless maybe you would prefer to have them just give up, go home, and collect benefits?

Just like the fast food restaurants have the freedom to put most of their money into equipment, advertising, etc., and labor is obtained as cheap as possible and mostly considered expendable, those workers have the right to organize and try to increase their leverage position for a bigger piece of the pie. I don't think they will get very far, but hey, they have the right to do it and what does one learn from better than a mistake?

If we ever get a government somewhere between getting in bed with the unions, or wanting to wipe them off the face of the earth, maybe we could have union reform to shorten their leash and stop letting them playing politics with the members' money. Just do their job for the workers, which we all benefit from indirectly.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

MoonRiver said:


> So you're suggesting we should just get a robot to be President?


No doubt it would do a better job than what we've had the last couple decades... Especialyl if it was an AI robot (Artificial Intelligence)


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

arabian knight said:


> Yes and yes. Robots can do amazing things now days.
> Robotics replaced what took 16 of us to make computer hard drive parts all the way down to 2 people Per Unit, instead of 16. It would not take much time to replace a human with a robot to put a burger on a revolving chain driven grill like Burger King has. They put those burgers on that thing and the chain driven grill goes over the flames and cooks the burgers. A robot on the other end could very easily take them off place on a pre prepared bun and lift that over to a say conveyor of some type and Out To The Customer.


Now days they call that an automated assembly line.. People who maintain them and build them usually make a pretty good living... and many people who don't try in the working world really could do that if they actually wanted to apply their selves and make a good living..


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

Robotics have been replacing people for years. I don't hear too much singing in the cotton fields nowadays. Increasing the minimum wage might speed the changeover, just like eliminating slavery did for cotton, but the process is inevitable.

The elimination of manual labor and the elimination of levels of management through computerization will increasingly affect the minimally educated. (FWIW, automated food prep has been around for years.)


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> Anybody who is at least willing to get off their butt and work for their living, doesn't deserve to be called an "idiot". They seem to need some guidance and information/education, but not scorn. Unless maybe you would prefer to have them just give up, go home, and collect benefits?
> 
> Just like the fast food restaurants have the freedom to put most of their money into equipment, advertising, etc., and labor is obtained as cheap as possible and mostly considered expendable, those workers have the right to organize and try to increase their leverage position for a bigger piece of the pie. I don't think they will get very far, but hey, they have the right to do it and what does one learn from better than a mistake?
> 
> If we ever get a government somewhere between getting in bed with the unions, or wanting to wipe them off the face of the earth, maybe we could have union reform to shorten their leash and stop letting them playing politics with the members' money. Just do their job for the workers, which we all benefit from indirectly.


I wonder why they stopped at $10.50 everybody needs to have a job that puts food on the table and a house and a car. You need to make at least $25 per hour for that. But on the other hand if that is fair $50 is more fair. That way every body will be rich and no poverty in the country.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

$10.50? I heard it was $15??? Shoot, the pimple faced assistant manager probably doesn't make $15 an hour. The numbers are irrelevant, they are exercising their rights, however misguided, to try and leverage a "living wage" out of what is generally a dead end, or very temporary, job. Nobody is going to "win" this one.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

MO_cows said:


> Anybody who is at least willing to get off their butt and work for their living, doesn't deserve to be called an "idiot". They seem to need some guidance and information/education, but not scorn. Unless maybe you would prefer to have them just give up, go home, and collect benefits?


The people working are not idiots, but the protestors that allow themselves to be used by SEIU are. Where do they think the money will come from? How long do they think they will have a job if the hourly wage increases to $15/hr? 

My roommates and I all worked at McDonald's when we were in college. This was before things were computerized. It takes maybe 15 minutes at the most to master a station. I can't think of many jobs that require less skill.



MO_cows said:


> Nobody is going to "win" this one.


Care to make a wager? Most of these jobs will be automated within 2 years.


----------



## Dixie Bee Acres (Jul 22, 2013)

Old Vet said:


> everybody needs to have a job that puts food on the table and a house and a car. You need to make at least $25 per hour for that.


Really? You need $25 hour for food, housing and transportation?
Please explain
My income is basically non existant. My wife makes barely over $14 hour.
We have a mortgage on a 1900 sqft house on just over two acres, I have an older paid off truck, wife drives a 2012 KIA with $245 payments. Kids always have clean clothes in good condition, there is always good food on the table. We receive no government assistance, no food stamps, no energy assistance, etc. None.
So, why is $25 hour required?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> The people working are not idiots, but the protestors that allow themselves to be used by SEIU are. Where do they think the money will come from? How long do they think they will have a job if the hourly wage increases to $15/hr?
> 
> My roommates and I all worked at McDonald's when we were in college. This was before things were computerized. It takes maybe 15 minutes at the most to master a station. I can't think of many jobs that require less skill.
> 
> ...


How is that winning or losing? More and more jobs are becoming automated, irregardless of whether or not there is strife with the labor force. If it is cost effective long term to do it, then they do it. Once one company does it, their competitors are likely to follow, and other companies besides. Monkey see, monkey do.

Sometimes, the consequences stink. Or maybe you LIKE automated phone systems versus talking to a real live person? Maybe you LIKE having to log in to some web site to retrieve a monthly statement because they won't mail you one anymore, they won't even email it to you? First they did away with the "bag boy" to help you out with your groceries, now they are trying to do away with cashiers with the "self checkout" at some places. Service always suffers with automation, in my experience.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

MO_cows said:


> How is that winning or losing? More and more jobs are becoming automated, irregardless of whether or not there is strife with the labor force. If it is cost effective long term to do it, then they do it. Once one company does it, their competitors are likely to follow, and other companies besides. Monkey see, monkey do.


You're missing the point. Let's say you are a McDonald's franchisee. You're making a decent living with 2 stores. Now SEIU comes in and gets some of your workers fired up about being underpaid. The next thing you know there are a few employees and a bunch of SEIU guys protesting outside your restaurants.

Do you spend your time trying to figure out how to give everyone a $5/hr rise or do you try to figure out how you can get by with fewer employees?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> You're missing the point. Let's say you are a McDonald's franchisee. You're making a decent living with 2 stores. Now SEIU comes in and gets some of your workers fired up about being underpaid. The next thing you know there are a few employees and a bunch of SEIU guys protesting outside your restaurants.
> 
> Do you spend your time trying to figure out how to give everyone a $5/hr rise or do you try to figure out how you can get by with fewer employees?


I might close down the restaurant altogether and re-invest elsewhere. I might give the employees the raise to get back to business as usual and get the protestors off the property. But if I didn't see increased performance, productivity, less turnover, any tangible benefits from the raise, I would certainly be looking at more automation. I would play the hand I was dealt, that's business.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Personally, I support the workers right to strike. I support their right to protest for higher wages. I support their right to organize.

Beyond that, I support a $10 per hour minimum wage.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

MoonRiver said:


> Do you spend your time trying to figure out how to give everyone a $5/hr rise or do you try to figure out how you can get by with fewer employees?


The answer is you should be doing both. I work as an electrical engineer and have 15 years in manufacturing automation. I have heard many times that people believe automation is making it hard for the low end wage earner. This is not always the case. Let's look at the McDonalds example.

As a franchise owner I would be looking at not necessarily the wage per hour of the employees. Instead I would look at how much product is sold in an hour, then how much labor is used in the process of that transaction. This will result in a $/burger (let's say we only sell burgers to keep the example simple). Now I know my variable rate of cost of my product.

Here's the catch. An owner doesn't care how that variable rate is broken down! It could be to 1 highly compensated employee or to 100 lower compensated employees. So as an employee, if you want a higher wage, you should look at ways to automate such that you can produce more with less. Then your compensation can go UP.

The trick to better compensation is to increase the productivity of your labor. That spreads the variable rate cost over more product causing it to lower. This creates the head room needed in product pricing such that wage may be increased.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> Anybody who is at least willing to get off their butt and work for their living, doesn't deserve to be called an "idiot". They seem to need some guidance and information/education, but not scorn. Unless maybe you would prefer to have them just give up, go home, and collect benefits?


Let them starve if they dont wanna work.... all these comments about "just go home and collect benefits" were unheard of during this countries most productive and best years. 1776 to 1930. Why? coz there were no "benefits" to collect!




MO_cows said:


> Just like the fast food restaurants have the freedom to put most of their money into equipment, advertising, etc., and labor is obtained as cheap as possible and mostly considered expendable, those workers have the right to organize and try to increase their leverage position for *a bigger piece of the pie.* I don't think they will get very far, but hey, they have the right to do it and what does one learn from better than a mistake?


And just how big a slice of the burger do you really think is profit? Sure, the workers should have the right to walk off the job if they dont like it... I have done it myself several times. What they DO NOT have the right to do is keep anyone else from walking right in and taking that very same job if they want it. 




MO_cows said:


> If we ever get a government somewhere between getting in bed with the unions, or wanting to wipe them off the face of the earth, maybe we could have union reform to shorten their leash and stop letting them playing politics with the members' money. Just do their job for the workers, which we all benefit from indirectly.


I fail to see where anyone other than union bosses benefit from any union.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

HDRider said:


> Personally, I support the workers right to strike. I support their right to protest for higher wages. I support their right to organize.
> 
> Beyond that, I support a $10 per hour minimum wage.


In principle I agree with you - all except for the $10.00 an hour minimum wage. That really needs to be re-thought with this economy. 

I also support the right for an employer to fire those who do not show up for work.

But these are entry level workers and workers that are on supported employment. AND that is who the Unions are using to gain more dues under the guise of higher pay. Those with little to no understanding of the consequences of the union's manipulation. 

And we won't even talk about those who invested in their future by getting degrees or doing apprentisships and only make $15.00 an hour.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

Remove the various taxes and there would be plenty of money for raises. Property tax, sales tax, business license (tax), unemployment fund, fire district fees, corporate tax, etc.

Most of the businesses that started and were successful after WWII wouldn't stand a chance today.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Let them starve if they dont wanna work.... all these comments about "just go home and collect benefits" were unheard of during this countries most productive and best years. 1776 to 1930. Why? coz there were no "benefits" to collect!
> 
> 
> And just how big a slice of the burger do you really think is profit? Sure, the workers should have the right to walk off the job if they dont like it... I have done it myself several times. What they DO NOT have the right to do is keep anyone else from walking right in and taking that very same job if they want it.
> ...


Channeling Ebeneezer Scrooge today? Surely this can't be the same guy who was bragging about how much extra, nice stuff he did for a crew that worked for him over the weekend in another thread!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> Channeling Ebeneezer Scrooge today? Surely this can't be the same guy who was bragging about how much extra, nice stuff he did for a crew that worked for him over the weekend in another thread!


Yep, same guy... and the guys I hired didnt once threaten to walk off the job or join a union. Imagine that! Management and labor were able to get on the same page with all parties concerned being happy with their arrangement.... without a union boss picking anyones pockets! 

Oh, and if you payed attention, (all the way through) it seems to me ol Ebeneezer was a pretty generous guy himself.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Nate_in_IN said:


> The answer is you should be doing both. I work as an electrical engineer and have 15 years in manufacturing automation. I have heard many times that people believe automation is making it hard for the low end wage earner. This is not always the case. Let's look at the McDonalds example.
> 
> As a franchise owner I would be looking at not necessarily the wage per hour of the employees. Instead I would look at how much product is sold in an hour, then how much labor is used in the process of that transaction. This will result in a $/burger (let's say we only sell burgers to keep the example simple). Now I know my variable rate of cost of my product.
> 
> ...


Name a business that would raise wages because of increased productivity through automation.

In our current economy, wages are flat while productivity is increasing. Companies are not raising salaries even though productivity is increasing.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Harry Chickpea said:


> Remove the various taxes and there would be plenty of money for raises. Property tax, sales tax, business license (tax), unemployment fund, fire district fees, corporate tax, etc.
> 
> Most of the businesses that started and were successful after WWII wouldn't stand a chance today.


And most importantly, do away with minimum wage. A lot of companies were bootstrapped with little or no wages paid, with the understanding they would be paid if and when there was a profit. 

It should be up to an individual to accept or decline an offered wage. These days, I don't see how anyone could bootstrap a business.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

HDRider said:


> Personally, I support the workers right to strike. I support their right to protest for higher wages. I support their right to organize.
> 
> Beyond that, I support a $10 per hour minimum wage.


And do you support the owner's right to fire those who refuse to work or taking actions which hurt his business?


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

MoonRiver said:


> Name a business that would raise wages because of increased productivity through automation.
> 
> In our current economy, wages are flat while productivity is increasing. Companies are not raising salaries even though productivity is increasing.


Steel plant I started working at. Increased productivity by 25% over two years and received a 30% raise.

Moved to a hot dip galvanizing line. In the first year we broke a 30 year productivity record. Received a 15% raise.

Moved to automotive glass fabrication. Increased productivity by 15%, while reducing waste 20%. Received a 20% raise.

That's my history. Engineering inside manufacturing has been good to me. But I think if you look even McDonald's employees have received decent wage increases in the past.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Dixie Bee Acres said:


> Really? You need $25 hour for food, housing and transportation?
> Please explain
> My income is basically non existant. My wife makes barely over $14 hour.
> We have a mortgage on a 1900 sqft house on just over two acres, I have an older paid off truck, wife drives a 2012 KIA with $245 payments. Kids always have clean clothes in good condition, there is always good food on the table. We receive no government assistance, no food stamps, no energy assistance, etc. None.
> So, why is $25 hour required?


You can't expect workers to live at those wages. Just because you live like that you cant expect workers to live like that. Oh by the way you also need a new flat screen TV and a new car or two. Any way if wages go up prices increase on everything. That puts hardship on retired or those on fixed incomes. It is not just the products they provide but also food, Gas, electricity, and everything else.


----------



## Dixie Bee Acres (Jul 22, 2013)

That's the problem old vet, people van live off a lot less money when they prioritize how to use their money. You don't need a tv, nor a cell phone, nor many other things that cost a lot of money.
I have a 6 year old 29 inch tv, works just fine. No cable or satalite.

I live the way I live because we have what we need, and some of what we want. So why can't I expect other workers to live off the same money?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Nate_in_IN said:


> Steel plant I started working at. Increased productivity by 25% over two years and received a 30% raise.
> 
> Moved to a hot dip galvanizing line. In the first year we broke a 30 year productivity record. Received a 15% raise.
> 
> ...


How many years ago was all this?

Was the raise mandated by union contract?


----------



## Dixie Bee Acres (Jul 22, 2013)

Do all of these fools who expect $15 hour minimum wage honestly not see that all that will do is raise the price of goods and services?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

watcher said:


> And do you support the owner's right to fire those who refuse to work or taking actions which hurt his business?


Without question. Absolutely.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Dixie Bee Acres said:


> Do all of these fools who expect $15 hour minimum wage honestly not see that all that will do is raise the price of goods and services?


That is why I want to see the minimum wage raised.


----------



## Dixie Bee Acres (Jul 22, 2013)

Think about that for a minute.....
Min wage goes up, doesn't mean that people making above min wage will get a pay raise. So, now products and services will cost more than now, yet only min wage workers will make more money than now. This creates hardships for the biggest majority of middle class families.
How can that be a good thing?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Dixie Bee Acres said:


> Think about that for a minute.....
> Min wage goes up, doesn't mean that people making above min wage will get a pay raise. So, now products and services will cost more than now, yet only min wage workers will make more money than now. This creates hardships for the biggest majority of middle class families.
> How can that be a good thing?


It is now a political issue. One side making an enormously popular argument FOR raising the minimum wage. The other side appearing to be greedy SOBs trying to make the same logical argument you are AGAINST raising the minimum wage.

In the end, the argument is moot. *Everything* will rise in price or cost to make the minimum wage be relatively equal to what it ever was. It does not matter.

I'd rather challenge things that matter.


----------



## Dixie Bee Acres (Jul 22, 2013)

Except for those who are earning above min wage now and wont see an increase in wages as prices increase to match min wages. So it does matter.

So, if your income is, say $60,000 year, and you live comfortably on that, fine. But, lets say min wage goes up 50%-70% or so. Prices of goods produced by min wage workers will go up 50-70%, services by companies who employ min wage workers will also go up 50-70%. Now you, earning well above min wage will not get a 50-70% pay increase, yet you will now be paying out 50-70% more for goods and services.
So, please explain, how does it NOT matter?


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

MoonRiver said:


> How many years ago was all this?
> 
> Was the raise mandated by union contract?


It was spread over the last 12 years. It had absolutely nothing to do with a union contract. In fact the one shop I worked at which was union didn't get a raise when production increased, why? Because they had already agreed to a wage for the next seven years.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

Dixie Bee Acres said:


> Except for those who are earning above min wage now and wont see an increase in wages as prices increase to match min wages. So it does matter.
> 
> So, if your income is, say $60,000 year, and you live comfortably on that, fine. But, lets say min wage goes up 50%-70% or so. Prices of goods produced by min wage workers will go up 50-70%, services by companies who employ min wage workers will also go up 50-70%. Now you, earning well above min wage will not get a 50-70% pay increase, yet you will now be paying out 50-70% more for goods and services.
> So, please explain, how does it NOT matter?


You are correct, but the effects only last for so long. What happens is all the people who work jobs worth more than minimum wage will start to demand more money. It just leads to inflation.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Dixie Bee Acres said:


> Think about that for a minute.....
> Min wage goes up, doesn't mean that people making above min wage will get a pay raise. So, now products and services will cost more than now, yet only min wage workers will make more money than now. This creates hardships for the biggest majority of middle class families.
> How can that be a good thing?


One reason unions are pushing this is some union wages are minimum wage plus. So when minimum wage goes up, union members wages also go up.


----------



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

The unions have chosen this battleground, fast food workers, because they did not go to the mat over the US wholesale exporting of jobs. So all they have left is this group.

The trouble with this choice is that, unlike manufacturing, fast food exists in such numbers because it is fast and cheap. When you make a car, your skill mean something but everyone can work fast food. 

And we have hundreds of thousands of 'anyone's coming across the border yearly. 

If the unions push fast food businesses too far, and their product gets too expensive, then the public simply looks for their equivalent elsewhere- as in food trucks, home delivery, take out at regular restaurants, grocery stores, etc. Those businesses, and new ones yet unknown, will simply strangle fast food places out of existence. And they don't need the staff of a fast food place to get the product out. They will not neccessarily be franchises, but local, hard to organize independents.


----------



## brosil (Dec 15, 2003)

I don't agree with the minimum wage idea but if you must, then give me the original minimum wage, a buck fifty in 90% silver quarters.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

I find it very strange that picketing is a way to ask for a raise. These people are nothing but thugs,trying to strong arm buisness. Terrorists.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

7thswan said:


> I find it very strange that picketing is a way to ask for a raise. These people are nothing but thugs,trying to strong arm buisness. Terrorists.


Could it be this is nothing but an election ploy?


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

MoonRiver said:


> Could it be this is nothing but an election ploy?


Yup, the left stiring up trouble,just like that Wasserman chick.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

MoonRiver said:


> Could it be this is nothing but an election ploy?


I think that is a huge part of it. I also think that the progressives are pushing this agenda for another reason. It is their hedge against the growing debt.

They need GDP to go up, first to make the economy look better, and second to have the leverage to have the Federal Govt. borrow more money. Raising minimum wage is one way they can move things in that direction.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

HDRider said:


> That is why I want to see the minimum wage raised.


Interesting... Me? I dont want to see more inflation gobbling up what little money I have.


----------



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

I think it is just unions looking for a new base, having lost the old one. They need to have a victory and a wage increase that would have happened at the end of a recession anyway will pass for a victory. And increase membership. 
If I worked in fast food, I would like that increase. But paying union dues would be a net loss I think.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

7thswan said:


> I find it very strange that picketing is a way to ask for a raise. These people are nothing but thugs,trying to strong arm buisness. Terrorists.


If I were the boss and my employees walked off the job and began picketing my business, they would no longer be my employees, they would be trespassers. How I deal with trespassing is a whole nuther topic. Someone either wants to work or they dont, if they want that job... its pretty simple, be at your work station doing it. If not, be gone.


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

I haven't had a chance to read all the responses but I had to pipe in and say that I have been following this story and to think that somebody flipping burgers would be making more per hour than I did as a nurse at my last clinical posting makes me want to start inventing new swear words.:hairgre:

Don't know what this world is coming to if unskilled workers are earning more than trained health care providers that hold precious human lives in their hands. 

Where's the 'reset' button when you need it?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

simi-steading said:


> No doubt it would do a better job than what we've had the last couple decades... Especialyl if it was an AI robot (Artificial Intelligence)


Intelligence, artificial or otherwise, will not be tolerated in the presidency.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Same here badlander. I often get fuel next to a hosptial. I watch as the nurses/aids walk over to the station off the hosptial property to have a smoke. It makes me think, these people are supposed to take care of me if I'm in that hosptial and they won't even take care of themself. Where does self responsibility come into some peoples head?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Anybody who thinks unions are the good guys isn't paying attention.
Maybe once upon a time they did some good, but take a look at places like Detroit, and have you priced a new pickup lately?
Unions are in the business of collecting money and strong arming votes for the democrats, and are little more than organized crime.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nate_in_IN said:


> You are correct, but the effects only last for so long. What happens is all the people who work jobs worth more than minimum wage will start to demand more money. It just leads to inflation.


Which leads to that $15/hr wage not being a 'living wage' and we will see a demand for a $25/hr wage.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

I've posted this before:

Let me introduce the employee of the month if the $15/hr fast food wage goes through:


----------



## badlander (Jun 7, 2009)

7thswan said:


> Same here badlander. I often get fuel next to a hosptial. I watch as the nurses/aids walk over to the station off the hosptial property to have a smoke. It makes me think, these people are supposed to take care of me if I'm in that hosptial and they won't even take care of themself. Where does self responsibility come into some peoples head?



Ditto. As a nurse it galls me when a doctor tells me to loose 10 pounds to be healthier and he needs to loose 50 just to fit in his pants.

In their defense (I am and always have been a non smoker) the stress has to be dealt with somehow. I used to say one of three vices would surface, food, tobacco or drugs, including tobacco as a drug. Mine was candy bars. Since I retired I gave up candy all together and eat a lot healthier.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

watcher said:


> I've posted this before:
> 
> Let me introduce the employee of the month if the $15/hr fast food wage goes through:



We'll be seeing those anyway. Doesn't matter if the minimum wage is $15 or $1.50. As long as the customers don't stop coming because of them, they'll be put to use.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

badlander said:


> Ditto. As a nurse it galls me when a doctor tells me to loose 10 pounds to be healthier and he needs to loose 50 just to fit in his pants.
> 
> In their defense (I am and always have been a non smoker) the stress has to be dealt with somehow. I used to say one of three vices would surface, food, tobacco or drugs, including tobacco as a drug. Mine was candy bars. Since I retired I gave up candy all together and eat a lot healthier.


I used to do some modeling when I was bodybuilding, when I had to work with models-they all smoke to stay thin and drink(usally champaine) before getting on stage,loosen up I guess.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

where I want to said:


> The unions have chosen this battleground, fast food workers, because they did not go to the mat over the US wholesale exporting of jobs. So all they have left is this group.
> 
> The trouble with this choice is that, unlike manufacturing, fast food exists in such numbers because it is fast and cheap. When you make a car, your skill mean something but everyone can work fast food.
> 
> ...


I would suggest this is a wedge issue by Democrats because they know Republicans will not go along. It is a good way to make Republicans look bad.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

HDRider said:


> I would suggest this is a wedge issue by Democrats because they know Republicans will not go along. It is a good way to make Republicans look bad.


Actually as a fiscal conservative I'm willing to concede on the minimum wage, let's increase it to $15, but the same bill to change it needs to lock the Federal Poverty level in the same place. This would then cause the minimum wage workers to no longer be qualified for all the assistance programs, like the progressives say will happen.

There we can compromise.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Dixie Bee Acres said:


> Really? You need $25 hour for food, housing and transportation?
> Please explain
> My income is basically non existant. My wife makes barely over $14 hour.
> We have a mortgage on a 1900 sqft house on just over two acres, I have an older paid off truck, wife drives a 2012 KIA with $245 payments. Kids always have clean clothes in good condition, there is always good food on the table. We receive no government assistance, no food stamps, no energy assistance, etc. None.
> So, why is $25 hour required?


I'd drop it to $20 instead of $25 but try living in a major metropolitan area on less than $20 an hour (include housing and car, insurance along with other basic living expenses.

We just got back from Panama, now there is some extreme poverty (in parts) I've often said the U.S. has the richest poor people around, this trip just re-enforced that statement.
People with little carts selling cold drinks during rush hour in between the lanes of a (rush hour stop and go)2 lane highway. They're making their own jobs.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Dixie Bee Acres said:


> Think about that for a minute.....
> Min wage goes up, doesn't mean that people making above min wage will get a pay raise. So, now products and services will cost more than now, yet only min wage workers will make more money than now. This creates hardships for the biggest majority of middle class families.
> How can that be a good thing?


As an inflation factor it is negligible at best, most likely not even perceptible.

In 2012, there were 3.6 million or 4.7 percent of the US workforce at the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, far and away most of them below 25 years of age. 1.8 million of the minimum wage jobs are held by people younger than 25.

It is an emotional campaign issue. This kind of tactic is what the Democrats excel at.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

HDRider said:


> Beyond that, I support a $10 per hour minimum wage.


Why???

minimum wage was $1.35 an hour when I started working. McD's hamburgers were 19 cents each, gasoline was under 25 cents a gallon, a new Chevy was under $2000, smokes were 25 cents a pack. 
What has raising minimum wage done since then?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Dixie Bee Acres said:


> Do all of these fools who expect $15 hour minimum wage honestly not see that all that will do is raise the price of goods and services?


They don't. If they knew anything a all they would know that they are in a dead end, zero skill needed position.
I had mentally challenged people (extreme autism, etc) working for me all the time when I was in the restaurant business. In many cases they were better workers than the (so-called) normal people.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mnn2501 said:


> Why???
> 
> minimum wage was $1.35 an hour when I started working. McD's hamburgers were 19 cents each, gasoline was under 25 cents a gallon, a new Chevy was under $2000, smokes were 25 cents a pack.
> What has raising minimum wage done since then?


I 'splained all that already.


----------



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

HDRider said:


> As an inflation factor it is negligible at best, most likely not even perceptible.
> 
> In 2012, there were 3.6 million or 4.7 percent of the US workforce at the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, far and away most of them below 25 years of age. 1.8 million of the minimum wage jobs are held by people younger than 25.
> 
> It is an emotional campaign issue. This kind of tactic is what the Democrats excel at.


If you have a hundred employees at $8 an hour, a $2 increase in minimum wage is an increase of $200 per employee hour worked ( actually about $2.15 because the basic employer payroll taxes add that much at least.) If you have employees working a 30 hour week, then that is an extra $6000 per week for 100 employees or $312,000 more per year that your business has to generate to cover this.
As a typical fast food franchise has a profit margin of about three percent, that means you must sell about $10,400,000 more in product to cover this. 
That is not chump change for a franchise that is maybe 2or 3 McDonalds.

Then there are most businesses that pay minimum wages to starting employees but as soon as the employee has proven themselves, they get more than minimum wage. So that means those employees getting more than minimum must have their wages increased by more than the $2 per hour to keep pace. Then the supervisor should earn more than the regular employees. 

And that does not include the inflation that is sure to come because of the wage increase. That it has not been a problem yet is unlikely otherwise why the push to increase wages?

All this does not mean it shouldn't be done but it is a big deal in businesses with small margins and the concerns should not be dismissed.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

where I want to said:


> If you have a hundred employees at $8 an hour, a $2 increase in minimum wage is an increase of $200 per employee hour worked ( actually about $2.15 because the basic employer payroll taxes add that much at least.) If you have employees working a 30 hour week, then that is an extra $6000 per week for 100 employees or $312,000 more per year that your business has to generate to cover this.
> As a typical fast food franchise has a profit margin of about three percent, that means you must sell about $10,400,000 more in product to cover this.
> That is not chump change for a franchise that is maybe 2or 3 McDonalds.
> 
> ...


I ain't arguing the math. Dumb issue for dumb people.


----------



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

HDRider said:


> I ain't arguing the math. Dumb issue for dumb people.


Are you saying I'm dumb? And that figures are not only the main issue but the whole issue?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

where I want to said:


> Are you saying I'm dumb? And that figures are not only the main issue but the whole issue?


No...


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

HDRider said:


> That is why I want to see the minimum wage raised.


HWne good and serves go up because of some arbitrary amount of minimum wage is upped, so does the Buying power of those same folks that scream they want more money. They will have the SAME buying power as they do NOW. So whats the point in ANY raise what so ever.. Get Government the heck out of things and let businesses seat wages if SOME don't like to Move On. Nobody ever said flipping burgers was a life long put your kids through college job. Nor should it, it is a Learning Wage A Starting Wage not and never should be a Living wage.
Unskilled workers do not and should not make what others are at who have Studied and worked hard and moved up the ladder. And have done so without any government telling anyone THIS is what you should be getting. 
They went out and if it took 2 Part times jobs to put them through further schooling So Be It.
And I can see this going to OK you want 15 bucks an hour. Here is your work hours. 3 hours a Day and THAT IS IT. 4 at the most and someone else will work another 3 to 4 and those cry babies all of a sudden have little or NO MONEY in their pocket because they were too dern greedy not they have little hours for that So Called living wage to spent Better get that 2nd and even aq 3rd job to make ends meet. THAT is in the not to distant future if this 15 buck stuff gets any traction at all in this country.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

I wonder if the unions will cover those on SS. Sounds like a plan.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

badlander said:


> I haven't had a chance to read all the responses but I had to pipe in and say that I have been following this story and to think that somebody flipping burgers would be making more per hour than I did as a nurse at my last clinical posting makes me want to start inventing new swear words.:hairgre:
> 
> Don't know what this world is coming to if unskilled workers are earning more than trained health care providers that hold precious human lives in their hands.
> 
> *Where's the 'reset' button when you need it?*


There is a little private booth down at the voting house... thats where the reset button is. You can get directions on how to use it in most areas... just google "Tea Party Patriots". There is a place to join, and plenty of info there.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

HDRider said:


> I 'splained all that already.


No, you really didn't. Perhaps in your own mind you did, but not to anyone else.

Another question What will seniors on fixed incomes do when everything's prices rise? and no, COLA increases never ever keep up with inflation.


----------



## wally (Oct 9, 2007)

For those that are wanting the 15 per hour should ask the people that used to work at Hostess how the union saved their job.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

And while they picket our military is probably only going to get a 1percent raise.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

wally said:


> For those that are wanting the 15 per hour should ask the people that used to work at Hostess how the union saved their job.


Or maybe they could look at how a company with billions in sales was so mis-managed they had to get huge concessions from their workers to avoid going belly up. Gee, the people who actually made the products didn't want to take a 30% pay cut and lose their retirements, meanwhile nobody in the executive branch, the decision makers, was giving up anything? The nerve!


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

These workers will see no benefit from the higher wage the unions want. 
It will go to pay higher taxes and union dues. 

Unions used to be needed. Now we see they are just desperately trying to remain relevant. 

I am anti-union. The union is what cost my husband a job he loved. The benefit to it though was we escaped California because of it.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> If you have a hundred employees at $8 an hour, a $2 increase in minimum wage is an increase of $200 per employee hour worked ( actually about $2.15 because the basic employer payroll taxes add that much at least.) If you have employees working a 30 hour week, then that is an extra $6000 per week for 100 employees or $312,000 more per year that your business has to generate to cover this.
> As a typical fast food franchise has a profit margin of about three percent, that means you must sell about $10,400,000 more in product to cover this.
> That is not chump change for a franchise that is maybe 2or 3 McDonalds.
> 
> ...





HDRider said:


> I ain't arguing the math. Dumb issue for dumb people.


You really should argue the math. It's only off by a factor 10 or so. 300 employee hours at $ 8/ hr come out to a payroll of $24,000 / week. Assuming the 27% labor percentage I saw cited as average for fast food businesses is accurate that means a business must generate $88,888 in gross revenue each week to meet that number. Adjust the wage to $10/ hr and the business must now generate $111,111 in revenue to keep that $30,000 payroll at 27% a difference that when multiplied out by 52 weeks come to a $1.155 M annual difference. Substantial and each business will have to make its own decisions on how to cope if it should come about.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

Maaaaan. If I had known that fast food was supposed to be a dead end job, I would've never gone to college. I could have saved like a hundred grand! I feel like an idiot.


----------



## summerdaze (Jun 11, 2009)

I am already flabbergasted at the costs of items at the fast food places, and I don't buy nearly as much from them as I used to. A Wendy's salad now costs 6.30 here. They're good salads, but DANG! They don't have a dollar menu anymore either. 
Yesterday I had a coupon for BOGO free at Burger King. So I got two Whoppers. The receipt said 4.15 I believe. Might have been a little more. OK for 2 of them, but I rarely pay in the 4-5.50 range for just the sandwich alone. I almost always have a coupon to buy fast food.
I'm buying smaller portions, using coupons, and skipping the pop. Instead of the "meal", I'll just get the sandwich. If the workers get the $$ they want, I can only imagine what that will do to the prices. I'm betting they will go up, and the workers hours will go down to make up for it.

Plus I'm I'm also one of those who have certain skills that had to pass tests and get training in order to get more money too. It's taken YEARS to get what I'm making now after being in the bizz for 25 yrs. I've worked a number of fast food jobs when I was younger. I never thought it would be good to work there forever. It was a stepping stone, a starting place. I had to actively SEEK out something better and be willing to take the steps and do the work to get a better paying job. 

These days, so many want to be a victim of some sort. And have someone else pay for them being where they're at in life. Not everyone can change their stars. But so many COULD if they'd only try.

Americans "Can Do" spirit is being replaced with the "Can't. Tried it once and it didn't work" spirit. Usually they'll site somebody or maybe a whole bunch of somebodies who they perceive to be responsible in some way for their failure to better themselves. ( IOW, it's not their fault)


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

And McDonalds sales are already going down. And after this. Wow how nice it is for these folks to punish their employer by doing a slimy low down strike for higher wages that will get them no where. Just make unions richer and get the Dem's more voters at the same time because of the low information voting block of some of the youngsters that don't know any better.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> You really should argue the math. It's only off by a factor 10 or so. 300 employee hours at $ 8/ hr come out to a payroll of $24,000 / week. Assuming the 27% labor percentage I saw cited as average for fast food businesses is accurate that means a business must generate $88,888 in gross revenue each week to meet that number. Adjust the wage to $10/ hr and the business must now generate $111,111 in revenue to keep that $30,000 payroll at 27% a difference that when multiplied out by 52 weeks come to a $1.155 M annual difference. Substantial and each business will have to make its own decisions on how to cope if it should come about.


I ain't looking to argue so I am outsourcing it to mmoetcstan.

As I said, this is a non-issue being used to drive emotional support for Democrats and Republicans keep falling into the trap.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

HDRider said:


> I ain't looking to argue so I am outsourcing it to mmoetcstan.
> 
> As I said, this is a non-issue being used to drive emotional support for Democrats and Republicans keep falling into the trap.


Wasn't arguing, just pointing out bad math and lack of understanding how budgets work. I actually agree with you that this should be a non issue and thank those on the right for using the language they do to describe these workers. Many of these fast food jobs require more skill and harder work than the low skill assembly and manufacturing jobs they've replaced. Many of our parents and grandparents worked for thirty or forty years essentially putting the same handful of parts together. In return they had stable jobs and paychecks that in many cases allowed them to own homes and cars, buy the consumer goods of their day, take a weeks vacation at the cabin up north and send their own kids to college. All without many more job skills, education or desire to advance than are shown by some of those protesting today in an efforts to attain the same things. I don't think any of the protestors or union organizers expect to get $15/hr but negotiations always have to start somewhere. 

I'd favor some sort of two tiered minimum wage with a lower level for training and those under 18 or still in high school.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

The only ones who win with this are the government's because of the extra tax revenues raised. Every other minimum wage increase has never lifted anyone out of poverty, even though that's been the selling point for decades. It doesn't work that way.


----------



## Dixie Bee Acres (Jul 22, 2013)

Just think, this could possibly be a good thing if fast food jockeys get $15 an hour.
Not too many people would get excited over a $9 big mac, and not too many parents would want to shell out $12 for a happy meal. More people might start eating better food at home, childhood obesity levels might go down.

Then unemployment rates go up, more people on grub stubs, and the government goes into further debt even faster. Yup, $15 hour for grease caddies and patty slingers will do all kinds of good and bad, the American way.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Yes lets just stop companies from expanding and getting workers and Making JOBS. Ya lets just close them down and put more on the government dole.
Lets just say the heck with the whole dern capitalism what has made this country great and get everyone on government teat.
Lets just close down All Restaurants that serve anything that the anti everything establishment disagrees with and put more out of work. 
Sounds like a good way for a 3rd world country to become a lesson to learn from just because some don't agree with what is going on in this country./ Lets just stop everyone from getting something they LIKE, THEY WANT, and They Deserve to get and eat whatever they dern well went to.
Nice way for this not only to become a 3rd world country but even Lower then THAT.

Ahhhhh Now doesn't THIS look good a Triple Whopper


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

arabian knight said:


> Yes lets just stop companies from expanding and getting workers and Making JOBS. Ya lets just close them down and put more on the government dole.
> Lets just say the heck with the whole dern capitalism what has made this country great and get everyone on government teat.
> Lets just close down All Restaurants that serve anything that the anti everything establishment disagrees with and put more out of work.
> Sounds like a good way for a 3rd world country to become a lesson to learn from just because some don't agree with what is going on in this country./ Lets just stop everyone from getting something they LIKE, THEY WANT, and They Deserve to get and eat whatever they dern well went to.
> ...


Can you make payments on that thing :bouncy:


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> Wasn't arguing, just pointing out bad math and lack of understanding how budgets work. I actually agree with you that this should be a non issue and thank those on the right for using the language they do to describe these workers. Many of these fast food jobs require more skill and harder work than the low skill assembly and manufacturing jobs they've replaced. Many of our parents and grandparents worked for thirty or forty years essentially putting the same handful of parts together. In return they had stable jobs and paychecks that in many cases allowed them to own homes and cars, buy the consumer goods of their day, take a weeks vacation at the cabin up north and send their own kids to college. All without many more job skills, education or desire to advance than are shown by some of those protesting today in an efforts to attain the same things. I don't think any of the protestors or union organizers expect to get $15/hr but negotiations always have to start somewhere.
> 
> I'd favor some sort of two tiered minimum wage with a lower level for training and those under 18 or still in high school.


It is a non-issue for you for a very different reason than me. You and everyone can argue that these poor folks deserve a break today, or that rich folks owning FF places can have it their way.

Ya'll go ahead with all that.

It is is a non-issue with me because I, we, and others of like mind lose these propaganda wars with feel-good BS laws thought up by bleeding heart people feeling guilty or something. I can't explain them.

I ain't going to play the propaganda game, their game.

You want to take the ship down? Go ahead. Go ahead.


----------



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

mmoetc said:


> You really should argue the math. It's only off by a factor 10 or so. 300 employee hours at $ 8/ hr come out to a payroll of $24,000 / week. Assuming the 27% labor percentage I saw cited as average for fast food businesses is accurate that means a business must generate $88,888 in gross revenue each week to meet that number. Adjust the wage to $10/ hr and the business must now generate $111,111 in revenue to keep that $30,000 payroll at 27% a difference that when multiplied out by 52 weeks come to a $1.155 M annual difference. Substantial and each business will have to make its own decisions on how to cope if it should come about.


You forgot that to make the extra $1.155 M, you need to spend $3.125 in other business costs so the company would need to generate not only the increased wage cost but the increase in other costs to the tune of $4.28 M. I admit that the increased labor costs do not come out of profit unless there is not enough increase in sales. 
But the point is that even $4 million is a lot for a business to generate who is in competition with grocery delis, food trucks, and take out. 
It is not so easy as it sounds.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

HDRider said:


> It is a non-issue for you for a very different reason than me. You and everyone can argue that these poor folks deserve a break today, or that rich folks owning FF places can have it their way.
> 
> Ya'll go ahead with all that.
> 
> ...


It's not so much about the employees deserving anything as it is about the owners of a business paying the full cost of that business, which includes paying employees. I enjoy a Royale with cheese every now and then and don't mind paying full price. I do object to subsidizing others dining experiences with my tax dollars through food stamps, housing assistance and various other government largesse which allows businesses to pay people less while those people still are able to get their basic needs met.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> You forgot that to make the extra $1.155 M, you need to spend $3.125 in other business costs so the company would need to generate not only the increased wage cost but the increase in other costs to the tune of $4.28 M. I admit that the increased labor costs do not come out of profit unless there is not enough increase in sales.
> But the point is that even $4 million is a lot for a business to generate who is in competition with grocery delis, food trucks, and take out.
> It is not so easy as it sounds.


You really should take a basic business accounting class. It is as easy as I drew out. Payroll doesn't go up $1.155M. It goes up $312,000 over the course of the year. This would be 27% of the $1.15M. The remainder of that money after you subtract the increased payroll pays for all those other business costs. Excel is easy.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> You really should take a basic business accounting class. It is as easy as I drew out. Payroll doesn't go up $1.155M. It goes up $312,000 over the course of the year. This would be 27% of the $1.15M. The remainder of that money after you subtract the increased payroll pays for all those other business costs. Excel is easy.


Ok, lets take a business course.... cost of production increases by $312,000.... 27% of labor, and production, sales, profits goes up by what percentage? Excel may be easy, I dunno, never used it, but I have ran businesses.... and it aint that easy to hump up an extra quarter million or so ($60 grand a week) without increasing sales. Someone pays, either you must increase your customer base, thus increasing sales, or.... raise the prices on the customers you already have enough to cover the cost of your increased expense. Your only other alternative is go broke, go on welfare along with all of your employees, who have essentially priced themselves out of a job.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, lets take a business course.... cost of production increases by $312,000.... 27% of labor, and production, sales, profits goes up by what percentage? Excel may be easy, I dunno, never used it, but I have ran businesses.... and it aint that easy to hump up an extra quarter million or so ($60 grand a week) without increasing sales. Someone pays, either you must increase your customer base, thus increasing sales, or.... raise the prices on the customers you already have enough to cover the cost of your increased expense. Your only other alternative is go broke, go on welfare along with all of your employees, who have essentially priced themselves out of a job.


What about businesses that have contracts? If I kept my business in California and had to bump my payroll to $15 per hour(i pay $10 per hour for non skilled labor), it would cost me aproximately $30,000.00 per week! 
$1,320,800 per year. (It will actually be more because of taxes) How can I justify an increase like that? I saw the writing on the wall and was proactive, and moved to Arizona. Tonight, my daughter wanted....... (gag)..Jack in the Box. They had 2 self serve kiosks and only 2 people behind the counter compared to 6 a few weeks ago!!! I was told they let go 2/3rds of their staff. It was just as fast and gross as usual, just less employees.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

When these union slaves are out of a job, they'll blame the "greedy corporations" and will never see their own greed as the downfall.
That's the left preying on the uninformed


----------



## gweny (Feb 10, 2014)

I have worked in the same field for 15+ years. I have worked for small businesses, the government, as a government contractor, for myself, in a union, and even as a subcontractor on union jobs (union pay without the benies or the dues). I am currently union. 
They all have their pros and cons. 
Working non union, it's all about the bottom line. They will can you in a minute for some young guy that is faster and stronger and has no tenure. This greatly effects safety and product quality. they also expect one person to do the work of 10, work excessive overtime, and do my paperwork at home unpaid on my own time.
In the union it might as well be impossible to get fired, there is excessive middle management, and the attitudes and lack of motivation seems like an inevitable outcome.... However, my experience is valued as is my personal safety. I can work here till I retire and the retirement benefits will afford me a comfortable retirement.
Non union, I was forced to NOT continue my education because I would've educated myself out of a job. It would've made my value more than local employers were willing to pay.
Neither offer much in the way of advancement! I could go Forman at my current job, (been offered 3xs this year) but the hours are horrid, they are basically babysitters charged with micromanaging lazy people they can't fire.... No thanks, I'll pass. 
Ive realized If I want to make a mint in this profession I must go into business for myself. 
Personally family time and quality of life matter more to me than making a mint. I'd lose both having to hustle if I started my own shop.
I just want a job/ employer I can count on to provide for me and mine in exchange for an honest days work. I want to be a loyal 30+ year employee. I don't want to take work home with me or get called in at all hours. I want to come in and for 8-10 hours a day take pride in what my hard work has accomplished.
I might as well be looking for a golden unicorn.
I do however see that when union shops and non union shops are forced to compete that it lessens many of the issues. 
Unions must compete with the production of the other guys or lose bids for jobs.
Non unions must compete with the benefits and higher wages or lose good employees.... Which effects their all important bottom line.
In conclusion, I believe a healthy, undisturbed competition is the answer. Sure there will be ups and downs.... These would be naturally occurring in our economy as well if government would just stay out of it.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

gweny said:


> they also expect one person to do the work of 10


Interesting point here. Since one person does seem to be able to do the work in the non union shops, I am guessing that union employees are only expected to do a tenth as much as they are capable of. Thats nearly as good as a government employee. I "worked" for the county a brief stint many years ago. We were honestly expected to do NOTHING! It didnt take long for me to figure out that wasnt for me.


----------



## gweny (Feb 10, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Interesting point here. Since one person does seem to be able to do the work in the non union shops, I am guessing that union employees are only expected to do a tenth as much as they are capable of. Thats nearly as good as a government employee. I "worked" for the county a brief stint many years ago. We were honestly expected to do NOTHING! It didnt take long for me to figure out that wasnt for me.


I think you missed the part where I said I was getting called in at all hours, working late regularly and taking work home. Also I said it was 'expected' not 'possible'. I think I said enough bad stuff about unions that there is no need to put words in my mouth, thank you very much.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

MoonRiver said:


> SEIU backed idiots demand $15 an hour pay from fast-food companies. At the same time, Momentum Machines announces a robot to replace fast food workers.
> 
> http://www.businessinsider.com/momentum-machines-burger-robot-2014-8
> 
> It should be criminal that organizations like SEIU are able to manipulate people like this. All SEIU is after is more dues.


 
I never thought they would make a robot that could spit a lugie on a burger ordered by a state trooper ound:


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

mmoetc said:


> It's not so much about the employees deserving anything as it is about the owners of a business paying the full cost of that business, which includes paying employees. I enjoy a Royale with cheese every now and then and don't mind paying full price. I do object to subsidizing others dining experiences with my tax dollars through food stamps, housing assistance and various other government largesse which allows businesses to pay people less while those people still are able to get their basic needs met.


One has nothing to do with the other. Salaries are based on supply and demand. When there are more jobs than people, salaries go up. And when there are more people than jobs, salaries are stagnant or even go down. The problem is there aren't enough jobs!

If one can't afford to get their basic needs met, they should figure out why they can't and then take the actions that will allow them to meet their needs in the future. It is the individual's responsibility, not the business owner's.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

MoonRiver said:


> One has nothing to do with the other. Salaries are based on supply and demand. When there are more jobs than people, salaries go up. And when there are more people than jobs, salaries are stagnant or even go down. The problem is there aren't enough jobs!
> 
> If one can't afford to get their basic needs met, they should figure out why they can't and then take the actions that will allow them to meet their needs in the future. It is the individual's responsibility, not the business owner's.


But these people are getting their basic needs met. They are doing it through a combination of what they get paid and government programs such as SNAP, housing assistance and the earned income tax credit. All of this leesens their need to apply pressure for better wages and benefits on their employer. In fact small raises may actually work to their detriment by decreasing the amount of government support more than any monetary gain. You're right that it should be the individual's responsibility, but as long as I am subsidizing every Big Mac and cheap bag of groceries I'll agree with the protestors. I'll also tell them that when they get that raise the government support goes away.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> One has nothing to do with the other. Salaries are based on supply and demand. When there are more jobs than people, salaries go up. And when there are more people than jobs, salaries are stagnant or even go down. The problem is there aren't enough jobs!
> 
> If one can't afford to get their basic needs met, they should figure out why they can't and then take the actions that will allow them to meet their needs in the future. It is the individual's responsibility, not the business owner's.


Post of the day award.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> What about businesses that have contracts? If I kept my business in California and had to bump my payroll to $15 per hour(i pay $10 per hour for non skilled labor), it would cost me aproximately $30,000.00 per week!
> $1,320,800 per year. (It will actually be more because of taxes) How can I justify an increase like that? I saw the writing on the wall and was proactive, and moved to Arizona. Tonight, my daughter wanted....... (gag)..Jack in the Box. They had 2 self serve kiosks and only 2 people behind the counter compared to 6 a few weeks ago!!! I was told they let go 2/3rds of their staff. It was just as fast and gross as usual, just less employees.


Every business has to make decisions based on what's best for them. The early numbers show raising the minimum hasn't been the immediate disaster predicted. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...higher-minimum-wages-gain-more-jobs/12879113/


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Cornhusker said:


> When these union slaves are out of a job, they'll blame the "greedy corporations" and will never see their own greed as the downfall.
> That's the left preying on the uninformed


How come when labor wants to make a living its greed and when the rich want to keep their profits it isn't?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

AmericanStand said:


> How come when labor wants to make a living its greed and when the rich want to keep their profits it isn't?


He who owns the business and takes the risks, reaps the profit (or loss).

He who wants the safety of a salary without taking any risk, doesn't get any of the profit.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

LOL that's so 1950s ,business has made it very clear that employment is on a day to day basis.
More and more business has made it clear that risk will be taken by the employees.
Now when business has so raised the cost of living that the minimum wage isn't enough to live on they are screaming that its unfair of the employees to want to survive!


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> Now when business has so raised the cost of living


Please elaborate on that. What has "business" done which has increased the cost of living?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Raised prices.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

AmericanStand said:


> LOL that's so 1950s ,business has made it very clear that employment is on a day to day basis.
> More and more business has made it clear that risk will be taken by the employees.
> Now when business has so raised the cost of living that the minimum wage isn't enough to live on they are screaming that its unfair of the employees to want to survive!


I call Bull . gre: Go start you a logging Co and sawmill then get back to me in a couple years . Bet you have five hundred more insane reasons you went broke .


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

LOL I have started and ran businesses since I was 5 I've never gone broke from paying a minimum wage. 
Anyone who thinks that paying a higher minimum wage would put them at a disadvantage compared to anyone else in this country doesn't understand the fundamentals of business.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> He who owns the business and takes the risks, reaps the profit (or loss).
> 
> He who wants the safety of a salary without taking any risk, doesn't get any of the profit.


No risk, huh? Don't let the coal miners, steel workers, many other workers who stand a chance of getting maimed or killed on a daily basis hear you say that. 

The best thing most businesses could do is start some kind of profit sharing or incentive program. Puts some skin in the game for even the most lowly of workers, takes away that "us vs them" mentality.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> Raised prices.


Who do you think has more power in a business transaction, the person selling a good or service, or the person buying it?


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

AmericanStand said:


> LOL I have started and ran businesses since I was 5 I've never gone broke from paying a minimum wage.
> Anyone who thinks that paying a higher minimum wage would put them at a disadvantage compared to anyone else in this country doesn't understand the fundamentals of business.


Yea I understand I'v had workers that weren't worth $2.00 an hour  I would been ahead paying em to stay at home :awh:


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Sawmill Jim said:


> Yea I understand I'v had workers that weren't worth $2.00 an hour  I would been ahead paying em to stay at home :awh:


LOL so true. But as you know that's a management decision . For some reason people in this country try to act like management is something everybody is born with and never have to learn.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Nate_in_IN said:


> Who do you think has more power in a business transaction, the person selling a good or service, or the person buying it?


There is no one right answer to that.
For instance if I go down to the farmers market with $5 and Jill wants $10 for her peaches I have the right to move on to Ann, but if everyone wants $10 for their peaches I don't have the power to buy them at all and will go hungry.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

AmericanStand said:


> LOL so true. But as you know that's a management decision . For some reason people in this country try to act like management is something everybody is born with and never have to learn.


Thing is unless you are a good fortune teller you don't realize they can't stack two planks on top one another till you hire em :smack


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> Every business has to make decisions based on what's best for them. The early numbers show raising the minimum hasn't been the immediate disaster predicted. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...higher-minimum-wages-gain-more-jobs/12879113/


So, please tell me how I should handle this, hypothetically? Where would I come up with $1,500,000?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> LOL that's so 1950s ,business has made it very clear that employment is on a day to day basis.
> More and more business has made it clear that risk will be taken by the employees.
> Now when business has so raised the cost of living that the minimum wage isn't enough to live on they are screaming that its unfair of the employees to want to survive!


You can thank the government for these increases, not businesses.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> No risk, huh? Don't let the coal miners, steel workers, many other workers who stand a chance of getting maimed or killed on a daily basis hear you say that.
> 
> The best thing most businesses could do is start some kind of profit sharing or incentive program. Puts some skin in the game for even the most lowly of workers, takes away that "us vs them" mentality.


Nope, no risk! They aren't forced to work at these jobs, they choose too! Workers can start their own businesses if they don't like it!


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> There is no one right answer to that.
> For instance if I go down to the farmers market with $5 and Jill wants $10 for her peaches I have the right to move on to Ann, but if everyone wants $10 for their peaches I don't have the power to buy them at all and will go hungry.


You could always grow your own peaches.

The power is equally split, neither side can force the other. Everybody understands there has to be some profit to motivate people to grow peaches and sell them to others.

But to your point before, you stated that businesses raised prices, but in your example above you say you would get the product from another supplier if the price were more desirable. The only businesses can then raise prices is if all vendors suddenly decide to spontaneously increase their price, or there is an outside source. What could cause that?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> So, please tell me how I should handle this, hypothetically? Where would I come up with $1,500,000?


If you'd like to fly me out( business class), pay for some moderate food and lodging, meet my consulting fee, and open up your business and books to my scrutiny for a couple of weeks I could give you an answer. That answer might well be the same one you already came to, it might not. Hypothetically I'd say any business that locks itself into long term contracts always runs the risk of one of its inputs suddenly increasing in cost making those contracts difficult to fulfill profitably. Last winter propane companies provided fuel to many homes at a price that was far less than what it cost them to buy that propane on the market. You wanna be the boss, you take the risk, right?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

You bet if this horrible 15 buck a raise does happen a HUGE raise in prices will soon follow. Bet the bank on it.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

JeffreyD said:


> Nope, no risk! They aren't forced to work at these jobs, they choose too! Workers can start their own businesses if they don't like it!


Oh, yes, you can just walk down any street and take your choice of all the great jobs - not!

Most people aren't cut out to be their own boss especially these days. The whole culture says, get a degree or learn a trade and get a job. And a lot of people who are very good at what they do, are lousy at managing a business from top to bottom. I have seen that over and over again. So most people work for someone else, that is no reason to view them with scorn and contempt.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

JeffreyD said:


> Nope, no risk! They aren't forced to work at these jobs, they choose too! Workers can start their own businesses if they don't like it!


There are so many help wanted signs around it stinks that so many just sit home and collect government money or stay where they are and twitch about how poorly they are getting paid. Get up and move on the door is not locked. And no way can the fast food industry take such a hit as 15 an hour. They WILL Push Back, and Push back hard.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

MO_cows said:


> No risk, huh? Don't let the coal miners, steel workers, many other workers who stand a chance of getting maimed or killed on a daily basis hear you say that.
> 
> The best thing most businesses could do is start some kind of profit sharing or incentive program. Puts some skin in the game for even the most lowly of workers, takes away that "us vs them" mentality.


If you want to be nit picky, I meant risk of capital. 

A coal miner makes a decision whether the personal risk is worth the salary. Same with a steel worker, a farmer, a fisherman, a soldier, etc.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

JeffreyD said:


> You can thank the government for these increases, not businesses.


To some tiny degree Im sure that's true But I think most people have seen private business prices go up and effect them far more than government prices.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

arabian knight said:


> You bet if this horrible 15 buck a raise does happen a HUGE raise in prices will soon follow. Bet the bank on it.


If the cost of labor in fast food is 25 % as some here have indicated it means the costs of those items would go up 25% to keep the same profit levels.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> Oh, yes, you can just walk down any street and take your choice of all the great jobs - not!


Why not? I always did. :shrug: But then I never really looked for a job... I looked for work, and there was always plenty go around!


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> ... I looked for work, and there was always plenty go around!


:duel:
LOL like the joke with the statistics says that's because when it comes down to it you and I are the only ones working.....And Im not to sure about you!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> :duel:
> LOL like the joke with the statistics says that's because when it comes down to it you and I are the only ones working.....And Im not to sure about you!


Well just to ease your mind... it must be you thats having to bear the whole load these days, coz I aint doin a durn thing! 

Not how I like it, but its how it is.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> If the cost of labor in fast food is 25 % as some here have indicated it means the costs of those items would go up 25% to keep the same profit levels.


So a $6 burger will be $7.50. That is probably pretty close.


----------



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

mmoetc said:


> You really should take a basic business accounting class. It is as easy as I drew out. Payroll doesn't go up $1.155M. It goes up $312,000 over the course of the year. This would be 27% of the $1.15M. The remainder of that money after you subtract the increased payroll pays for all those other business costs. Excel is easy.


Yes, I do see now that I lost track of which was the increased cost and which was the profit needed to cover the cost. You are right- unneccessarily sarcastic but right. And right is important.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

MO_cows said:


> Oh, yes, you can just walk down any street and take your choice of all the great jobs - not!
> 
> Most people aren't cut out to be their own boss especially these days. The whole culture says, get a degree or learn a trade and get a job. And a lot of people who are very good at what they do, are lousy at managing a business from top to bottom. I have seen that over and over again. So most people work for someone else, that is no reason to view them with scorn and contempt.


Actually, having just returned from Panama (yes as in Canal)Its truly amazing how inventive people are in starting their own business and making money.
Of course the government has to get out of the way and stop making it too easy to sit around watching TV and making babies.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> Oh, yes, you can just walk down any street and take your choice of all the great jobs - not!
> 
> Most people aren't cut out to be their own boss especially these days. The whole culture says, get a degree or learn a trade and get a job. And a lot of people who are very good at what they do, are lousy at managing a business from top to bottom. I have seen that over and over again. So most people work for someone else, that is no reason to view them with scorn and contempt.


Just pointing out that folks have choices, their not slaves! There's no scorn or contempt, just honesty.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

AmericanStand said:


> If the cost of labor in fast food is 25 % as some here have indicated it means the costs of those items would go up 25% to keep the same profit levels.


What about the cost of supplies which will also go up as those companies have to increase wages. Once you start this cycle, it has to run all the way through the economy.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> Yes, I do see now that I lost track of which was the increased cost and which was the profit needed to cover the cost. You are right- unneccessarily sarcastic but right. And right is important.


What sarcasm?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> What sarcasm?


Ok, I have been reading on this board since I cant remember when.... oh there it is up in the corner... since Oct 2005! I rarely see anything remotely resembling an apology from anyone. They are the exception not the rule... how about just accepting it as the rare gift it is?


----------



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

mmoetc said:


> What sarcasm?


That sarcasm.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nate_in_IN said:


> Please elaborate on that. What has "business" done which has increased the cost of living?





AmericanStand said:


> Raised prices.


Businesses rarely raise prices just to be raising them. There is that thing called competition that prevents them from doing so. Labor on the other hand, thanks to unions and government interference dont have that problem. When they raise their prices, (wages) without increasing production, the companies are then forced to raise their prices to cover those increases in costs to produce exactly the same product. Normally the competition gets stuck with the same increased costs of labor, particularly when talking about minimum wage jobs. The result? Everyone pays more for the very same product today, than we did yesterday. Sadly there are other costs that also go up when the employee gets his "raise". More taxes, more interest has to be paid to banks who are financing everything. Raising the minimum wage cuts into the buying power of the workers every time. After their "raise" they can buy even less than they could before.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

MoonRiver said:


> What about the cost of supplies which will also go up as those companies have to increase wages. Once you start this cycle, it has to run all the way through the economy.


Well no. first it would only effect those employing workers at less than the minimum wage they are asking. AND only those employers in the affected industries with new wage costs.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Well no. first it would only effect those employing workers at less than the minimum wage. AND only those employers in the affected industries with new wage costs.


Historically that is not how it happens. When the minimum wage has been raised, everyone elses wages go up shortly thereafter. In theory it would not be required, but for whatever reasons a raise in minimum wage has always produced an economy wide round of inflation. Each level of production, in totally unrelated industries, will adjust wage scales to equal that of the increased minimum wage. This does indeed have the effect of penalizing the workers by reducing their overall buying power. What one would expect is an increase in the workers buying power, but in reality just the opposite has happened... every single time! Prior to the adoption of a minimum wage, a ditch digger could support his family, without his spouse having to be in the work force. In todays world, both parties need a job just to break even, and many are still getting further behind every month.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Um We are not talking about raising the minimum wage. just the wages of some employees.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Um We are not talking about raising the minimum wage. just the wages of some employees.


No this is a 15 buck raise on Minimum Wage for ALL workers. Not just those at fast food joints. Minimum Wage itself goes up if this insane thing goes through.


> Last week saw the fast food strikes and the demonstrations in favour of a *$15 an hour minimum wage*. The joint argument seems to be that it would simply be fair that lower skilled workers would be able to support their families if wages rose to this level and also that there would be a reduction in inequality as a result of such a higher wage. On the other side thereâs all those killjoys (like myself) pointing out that things really arenât that simple and there would be a certain amount of blowback *if the minimum wage* were raised to that amount. Think of it this way: a $15 an hour minimum wage would amount to a $17,500 a year tax on jobs. And anyone who thinks that such a tax wouldnât change employer behaviour is simply not inhabiting the same economic universe as the rest of us.





> So, assume 40 hours a week of work, 52 weeks a year, the current minimum is $7.25 and the suggested new one is $15. Obviously, the annual cost of that is (40x51x7.75) $16,120. Add Employerâs social security (999.44), Medicaid (233.74) and Federal unemployment tax (96.72) and we get to $17,449.90. Itâs fair enough simply to call that $17,500.* So, the minimum wage rises to $15* and thus all minimum wage jobs cost the employer $17,500 a year more.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2014/09/06/a-15-an-hour-minimum-wage-would-be-a-17500-a-year-tax-on-jobs/


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Um We are not talking about raising the minimum wage. just the wages of some employees.


Its my understanding that while this is currently sorta true, the fast food industry is a pretty large chunk of our overall economy, and I am quite sure, if history prevails, that if this goes thru, an increase of the federal minimum wage will be forthcoming shortly after. With all of its usual inflationary "unintended consequences".


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Sure it will hurt a whole lot of companies.
Many are working and making ends meet just fine at 10, 12 bucks an hour. But if Federal Wage goes up to 15 they would then be working Below Minimum and would also be getting a nice hearty wage increase.
This is a federal manner and the feds raising the Minimum wage Up.
It isn't just those at Micky D's or Burger-king


----------



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

arabian knight said:


> Sure it will hurt a whole lot of companies.
> Many are working and making ends meet just fine at 10, 12 bucks an hour. But if Federal Wage goes up to 15 they would then be working Below Minimum and would also be getting a nice hearty wage increase.
> This is a federal manner and the feds raising the Minimum wage Up.
> It isn't just those at Micky D's or Burger-king


The really scary part is that some are pushing for a minimum wage indexed to inflation.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

AmericanStand said:


> Well no. first it would only effect those employing workers at less than the minimum wage they are asking. AND only those employers in the affected industries with new wage costs.


So let's say you work for a company and are making $15/hr. Now the minimum wage is raised to $15/hr. Will you continue to work for $15/hr or does the company owe you a commensurate adjustment in wage? After all, you were making well over the minimum wage because of your hard work and initiative and now you are only making minimum wage. Companies will be forced to increase all hourly wages.

And what about all the unions that have it written into their contract that they must be paid minimum wage plus x$? Why do you think the unions are fighting so hard to get the minimum wage increased? Union employees don't make minimum wage. It is so the clause in their contract kicks in which causes a corresponding wage increase for employees already making above the minimum wage. Again, increasing the cost of goods and services.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, I have been reading on this board since I cant remember when.... oh there it is up in the corner... since Oct 2005! I rarely see anything remotely resembling an apology from anyone. They are the exception not the rule... how about just accepting it as the rare gift it is?


I'll agree that anything remotely admitting that one is wrong is rare here. Suddenly feigning sensitivity to slights, insults, name calling and even (gasp) sarcasm and slapping down the victimhood card is not. I was sincere in my suggestion that the poster could benefit from some further education in business math. After showing a glaring lack of how to calculate labor costs and the effect of an increase and being corrected( I even showed my work) he doubled down again with more bad math and lack of understanding. I simply pointed out that he might benefit from more education than I was willing to give so that he might better understand these rather simple concepts and was quite sincere in this. You even made a mistake ( by a factor of 10) in your follow up post . I let it slide as slip of the finger. I'll try to keep people's heightened sensitivity in mind in further postings


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> You even made a mistake ( by a factor of 10) in your follow up post . I let it slide as slip of the finger. I'll try to keep people's heightened sensitivity in mind in further postings





Yvonne's hubby said:


> Ok, lets take a business course.... cost of production increases by $312,000.... 27% of labor, and production, sales, profits goes up by what percentage? Excel may be easy, I dunno, never used it, but I have ran businesses.... and it aint that easy to hump up an extra quarter million or so (*$60 grand a week) without increasing sales. Someone pays, either you must increase your customer base, thus increasing sales, or.... raise the prices on the customers you already have enough to cover the cost of your increased expense. Your only other alternative is go broke, go on welfare along with all of your employees, who have essentially priced themselves out of a job.


**this should be $6k per week.. thanks mmoetc! *

Yeppers, I was too durn lazy to check my work before posting. Nice catch. Its too late now for me to edit my original erroneous post so am bringing it forward here with my most humble apologies and the appropriate correction. This kind of error is why I got out of the real estate game.... On this board an error of this kind is one thing, but in the real world, while handling other peoples money, it gets dangerous.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> **this should be $6k per week.. thanks mmoetc! *
> 
> Yeppers, I was too durn lazy to check my work before posting. Nice catch. Its too late now for me to edit my original erroneous post so am bringing it forward here with my most humble apologies and the appropriate correction. This kind of error is why I got out of the real estate game.... On this board an error of this kind is one thing, but in the real world, while handling other peoples money, it gets dangerous.


No worries. My fingers often get ahead of me on the phone keyboard. Most if my posts seem to have an edit to correct such things. Who put the I and O next to each other, anyway.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I can see two issues here.
Why is it a problem when those on the bottom want a little more of the pie when those on the top can add millions as long as they call it "keeping their profits".
Im sure you will say its because those people and their talents are in short supply.
Why aren't the people on the bottom worth more? Why do we even need a minimum wage?
There is a over supply of people to fill the so called unskilled jobs , Why not stop immigration and let the lower wage level seek its natural level ?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> I can see two issues here.
> Why is it a problem when those on the bottom want a little more of the pie when those on the top can add millions as long as they call it "keeping their profits".
> Im sure you will say its because those people and their talents are in short supply.
> Why aren't the people on the bottom worth more? Why do we even need a minimum wage?
> There is a over supply of people to fill the so called unskilled jobs , Why not stop immigration and let the lower wage level seek its natural level ?


The reason we need immigrants to fill the unskilled labor jobs is because our own "citizens" refuse to do so. Its much easier for them to just apply for the "free" handouts and not have to work at all.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> LOL that's so 1950s ,business has made it very clear that employment is on a day to day basis.
> More and more business has made it clear that risk will be taken by the employees.
> Now when business has so raised the cost of living that the minimum wage isn't enough to live on they are screaming that its unfair of the employees to want to survive!


I don't see masses of people dying on the streets so they must be surviving some how.

I have NEVER worked a job where I didn't know how much I was going to be paid. I don't think any of these people walked in, worked for a week or two the *suddenly* discovered that they were only being paid minimum wage. They knew when they started what they were going to be paid but NOW they think their labor is worth more? Ask for a raise and if you don't get either shut up and do the job you are being paid for or quit and find another way to earn money. 

When I had the job I would decide if the work they wanted from me was worth the pay I was getting or if there was a chance I could move up to better (i.e. easier or more money) job there. If not I'd spend my time off looking for another job. 

I went from minimum wage picking cigarette butts out of the grass and scraping gum off of places you really don't want to know about to management in a fast food place in a little over a year. How? By working my tail off, going above and beyond, being reliable, willing to work when needed plus I was honest and smart. When you can't even make change w/o the machine telling you what makes you think you can ever be promoted to a job which requires you to count multi thousand dollar deposits, make a change order for the bank and determine how much stock you need to order to cover next week's business?

Let me tell you how difficult fast food work is. We had people working there who were, well let's say mentally challenged. I'd put stick them at a station and tell them to do this and they did it and did it just as well as the highly intelligent college students who were working there to pay for their education. I say that to point out you can take almost anyone off the street and make them a 'skilled' fast food worker in 2 weeks or less which means their pay is more than what their job skills are worth.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

watcher said:


> I have NEVER worked a job where I didn't know how much I was going to be paid. I don't think any of these people walked in, worked for a week or two the *suddenly* discovered that they were only being paid minimum wage. They knew when they started what they were going to be paid but NOW they think their labor is worth more?


Yup. I bet everyone knows what the terms of compensation from the employer are when they accept a job. If they don't they have bigger issues than being paid minimum wage.

As an alternative though, I have heard people complain that they accepted a job and then were completely discouraged by their first paycheck. They didn't realize how much came out of it due to taxes, fees, and union dues. It's the net which they see, not really the gross.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> There is no one right answer to that.
> For instance if I go down to the farmers market with $5 and Jill wants $10 for her peaches I have the right to move on to Ann, but if everyone wants $10 for their peaches I don't have the power to buy them at all and will go hungry.


I disagree. The buyer almost always has the advantage. The seller already has assets tied up in the goods which means he has already spent 'money' on them and needs to at least recoup his cost.

A buyer has nothing risked. If he doesn't like the price or quality or looks or whatever of a product he walks away with the same assets he had before.

One rule most people don't get is something is only worth what someone else is willing to trade for it. This applies to an apple, a car and your labor. I've got a chance to take down a carport. To me its worth the cost of my labor but if the owner expected me to pay him cash for it I wouldn't. Its not worth that to me. It might be to you. I'd like to have some help doing it but if anyone expects me to pay them any more than sodas and buy them lunch they are pricing themselves out of the market. Its not worth more than that to me. It could be to you. The odds are if I told the owner I wanted cash to take it down he'd probably tell me to keep walking because getting rid of it isn't worth paying for. If you owned it you might be willing to pay to have it go away.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> Oh, yes, you can just walk down any street and take your choice of all the great jobs - not!
> 
> Most people aren't cut out to be their own boss especially these days. The whole culture says, get a degree or learn a trade and get a job. And a lot of people who are very good at what they do, are lousy at managing a business from top to bottom. I have seen that over and over again. So most people work for someone else, that is no reason to view them with scorn and contempt.


They make their choice and they should live with it. If you don't want to spend 12+ hours a day working for a couple of weeks then don't take a job on a farm during harvest time. If you don't like working in 90+ degree temps hour after hour don't get a job with a landscaping company in Florida. If you don't like making minimum wage doing a job I could probably train a chimp to do then don't work fast food!

I've worked my share of what I call "monkey jobs", i.e. a job that trained chimp I talked about could do (most today are done either by robots or overseas). Jobs where you take this thing from this pile, put it in the machine, trip a lever, remove the part from the machine and put it in that pile. I never understood why people thought just because they had been putting parts into and taking them out of a machine for 2 years they should get a raise in pay when they max out in productivity in 6 months or so. What makes them think they are more valuable just because they haven't quit?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Well no. first it would only effect those employing workers at less than the minimum wage they are asking. AND only those employers in the affected industries with new wage costs.


You need to educate yourself. Please let me provide some first hand info on what happens. Back in the stone age I was working fast food management when the minimum wage was increased. The night before it want to effect the store manager (who NEVER came in before 10am and left in time to get the deposit to the bank before the 2pm daily cut off) came in at 11pm and we sat at the computer and increased the price of each and every item on the menu while workers were busy changing prices on the menu boards. I never saw that done before nor after (I left before another minimum wage increase).

The morning after the minimum wage increase everyone who came into our restaurant discovered their effective wage had just dropped. They now had to work longer to make the money necessary to buy the same product, made with the same ingredients, on the same equipment by the same employees as the day before. While it wasn't long, probably just a few seconds to a couple of minutes depending on their pay and what they bought, when you add up all the other things which also went up in cost its enough to notice.

This is one of the way a minimum wage hike ripples though the economy.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

As some of you have pointed out, raising wages by legislation or through orginizing, most likely will have a ripple effect on other wages. Makes sense. 

Who wins most when taxable wages go up?

Who wins most when labor organizes?

Who is making the most noise in all this? 
Unions & Democrats. You do the math.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> I can see two issues here.
> Why is it a problem when those on the bottom want a little more of the pie when those on the top can add millions as long as they call it "keeping their profits".
> Im sure you will say its because those people and their talents are in short supply.
> Why aren't the people on the bottom worth more? Why do we even need a minimum wage?
> There is a over supply of people to fill the so called unskilled jobs , Why not stop immigration and let the lower wage level seek its natural level ?


We need a minimum wage to keep politicians in office. Its another way a fascist government can control people and businesses w/o making it look like it has any control at all. Force businesses to pay more through government regs/laws. If things go well then the pols get to crow about the 'good' they have done. If things go mammaries up the pols can blame the 'evil corporations' and scream about how the need more power.


----------



## mvick (Feb 8, 2014)

I know everything has gotten more expensive and everyone deserves a decent wage. BUT ---- I am on retirement and I never get an increase. Social security sometimes increases, but nothing like the minimum wage does. 
If I figured this as wages, it would prob not even be half. Has to stop sometime????
I no longer can afford anyone to even cut my grass as they expect more than minimum wage.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> You need to educate yourself. Please let me provide some first hand info on what happens. Back in the stone age I was working fast food management when the minimum wage was increased. The night before it want to effect the store manager (who NEVER came in before 10am and left in time to get the deposit to the bank before the 2pm daily cut off) came in at 11pm and we sat at the computer and increased the price of each and every item on the menu while workers were busy changing prices on the menu boards. I never saw that done before nor after (I left before another minimum wage increase).
> 
> The morning after the minimum wage increase everyone who came into our restaurant discovered their effective wage had just dropped. They now had to work longer to make the money necessary to buy the same product, made with the same ingredients, on the same equipment by the same employees as the day before. While it wasn't long, probably just a few seconds to a couple of minutes depending on their pay and what they bought, when you add up all the other things which also went up in cost its enough to notice.
> 
> This is one of the way a minimum wage hike ripples though the economy.


Exactly what we did when I managed restaurants when minimum wage went up - we didn't have computers back then but we raised all prices on the menu board the night before.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nate_in_IN said:


> Yup. I bet everyone knows what the terms of compensation from the employer are when they accept a job. If they don't they have bigger issues than being paid minimum wage.
> 
> As an alternative though, I have heard people complain that they accepted a job and then were completely discouraged by their first paycheck. They didn't realize how much came out of it due to taxes, fees, and union dues. It's the net which they see, not really the gross.


Losing your ignorance can be painful. I tell young people all the time don't expect to bring home any more than 85% of what your hourly wage is and they are still shocked when they get paid. Then when you point out they lose another 5-10% of their check when they buy something (sale's tax) they really are shocked.

The numbers I use are: Working 40hrs/wk at $7.25/hr (current minimum wage) you make $290/wk. You'll bring home about $245. The sales tax rate around here is 7%. That means you can buy less than $230 worth of stuff. That means you are really making about $5.75/hr and the government is taking $1.50/hr from you; that's 20%. Which means the first day you work every dollar you earn from your hard work is going right into someone else's pocket.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mvick said:


> I know everything has gotten more expensive and everyone deserves a decent wage. BUT ---- I am on retirement and I never get an increase. Social security sometimes increases, but nothing like the minimum wage does.
> If I figured this as wages, it would prob not even be half. Has to stop sometime????
> I no longer can afford anyone to even cut my grass as they expect more than minimum wage.


You really get shafted because companies are keeping inflation hidden from the government which means you don't get a COLA. A package of bologna still cost $1.50, a loaf of bread $1.50 and a bottle of mayo still cost $3 so according to the government the cost making your bologna sandwich hasn't gone up. Therefore there's no need to increase your check. But that package of bologna only has 12 ounces not 16, that loaf of bread only 14 ounces not 16 and the bottle of mayo only 30 ounces not 32. Which means you get fewer sandwiches for that price which means in reality the cost of your sandwich HAS gone up.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

The real reason Obama is for a hike in minimum wage is NOT because he wants the lower paid workers to have more buying power -that's been proven incorrect by basic Economics 101. The REAL reason is so we can inflate our way our of past debt. We are way beyond our ability as a nation to pay our debts - the solution, massive inflation which decreases old debt.

Example: you make $50K and you have old debt of $50K -- it uses all your income
But if you make $100K you can pay the 50K and still have $50K left over

That's what the government wants(has) to do. Inflate their way out of debt.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

watcher said:


> Losing your ignorance can be painful. I tell young people all the time don't expect to bring home any more than 85% of what your hourly wage is and they are still shocked when they get paid. Then when you point out they lose another 5-10% of their check when they buy something (sale's tax) they really are shocked.
> 
> The numbers I use are: Working 40hrs/wk at $7.25/hr (current minimum wage) you make $290/wk. You'll bring home about $245. The sales tax rate around here is 7%. That means you can buy less than $230 worth of stuff. That means you are really making about $5.75/hr and the government is taking $1.50/hr from you; that's 20%. Which means the first day you work every dollar you earn from your hard work is going right into someone else's pocket.


Don't forget about the other 10% which is intentionally hidden from wage earners eyes. You only see half the social security and FICA tax, the employer directly pays the other half and it is not even shown on your pay-check.

Unions have to push this as a government mandated over-all wage increase. Other-wise it would be very easy for a franchise owner to just contract a bunch of the positions to an agency who pays a lower wage.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

mnn2501 said:


> The real reason Obama is for a hike in minimum wage is NOT because he wants the lower paid workers to have more buying power -that's been proven incorrect by basic Economics 101. The REAL reason is so we can inflate our way our of past debt. We are way beyond our ability as a nation to pay our debts - the solution, massive inflation which decreases old debt.
> 
> Example: you make $50K and you have old debt of $50K -- it uses all your income
> But if you make $100K you can pay the 50K and still have $50K left over
> ...


Don't forget as I mentioned before, most people discuss the debt in terms of % of GDP. GDP is always measured in dollars so inflation makes GDP go up, means the government thinks they can borrow more money. In your example above they would say, "Hey we can now borrow another $50K and keep the same percentage as before"


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Nate_in_IN said:


> Don't forget as I mentioned before, most people discuss the debt in terms of % of GDP. GDP is always measured in dollars so inflation makes GDP go up, means the government thinks they can borrow more money. In your example above they would say, "Hey we can now borrow another $50K and keep the same percentage as before"


Unfortunately that's the politicians we keep electing.

The solution: Kick *ALL* incumbents out no matter what party they are affiliated with. (Don't want to vote for the 'other party'? then vote 3rd party. Libertarians and Constitutionalist's for the most part don't spend money on things that we don't absolutely need and are not authorized to spend money on)
The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing (electing Dems and Repubs) and expect different results.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

arabian knight said:


> You bet if this horrible 15 buck a raise does happen a HUGE raise in prices will soon follow. Bet the bank on it.


Of course that will occur. It will be part of the normal hyperinflation period of the recession/depression end. 

Supply and demand ensure that our buying power always stays the same or close to it. 

The 12k a year entry level salary I got in 1982 after the late 1970s recession had the same buying power as the 9k a year salary the industry sector offered in the mid 1970s.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> The solution: Kick *ALL* incumbents out no matter what party they are affiliated with.


I agree. The current Congress has been unable and/or unwilling to tackle the big issues. We need some fresh troops ...


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

As an alternative what about having the Federal gov bow out and let each state determine their own minimum wage. As already mentioned some states have a higher minimum wage than others. Geographically the cost of living is highly variable so one universal wage doesn't make sense anyway.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

willow_girl said:


> I agree. The current Congress has been unable and/or unwilling to tackle the big issues. We need some fresh troops ...


And the bills they do pass lay on Harry Reid's desk and never go anywhere.
We need to clean house, top to bottom and start all over


----------



## gweny (Feb 10, 2014)

Cornhusker said:


> And the bills they do pass lay on Harry Reid's desk and never go anywhere.
> We need to clean house, top to bottom and start all over


I agree, but everyone has a price. If they can't be bought than they can be blackmailed and big business has the funds to do it.

There in lies the problem with capitalism. (not saying there's any better alternative though)


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

gweny said:


> I agree, but everyone has a price. If they can't be bought than they can be blackmailed and big business has the funds to do it.
> 
> There in lies the problem with capitalism. (not saying there's any better alternative though)


Capitalism has nothing to do with it. The problem is Congress gets to write their own rules and exempt themselves from laws that apply to everyone else.

I have a great idea. Some candidate for President should say that they will jointly appoint a committee, along with Congress, of people outside of government to draft laws that govern the actions of Congress, defining what is legal and what is illegal. Of course, Congress would have to pass it and the President sign it.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

watcher said:


> I don't see masses of people dying on the streets so they must be surviving some how.
> 
> I have NEVER worked a job where I didn't know how much I was going to be paid. I don't think any of these people walked in, worked for a week or two the *suddenly* discovered that they were only being paid minimum wage. They knew when they started what they were going to be paid but NOW they think their labor is worth more? Ask for a raise and if you don't get either shut up and do the job you are being paid for or quit and find another way to earn money.
> 
> ...


Post of the day award.
What do y'all think 'entry level pay' should be, anyway? What's someone worth per hr who knows nada?


----------



## gweny (Feb 10, 2014)

MoonRiver said:


> Capitalism has nothing to do with it. The problem is Congress gets to write their own rules and exempt themselves from laws that apply to everyone else.
> 
> I have a great idea. Some candidate for President should say that they will jointly appoint a committee, along with Congress, of people outside of government to draft laws that govern the actions of Congress, defining what is legal and what is illegal. Of course, Congress would have to pass it and the President sign it.


Than big business will own them too. More government and more laws is never the answer. How about less government? Get rid of all laws that protect people from themselves for starters. Freedom includes the freedom to mess your own life up or even to end it of one chooses. 
Then get rid of all the programs that protect people from the personal consequences of their own actions (ie welfare, food stamps, obamacare, and even social security). Not all at once of course... That wouldn't go over well.
Less laws = less spent enforcing them, less taxes, less institutionalized population, more business, more and better jobs, less politicians and lawyers, etc..
The benefits could be extraordinary if we just make it easier/ cheaper to demolish a law than to make one.

As long as the government treats people like irresponsible children that can't handle their own problems, that is what people will be.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

You could raise the minimum wage to any amount you think is right but in the end people are still at minimum wage.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Old Vet said:


> You could raise the minimum wage to any amount you think is right but in the end people are still at minimum wage.


Did you get philosophical while in the hospital?


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Has anyone seen the tax ramifications of all of this? Is the lowest level of income being changed and the percentages for each subsequent level going to be adjusted also?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Tricky Grama said:


> Post of the day award.
> What do y'all think 'entry level pay' should be, anyway? What's someone worth per hr who knows nada?


Id say most of time its more where you are than what you know.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The reason we need immigrants to fill the unskilled labor jobs is because our own "citizens" refuse to do so. Its much easier for them to just apply for the "free" handouts and not have to work at all.


Ive Never see a job our own citizens wont do. NEVER!
I have seen lots of jobs nobody would do for the money offered.
Feel free to let me know of ay jobs that Americans wont do for a price.



Nate_in_IN said:


> Yup. I bet everyone knows what the terms of compensation from the employer are when they accept a job. If they don't they have bigger issues than being paid minimum wage..


:umno: Its very common for employers to change the terms of the job. Sure you can quit but what if you have 19 years towards a 20 year retirement? What if they eliminate that retirement after 19 years and 11 months, as Ive seen happen.



watcher said:


> One rule most people don't get is something is only worth what someone else is willing to trade for it. .


 So very true, but that means that any item has lots of different "worths" depending on who you meet to sell it to!


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

No one is an 'idiot' for asking for $15 an hour. Now thinking you're going to get it, well thats a different story.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> :umno: Its very common for employers to change the terms of the job. Sure you can quit but what if you have 19 years towards a 20 year retirement? What if they eliminate that retirement after 19 years and 11 months, as Ive seen happen.


That's one reason why the market place is going away from annuity style retirements and going to 401k style. A 401k gives the worker control over their own retirement.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

greg273 said:


> No one is an 'idiot' for asking for $15 an hour. Now thinking you're going to get it, well thats a different story.


It all depends on who they are asking. If they are asking their employer that's fine, if they are asking a third entity to force their employer for it that is wrong.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nate_in_IN said:


> It all depends on who they are asking. If they are asking their employer that's fine, if they are asking a third entity to force their employer for it that is wrong.


The only "third entity" who could "force the employer" would be the govt. 

Unions can only negotiate. Companies and unions that get into standoffs are short on creativity, both of them. 

DH was a union employee for over 30 years in the steel industry. At one time he was on par with auto workers but the industry took a lot of downturns over the years and they fell way behind them on wages and benefits. But contract negotiations were not ever ugly, hateful affairs. It was more of a poker match. The company made a brilliant move one time - they were looking for a wage freeze over the 3 year contract to offset major increases in the health insurance. They dangled a "signing bonus" in front of the employees, $2000 each I think it was. They couldn't vote yes fast enough, it was mostly younger guys. It was the equivalent of a nickel an hour raise, they screwed themselves and were happy to do it.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

Nate_in_IN said:


> It all depends on who they are asking. If they are asking their employer that's fine, if they are asking a third entity to force their employer for it that is wrong.


 Wrong according to who? They have every right to freely associate with whomever they want. Sure, most unions are corrupt and greedy, but no more so than company management, CEO and shareholders. Greed is good, right? Thats capitalism. Wouldn't have it any other way. 

The $15 minimum wage isn't going to happen, but I will not disparage anyone from asking for as much as they can. Everyone does, from the CEO to the burger flipper.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Minimum wage jobs have never been intended to be more than entry level positions into the working world for students allowed by school board work permit to work part time afternoon jobs for a little spending money , school credit and real world where senior citizens or younger adults wanting only part time employment often worked the early and late hours or industrial probationary gopher type jobs and as employees were proprietarily skill trained they moved up to above minimum wage jobs.

If enough adult burger flippers got laid off from those entry level jobs, industrial boards would take steps to make the viable industry employment appropriate for the adults more viable than some simply trying to bleed the entry level workplace introduction jobs as a band aid solution.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

Shrek said:


> Minimum wage jobs have never been intended to be more than entry level positions into the working world for students allowed by school board work permit to work part time afternoon jobs for a little spending money .


 Lol! Maybe that was the intention, but thats not been the way its played out. Many many adults are doing these jobs, not for 'a little spending money' , but to pay essential bills. Surely you have noticed, the middle class got sold out to China years ago, all in the name of global capitalism and the race to the bottom in wages. 
If you don't pay people a living wage, your taxes will go up to pay for their dinner. Either rein in the underpayment of labor and overpayment of management, or be prepared for the social consequences of widespread poverty.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Nate_in_IN said:


> It all depends on who they are asking. If they are asking their employer that's fine, if they are asking a third entity to force their employer for it that is wrong.


Yes and that has always been wrong. Government needs to get Out Of The Picture.
When people get hungry enough they WILL take these so called monotonous jobs that are being filled right and left by those coming over the boarder.
Quit treating the American people that THEY DON'T KNOW ANYTHING AND THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS BEST.
And make it harder instead of easier to get on the government teat. food stamps were ONLY for those in disparate need to Bridge the Gap until they got another job.

Instead the government makes it easier to stay at home and collect government money instead of working. And that then will spur people on to Get Ahead in their by studying harder and climbing up the pay scale ladder.
Don't like to stay at a low paying job then Get Out And Get one that pays more, and study and work hard for that employer so you are more valuable to said company. You will get rewarded by getting pay increases.
Even fast food joints have many incentive programs Get On Them and Make something out of yourself instead of just a person that says "You Want Fries With That". LOL


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

greg273 said:


> Wrong according to who? They have every right to freely associate with whomever they want. Sure, most unions are corrupt and greedy, but no more so than company management, CEO and shareholders. Greed is good, right? Thats capitalism. Wouldn't have it any other way.
> 
> The $15 minimum wage isn't going to happen, but I will not disparage anyone from asking for as much as they can. Everyone does, from the CEO to the burger flipper.


With capitalism individuals are free to enter into their own contracts with others. The problem with labor going to the government to force their employer to provide something is it attempts to force the employer to do something they have not agreed to. Everyone thought it wrong for the mob to shake down businesses, why is it different with the government?

Done correctly, government would make sure terms of contracts are understood by both sides before agreement, and resolve issues when contracts are breached. Individuals need to have the freedom to choose their own terms in contracts.

I have no problems with people asking their employer for a wage increase. I dislike that if they can form a big enough voting block that politicians force the employer into their demands as a reward for their political support. That is not allowing people to freely enter into their own contracts.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

greg273 said:


> Lol! Maybe that was the intention, but thats not been the way its played out. Many many adults are doing these jobs, not for 'a little spending money' , but to pay essential bills. Surely you have noticed, the middle class got sold out to China years ago, all in the name of global capitalism and the race to the bottom in wages.
> If you don't pay people a living wage, your taxes will go up to pay for their dinner. Either rein in the underpayment of labor and overpayment of management, or be prepared for the social consequences of widespread poverty.


And a minimum wage at $15 won't have that effect?


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

All that will happen is that the $15 will become the new $7.25 and pricing will reflect accordingly. And a wheelbarrow of money will buy a loaf of bread.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

greg273 said:


> Lol! Maybe that was the intention, but thats not been the way its played out. Many many adults are doing these jobs, not for 'a little spending money' , but to pay essential bills. Surely you have noticed, the middle class got sold out to China years ago, all in the name of global capitalism and the race to the bottom in wages.
> If you don't pay people a living wage, your taxes will go up to pay for their dinner. Either rein in the underpayment of labor and overpayment of management, or be prepared for the social consequences of widespread poverty.


Sadly I watched some of those middle class sell themselves out by trying to sandbag overtime to add to their $13 to $15 line jobs after our overtime needs had ended.

I had a commercial product line which I was an engineering/production output control lead on that sandbagged production for two quarters, then during the third quarter as I requested ramped up production of our Guadalajara production facility to make our shipipng requirements , the overtime sandbaggers began to fear for their jobs but still would not make the normal production numbers they had 5 quarters before the overtime required quarter.

It amazed me at how many let a few months of overtime income corrupt their common sense.

Two years after we laid the majority of the sandbaggers off, shut down the previous production line and staffed some streamlined production lines we learned that it was better to hire temp shop workers if overtime needs exceeded 10 hours a week for two weeks.

Using temp shop staff for extended overtime proved profitable to our company and investors while keeping employees from catching the gold fever for over a decade until the company was bought and most of us old timers had our contracts bought out. Those who were retained have told me the company that bought us out still prefers using temp shop labor for longer term overtime situations whenever possible.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Nate_in_IN said:


> It all depends on who they are asking. If they are asking their employer that's fine, if they are asking a third entity to force their employer for it that is wrong.





arabian knight said:


> Yes and that has always been wrong. Government needs to get Out Of The Picture.


So you are both against "Right to work laws"?
Welcome to the side of the Angels! :angel:


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

Prices will rise with an increase in minimum wage, but not nearly as much as the doomsayers would have us believe. 



> firms tend to respond to minimum wage increases not by reducing production or employment, but by raising prices. Overall, price increases are modest: For example, a 10% increase in the minimum wage would increase food prices by no more than 4% and overall prices by no more than 0.4%, significantly less than the minimum-wage increase - See more at: http://journalistsresource.org/stud...raising-the-minimum-wage#sthash.hq67wNzC.dpuf


http://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/inequality/the-effects-of-raising-the-minimum-wage#


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

When will some forget what took place YEARS AGO?. This is not a history lesson as wages have Never Ever gone UP like it is being proposed. This will be a Historic Setting of prices.~! 
So forget what took place YEARS ago and shove that out the window never to ever bring it up again~!
Increases in the minimum wages have been taken place but not on the scale that MAY happen now.
a 25 cent raise one time, last time was 75 cents or 85 cents whatever.
NOW it will DOUBLE That is not smart to say well in the PAST not much was raises in price.
We are talking about DOUBLING it that is not a 10% raise~!!!!!!


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I'm going to quality myself as on of greg's doomsayers.

If prices do not rise as we are describing, unemployment will. To keep the profit margin something has to be cut. And businesses are in business for the bottom line (for the most part).


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Shrek said:


> Minimum wage jobs have never been intended to be more than entry level positions into the working world for students allowed by school board work permit to work part time afternoon jobs for a little spending money , school credit and real world where senior citizens or younger adults wanting only part time employment often worked the early and late hours or industrial probationary gopher type jobs and as employees were proprietarily skill trained they moved up to above minimum wage jobs.
> 
> If enough adult burger flippers got laid off from those entry level jobs, industrial boards would take steps to make the viable industry employment appropriate for the adults more viable than some simply trying to bleed the entry level workplace introduction jobs as a band aid solution.


Post of the day award.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> When will some forget what took place YEARS AGO?. This is not a history lesson as wages have Never Ever gone UP like it is being proposed. This will be a Historic Setting of prices.~!
> So forget what took place YEARS ago and shove that out the window never to ever bring it up again~!
> Increases in the minimum wages have been taken place but not on the scale that MAY happen now.
> a 25 cent raise one time, last time was 75 cents or 85 cents whatever.
> ...


Look how wonderful Detroit is doing since the big strike decades ago raised their wages outta sight.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Shrek said:


> Minimum wage jobs have never been intended to be more than entry level positions into the working world .


That has changed .
Somebody BROKE the Career ladder.
Now what do we do?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

arabian knight said:


> When will some forget what took place YEARS AGO?. This is not a history lesson as wages have Never Ever gone UP like it is being proposed. This will be a Historic Setting of prices.~!
> So forget what took place YEARS ago and shove that out the window never to ever bring it up again~!


For those of us that HAVE forgot and those of us too young to remember in the first place could you explain what you are talking about? Are you referring to a particular event ?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> That has changed .
> Somebody BROKE the Career ladder.
> Now what do we do?


Fix the ladder.


----------



## ddgresham1 (Aug 5, 2014)

When inflation is taken into account, wages are historically low.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

ddgresham1 said:


> When inflation is taken into account, wages are historically low.


Actually the minimum wage is almost exactly (within 6%) of its value in 1968 if you compensate for inflation.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nate_in_IN said:


> Actually the minimum wage is almost exactly (within 6%) of its value in 1968 if you compensate for inflation.


Could you elaborate on that, maybe link where you found it? Because some things required to live have gone up at far more than the "inflation rate", such as medical expenses. Also the govt has tweaked how they figure inflation so some things most people require are no longer tallied in their official numbers. I doubt the accuracy of that 6%.

But even if it is accurate, is it good news that a generation has lost 6% in earnings? (On top of lost buying power because of "diluted dollars") Because most jobs are relative to the minimum wage. If you were offering $1/hour more than minimum wage but it goes up 50 cents, you likely have to raise your offering, too, to attract the employees you need. So by extrapolation, most hourly wage workers would also be 6% behind the pace of inflation. Not just the minimum wage jobs.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Fix the ladder.


Great Idea how do you propose we do that?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Great Idea how do you propose we do that?


A good start would be to get the government back into its proper place in the area of commerce. That of a disinterested third party who is only there to make sure each side plays by the rules THEY agree to.

Think of it like a ref in a ball game. The way it should be is each team knows the rules and the ref only gets involved when the rules are broken.

The way it is today the ref makes up the rules, changes them in the middle of play and has no problem with making rules which favor one team over the other.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Great Idea how do you propose we do that?


Its easy. Dont like your job? Go find one you like, or even better quit working for the other guy and go into business for yourself. That way you can pay yourself any wage you want and set up any hours you want. When you find yourself needing to hire on more help... pay those employees enough so they can all drive a new Mercedes and live the good life too! Ladder is all fixed.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

MO_cows said:


> Could you elaborate on that, maybe link where you found it? Because some things required to live have gone up at far more than the "inflation rate", such as medical expenses. Also the govt has tweaked how they figure inflation so some things most people require are no longer tallied in their official numbers. I doubt the accuracy of that 6%.
> 
> But even if it is accurate, is it good news that a generation has lost 6% in earnings? (On top of lost buying power because of "diluted dollars") Because most jobs are relative to the minimum wage. If you were offering $1/hour more than minimum wage but it goes up 50 cents, you likely have to raise your offering, too, to attract the employees you need. So by extrapolation, most hourly wage workers would also be 6% behind the pace of inflation. Not just the minimum wage jobs.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States

Look under the Federal Minimum Wage heading.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Its easy. Dont like your job? Go find one you like, or even better quit working for the other guy and go into business for yourself. That way you can pay yourself any wage you want and set up any hours you want. When you find yourself needing to hire on more help... pay those employees enough so they can all drive a new Mercedes and live the good life too! Ladder is all fixed.


I asked a honest question about a problem. Do you think that is a honest attempt to solve the problem?
The career ladder means the way of working your way up in a job or industry. Not starting at the top or being stuck at the bottom with out a chance to get a better job.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> I asked a honest question about a problem. Do you think that is a honest attempt to solve the problem?
> The career ladder means the way of working your way up in a job or industry. Not starting at the top or being stuck at the bottom with out a chance to get a better job.


It seems reasonable to me!


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> I asked a honest question about a problem. Do you think that is a honest attempt to solve the problem?
> The career ladder means the way of working your way up in a job or industry. Not starting at the top or being stuck at the bottom with out a chance to get a better job.


You touch on something I've been thinking about. It was not that long ago in the US that a person was able to live without a job. Many people moved west to obtain land and live on their own labor put forth on that land. There ess never an expectation that industry, commercialization, out the job market was required in order for a person to survive.

At some point the bulk of people in the US have gone away from this paradigm. Now they require a job to survive. The problem with this is they are now dependant on someone else to survive, but the people they depend on haven't been shouldered with that burden before, nor do most want it.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

The ladder is still available to anyone that wants it. And has the DESIRE and Fortitude, and Ambition to go ahead with it.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

AmericanStand said:


> That has changed .
> Somebody BROKE the Career ladder.
> Now what do we do?


 Students need to wise up and take viable vocational training to be able to have realistic expectations of their potential and take part in building a new ladder to climb up in the real world.

Most of all they need to be willing to build that ladder if they are capable even if they don't really think they like the idea because once they have built a few rungs and climbed up them if they hold a realistic perspective they will find they can enjoy the panoramic view as they build and climb the ladder of their generation.

Or they can sit on their butts playing angry birds or candy crush on their telephone until those of us who have climbed the ladders of our generations and stepped off into the lives we sought die off broke and happy.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Nate_in_IN said:


> You touch on something I've been thinking about. It was not that long ago in the US that a person was able to live without a job. Many people moved west to obtain land and live on their own labor put forth on that land. There ess never an expectation that industry, commercialization, out the job market was required in order for a person to survive.
> 
> At some point the bulk of people in the US have gone away from this paradigm. Now they require a job to survive. The problem with this is they are now dependant on someone else to survive, but the people they depend on haven't been shouldered with that burden before, nor do most want it.


Every body has a job. It may be a butcher or a grain broker. Living with out a job has never been available until the late 70 when Welfare became the job.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

AmericanStand said:


> I asked a honest question about a problem. Do you think that is a honest attempt to solve the problem?
> The career ladder means the way of working your way up in a job or industry. Not starting at the top or being stuck at the bottom with out a chance to get a better job.


The only people that are stuck either want to be stuck or are so stupid they have no choice. Or....perhaps they believed the sociology professor who told them there is no way to improve ones socio-economic status without the intervention of a fascist/socialist government?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> I asked a honest question about a problem. Do you think that is a honest attempt to solve the problem?
> The career ladder means the way of working your way up in a job or industry. Not starting at the top or being stuck at the bottom with out a chance to get a better job.


I gave you an honest answer to the question. If you dont like your job... go find one you do like. Or... go into business for yourself. Right up front the ladder isnt broken. People still work their way up, and some all the way to the top. What is required is the drive and ambition to do so. Nobody is going to carry anyone up the ladder, they never have, never will. People who want to succeed do, those who are content where they are tend to stay there. The rungs on the ladder are just as solid today as they ever were, its peoples grip that is weak, you gotta toughen up, work out regularly and hang on tight if you want to climb it.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I gave you an honest answer to the question. If you dont like your job... go find one you do like. Or... go into business for yourself. Right up front the ladder isnt broken. People still work their way up, and some all the way to the top. What is required is the drive and ambition to do so. Nobody is going to carry anyone up the ladder, they never have, never will. People who want to succeed do, those who are content where they are tend to stay there. The rungs on the ladder are just as solid today as they ever were, its peoples grip that is weak, you gotta toughen up, work out regularly and hang on tight if you want to climb it.


I think there are a lot here that don't understand what the Career ladder was.
Telling someone to change jobs Shows that. First off you are assuming that changing to a better job is possible. Thats not really a option for many people. If it was the Ladder wouldn't be broken.
But what I think you might mean is to go to work for another employer. That too would not be in the concept of the career ladder. That's job hopping. 
It used to be common to go to work for a employer , who would recognize your good qualities and move/train you into a progression of better jobs.
I think the best known of these left now would be the US Army.
A recruit gets some basic training then some specialized then after some time in a job proving himself then the training /proving process keeps repeating ,often for his entire career.
Contrast that to how many companies now hire for a job based on a degree and seldom promote from within let alone train.
A local company in my area has policy AGAINST promoting competent employees!
Their reasoning being why take someone out of a job they do well in. So they get people with degrees but no knowledge of how the company and industry actually works


----------



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

AmericanStand said:


> I think there are a lot here that don't understand what the Career ladder was.
> Telling someone to change jobs Shows that. First off you are assuming that changing to a better job is possible. Thats not really a option for many people. If it was the Ladder wouldn't be broken.
> But what I think you might mean is to go to work for another employer. That too would not be in the concept of the career ladder. That's job hopping.
> It used to be common to go to work for a employer , who would recognize your good qualities and move/train you into a progression of better jobs.
> ...


That would be correct if an employee has no input. But good employees do have a power. They can tell their boss that they will go elsewhere. If an employer has a hardworking, interested and successful employee, he wants to keep him. Even to the point of redesigning a job to the benefit of both.
But I do think that in many cases, college degrees are overvalued as if they were a guarantee of competence.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> I think there are a lot here that don't understand what the Career ladder was.
> Telling someone to change jobs Shows that. First off you are assuming that changing to a better job is possible. Thats not really a option for many people. If it was the Ladder wouldn't be broken.
> But what I think you might mean is to go to work for another employer. That too would not be in the concept of the career ladder. That's job hopping.
> It used to be common to go to work for a employer , who would recognize your good qualities and move/train you into a progression of better jobs.
> ...


If your definition of Career Ladder is moving up inside the same company then you are correct, that is much more scarce than it was in the past. But why do you define the ladder in that manner? If you are a quality tech for company A and company B has an opening for quality manager, which is the next rung on the ladder why is a move to company B not considered going up a rung?

The ability of workers to move across companies and industries is very desirable for the market place. It is what allows workers in a sagging automobile industry to get into a booming power generation industry. This movement should most certainly be considered as part of the career ladder.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> I think there are a lot here that don't understand what the Career ladder was.
> Telling someone to change jobs Shows that. First off you are assuming that changing to a better job is possible. Thats not really a option for many people. If it was the Ladder wouldn't be broken.
> But what I think you might mean is to go to work for another employer. That too would not be in the concept of the career ladder. That's job hopping.
> It used to be common to go to work for a employer , who would recognize your good qualities and move/train you into a progression of better jobs.
> ...


I guess it must just happen in Ky... My Yvonne was working for a good company when I met her, and had been advancing up the ladder since she was first hired on. When we got married she "job hopped" to another company, and proceeded to continue her climb, moving up just about every year. She also spent several weeks of every year going off to training seminars and the like to improve her own abilities. About a year ago, she "job hopped" again, and is still doing her training and movin on up the ladder. There is a very real possibility that her new company will be opening a new branch in the next couple years and guess who is in position to head up that branch? Nope, not the guys who sit back and let life happen around them... it would be my Yvonne! She would be one of those with the drive and ambition required to succeed. She takes the steps needed to cross the bridges, and passes up those who sit back waiting to advance just because they have worked there longest.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wow, YH, what a great union your Yvonne must belong to!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Wow, YH, what a great union your Yvonne must belong to!


Tricky... I just love your sense of humor!


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

AmericanStand said:


> Telling someone to change jobs Shows that. First off you are assuming that changing to a better job is possible. Thats not really a option for many people.


its always an option, it may not happen immediately, you may have to plan for it, it may not be possible where you are in the time frame you want it to be, you might even have to move to make it feasible - but its ALWAYS an option.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

where I want to said:


> But I do think that in many cases, college degrees are overvalued as if they were a guarantee of competence.


Amen to that! In many cases, with big companies at least, its just something HR departments use to weed out people with no real regard for qualifications.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nate_in_IN said:


> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States
> 
> Look under the Federal Minimum Wage heading.


I'm reading, but it contradicts your 6%. Such as:
_The minimum wage had its highest purchasing value ever in 1968, when it was $1.60 per hour ($10.79 in 2014 dollars[103])._

Today's federal min wage is $7.25, so compared to $10.79, that's around a 30% loss since 1968.

And then there was this:
_The minimum wage fell about 29% in real terms between 1979 and 2003. _

So, it would appear the fast food workers have a pretty good case for a raise, just not all they way up to $15/hour. 

I also learned from your link that 40 out of the 50 states already have a minimum wage higher than the feds. (So all the presidential attention to the min wage awhile back seems a bit self serving, now doesn't it?) Washington state currently the highest, over $9. But the city of Seattle has voted to increase theirs to $15, stepping it up over the next few years. It will be interesting to see how their little social experiment plays out.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> I asked a honest question about a problem. Do you think that is a honest attempt to solve the problem?
> The career ladder means the way of working your way up in a job or industry. Not starting at the top or being stuck at the bottom with out a chance to get a better job.


The ladder is/was broken, in my opinion, by unions. In a union structure you don't advance in a job because of your ability to get the job done, you advance just by not getting fired. Also union workers, in all the shops I've worked in, have severely frowned on any who "jumps ship" from being a hard working union member to a member of the evil management team.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nate_in_IN said:


> You touch on something I've been thinking about. It was not that long ago in the US that a person was able to live without a job. Many people moved west to obtain land and live on their own labor put forth on that land. There ess never an expectation that industry, commercialization, out the job market was required in order for a person to survive.
> 
> At some point the bulk of people in the US have gone away from this paradigm. Now they require a job to survive. The problem with this is they are now dependant on someone else to survive, but the people they depend on haven't been shouldered with that burden before, nor do most want it.


You are kidding right? You don't need a job to survive I know people who haven't worked in decades and get along better than I have at times in my life.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

watcher said:


> You are kidding right? You don't need a job to survive I know people who haven't worked in decades and get along better than I have at times in my life.


I know people who have never worked a day in their lives and made durn good livings too, but I think we are discussing corporate workers here, not government employees.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

watcher said:


> The ladder is/was broken, in my opinion, by unions. In a union structure you don't advance in a job because of your ability to get the job done, you advance just by not getting fired. Also union workers, in all the shops I've worked in, have severely frowned on any who "jumps ship" from being a hard working union member to a member of the evil management team.


Not So. In lots of union shops there is a well defined career ladder, think of the old railroad ,switchman ,brakeman, head brakeman ,fireman ,engineer , conductor.
or the old airline engineer ,copilot, pilot progressions.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I know people who have never worked a day in their lives and made durn good livings too, but I think we are discussing corporate workers here, not government employees.


Independent surveys have shown government workers to work a larger percentage of the time on average than the average private sector worker.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

watcher said:


> The ladder is/was broken, in my opinion, by unions. In a union structure you don't advance in a job because of your ability to get the job done, you advance just by not getting fired. Also union workers, in all the shops I've worked in, have severely frowned on any who "jumps ship" from being a hard working union member to a member of the evil management team.


So true. I moved up the ladder just find in a non - shop and thank goodness it was. It was such a friendly place everyone looked after their own needs without reporting to some big whig union dude, who would only want to grease his own pockets anyway..


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

mnn2501 said:


> its always an option, it may not happen immediately, you may have to plan for it, it may not be possible where you are in the time frame you want it to be, you might even have to move to make it feasible - but its ALWAYS an option.


Moving is not a option for many people.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

hawgsquatch said:


> The only people that are stuck either want to be stuck or are so stupid they have no choice.


While I don't agree with your statement Are you trying to say that stupid people don't have the right to live or enjoy other rights that you have?


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> While I don't agree with your statement Are you trying to say that stupid people don't have the right to live or enjoy other rights that you have?


What rights are you referring to? I don't think making $25k/yr as a right for anyone.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> While I don't agree with your statement Are you trying to say that stupid people don't have the right to live or enjoy other rights that you have?


What "Rights" are you talking about?
You have the RIGHT TO PURSUE Happiness. To Pursue ~!
Not given to you. "To Pursue" means get off ones butt and Make something of yourself. ON YOUR OWN. And if THAT means moving across the country so be it. That is what has happened for years and years. Even in the Little House On The Prairie Charles and his family MOVED to where the Jobs and crops would grow. Period.~
In fact he MOVED Several times~! And it sure was not at all easy in those days as it is today...


----------



## wally (Oct 9, 2007)

AmericanStand said:


> Moving is not a option for many people.


It is a option if you have a family to support.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

wally said:


> It is a option if you have a family to support.


Nope still not a option.
Let me be clear living in the same place is mandatory for some people. Its not a choice they can make.


----------



## hawgsquatch (May 11, 2014)

AmericanStand said:


> I think there are a lot here that don't understand what the Career ladder was.
> Telling someone to change jobs Shows that. First off you are assuming that changing to a better job is possible. Thats not really a option for many people. If it was the Ladder wouldn't be broken.
> But what I think you might mean is to go to work for another employer. That too would not be in the concept of the career ladder. That's job hopping.
> It used to be common to go to work for a employer , who would recognize your good qualities and move/train you into a progression of better jobs.
> ...


And that company holds these employees hostage? They keep a gun to their head and will not allow them to leave? Initiative is the cure for stagnancy. I could be whining on my welfare couch on my Obama-phone but when I saw the fishing and logging sectors crashing, I got trained in a different skill. Excuses are for the lazy, stupid, uninspired, and cowardly.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

And that is there choice and why they are at a low paying job and some at a dead end job with no hopes of getting ahead. That is THEIR CHOICE. And it is not the governments job to see to it that they are MANDATED to make a higher wage by some outside entity.
People move all the time all over this country. 
I myself moved form WI to AZ with No Job Promised to me at all. Found a job worked there for 10 years, I was at as far as I could go in that company, moved Back to WI.
Again with NO JOB offer, but I got one and quit that one, and got a job at a very nice computer that makes parts for computer hard drives.
People CAN and DO move all the time. if not that is their CHOICE and no one has the right to have them work at a higher wage that they are not worthy of or trained for in schooling.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

watcher said:


> The ladder is/was broken, in my opinion, by unions. In a union structure you don't advance in a job because of your ability to get the job done, you advance just by not getting fired. Also union workers, in all the shops I've worked in, have severely frowned on any who "jumps ship" from being a hard working union member to a member of the evil management team.


That happens whether there is a union or not. When one is promoted above what was formerly their peers, some will resent that. I've never belonged to a union but I have seen this phenomenon many times. Human nature. I've been on the receiving end of it. My first year in a managerial role, the company capped raises at 2%. The previous year it was 8%. So my peeps who got a good review but only a 2% raise, that went over like a lead balloon and really damaged the rapport we previously had.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Independent surveys have shown government workers to work a larger percentage of the time on average than the average private sector worker.


I might be willing to go along with that statement... IF you had said the average private sector *union* worker.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Nope still not a option.
> Let me be clear living in the same place is mandatory for some people. Its not a choice they can make.


Yep, and those people really should not have committed whatever crime it was that got them locked up. and your right, they probably dont have access to many ladders, corporate or otherwise. On the bright side they do get to wear those cute orange uniforms.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> While I don't agree with your statement Are you trying to say that stupid people don't have the right to live or enjoy other rights that you have?


everyone has the same rights. Its how we go about selecting our options that confines people to specific situations. Stupid people all too often make poor choices, and the results can be devestating... but they had the very same rights as everyone else had to start with. Smart people also make some pretty bad choices... believe it or not... not everyone makes it to the top. as a matter of fact most do not. But its nice to live in a country where with talent, good choices and a bit of luck.... some of us can make it to the very top.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Even those that have made it to the top have Failed at some point in time, some more than once too.
But they pick themselves up and move on and are better for it.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Not So. In lots of union shops there is a well defined career ladder, think of the old railroad ,switchman ,brakeman, head brakeman ,fireman ,engineer , conductor.
> or the old airline engineer ,copilot, pilot progressions.


And how long did it take for even the most intelligent, hard working switchman to become a conductor? Could it be the same amount of time it took for someone just smart enough to do the job and who works just hard enough to keep from being fired?

Of course it is because according to union rules when it comes to promotion the ONLY thing that matters is *seniority*. 

I worked in a union shop for almost two years and when I left I was working just about the same crappy low paying job as when I started.

When I worked in a non union shop in two years I had almost doubled my pay and could have moved up the 'ladder' even farther if I hadn't had to move.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> everyone has the same rights. Its how we go about selecting our options that confines people to specific situations. Stupid people all too often make poor choices, and the results can be devestating... but they had the very same rights as everyone else had to start with. Smart people also make some pretty bad choices... believe it or not... not everyone makes it to the top. as a matter of fact most do not. But *its nice to live in a country where with talent, good choices and a bit of luck.... some of us can make it to the very top.  *


 I totally AGREE!
But I think that as a country we have made it harder to be in the middle and nearly impossible to be on the bottom so that in that unlikely event we make it to the very top life will be even better.
Its the equivalent to spending your rent money on lottery tickets.
Who do you think we should give the breaks , Bill gates or some stupid ,poor unhealthy person?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Moving is not a option for many people.


Who does not have the option to move?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

AmericanStand said:


> Moving is not a option for many people.


Moving is always an option. 
If the government teet wasn't so easy to suck on, you would see how fast people would move to get a job to feed their family.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Independent surveys have shown government workers to work a larger percentage of the time on average than the average private sector worker.


You'll need some proof of this, might be correct for a few yrs ago but for these times? No way.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> Who do you think we should give the breaks , Bill gates or some stupid ,poor unhealthy person?


Why give breaks? Why not treat everyone the same?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> While I don't agree with your statement Are you trying to say that stupid people don't have the right to live or enjoy other rights that you have?


Life's tough. And its a fact that in the labor force stupid people are usually not as valuable as smart ones. Think about it. You have a job that needs to be done which person would be more valuable. 1) Someone you have to tell and supervise each and every step of the job or 2) someone you can leave alone and know the job will be done when you return?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Nope still not a option.
> Let me be clear living in the same place is mandatory for some people. Its not a choice they can make.


AFAIK there are only two people who can not move if they wish: convicts out on parole and members of the military.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

watcher said:


> Life's tough. And its a fact that in the labor force stupid people are usually not as valuable as smart ones. Think about it. You have a job that needs to be done which person would be more valuable. 1) Someone you have to tell and supervise each and every step of the job or 2) someone you can leave alone and know the job will be done when you return?


And there was a time in this country when even those "stupid people" could labor away for 30-40 years and earn a midd&#322;e class living. All those houses, cars, vacations, kids and everything else that fueled the growth of the middle class in the 5O's and 60's were only bought and paid for by smart people, right?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

arabian knight said:


> Even those that have made it to the top have Failed at some point in time, some more than once too.
> But they pick themselves up and move on and are better for it.


That is very true! Henry Ford, Walt Disney, many others who built empires did not succeed at first. They went bankrupt and failed more than once before they started their successful ventures that we know them for.


----------



## Nate_in_IN (Apr 5, 2013)

mmoetc said:


> And there was a time in this country when even those "stupid people" could labor away for 30-40 years and earn a midd&#322;e class living. All those houses, cars, vacations, kids and everything else that fueled the growth of the middle class in the 5O's and 60's were only bought and paid for by smart people, right?


Sadly those times are gone. After WW2 American was the only 1st world nation with any manufacturing to speak of in a time when most of the world was needing to be rebuilt. This brought in loads of wealth to the nation and allowed all to prosper.

So now we are beyond those times. The global market is up. America is competing against many more competitors and the wealth in the nation is on the decline. People are going to have to come to grips with the fact that the old mantra of "show up on time and you will have a nice middle class life" is no longer available.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Who do you think we should give the breaks , Bill gates or some stupid ,poor unhealthy person?


How about no breaks for anyone? 

ok, a lunch break is good for moral, and people do seem to perform better if they get a hour off in the middle of the day. I suppose potty breaks need to be given their place too. Other than that, I dont really see the need in giving anyone a break.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> And there was a time in this country when even those "stupid people" could labor away for 30-40 years and earn a midd&#322;e class living. All those houses, cars, vacations, kids and everything else that fueled the growth of the middle class in the 5O's and 60's were only bought and paid for by smart people, right?


An awful lot of those houses, and cars, and vacations were never paid for... people just went into debt deeper and further everytime they wanted, or thought they needed things. Consumer debt was basically unheard of prior to 1950. Tis a pity people cant understand that all of that "prosperity" was borrowed, not earned, nor accumulated. That middle class everyone is so proud of never really existed! It was all based on tomorrows income paying for yesterdays party... now its time for those grandkids, and great grands to pay off the note and we hear all the whining about it. Think what it will be like in another 50 years of added debt!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> And there was a time in this country when even those "stupid people" could labor away for 30-40 years and earn a midd&#322;e class living. All those houses, cars, vacations, kids and everything else that fueled the growth of the middle class in the 5O's and 60's were only bought and paid for by smart people, right?


Years ago a lot of people made fairly good livings making and selling buggy whips but you won't find a lot of them doing it today. 

The time when someone in the US could start as a apprentice and work his way up to being a 'master' is LONG gone. You take one really smart guy to write the software to run the computer controlled equipment and 1 fairly smart guy to keep an eye on things and 2 or 3 not so smart guys to load the machines and punch the buttons and you can turn out more high quality goods in a day than a 20 man shop could in a week. And each piece will be at least as good, and most likely better, than a 'master' with 20 years in the job could make. 

Also long gone is the time when you could start in a factory and move up to better paying jobs as you got more seniority. That's because most of the jobs are being done by robots or automatic machinery. Does it make sense to pay someone $20+/hr plus retirement plus vacation plus everything else to put lugnuts on a car when you can have a machine do it faster, longer and better?


----------



## just_sawing (Jan 15, 2006)

I just advertised this week for part time help to move so boxes in to storage. On a saturday and at 8 dollars an hour I got nobody. This is in the rural TN county where a good job is 13 dollars an hour. Kids are independently wealthy and before you jump on 8 dollars that is 8 period no with drawls or anything. I am headed out to do it myself and people wonder why I run the Sawmill by myself instead of hiring help. The help available wants cash so their food stamps and other welfare won't be affected.


----------

