To All Those Who Say Fast-Food Workers Should Just Get Better Jobs...
The total amount of money that changed hands worldwide in 2005 was 59.38 trillion dollars.
So if everyone made the same amount of money worldwide, everyone would have made $8,428 dollars.
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
A problem is that decades ago McDonald's set their business model to operate under the assumption that they would employ youngsters in their first-time job experience. This enabled them to offer low wages, part-time hours in exchange for training young people at their first job. This business model earned them millions of dollars.
However, this business model no longer works in a post baby boom society. It should be eliminated. Other fast food franchises have been able to adapt (Dick's for example).
Also, I think some posters missed the quote in the first link "I love fast food," Porter says, "because you get to see all kinds of people—I don't want to be a pencil-pushing person."
She could continue to be happy in her job with a livable wage and a strengthened social safety net.
Anyway. The bottom tier of wages should be higher. And CEOs should think about the human cost of their bonuses.
Instead of waiting on that to happen, while we're pushing for living wages, we should be pushing for a legal ratio of companies' highest paid employees to their lowest paid employees. Say 40 to 1? If you're a CEO who wants to make $20,000,000/year, find a way to pay your lowest paid employees $184.91 an hour. If you want to pay your lowest paid employees $9.19/hour, you may earn no more than $764,608/year.
Of course in this political climate instituting a CEO pay ratio limit has as much chance as implementing a living minimum wage. Still the outrageous incomes CEOs get, even when their companies are failing, should be part of the conversation.
You've got it exactly bassackwards: employers aren't hiring more adults because the Minimum Wage has increased (if you'd bothered to read the articles, you would know that in many states and at the federal level, the MW hasn't even kept up with inflation over the past 20 years), they're hiring more adults because, with the high unemployment rate caused by the 2008 recession they now represent a larger portion of the available labor pool, and they're so desperate for jobs - any jobs, including low-paying retail level positions - that employers don't HAVE to hire inexperienced, unreliable teenagers for the same wage, when there are so many adults who NEED the work to support their families, and so aren't going to be in a position to complain, or just not show up if they don't feel like it.
Lowering the starting wage for teenagers will only have ONE EFFECT: to drive down the cost-of-labor even more than it is already, because those adults are still going to need the jobs, and this will put them in direct competition with kids making less than they do, creating even more of a downward spiral as adults are forced to accept lower and lower wages just to hang onto the crappy fast food jobs they already have.
I guess trolling for sympathy is just easier.
Even assuming that were true, WHY does being more or less intelligent entitle you to be treated fairly or not? If you are capable of showing up and doing your job well, every day, you are entitled to a fair wage for the work, whatever that work might be.
By saying that people who aren't "smart enough" to improve their lives don't deserve to make a living wage you are actually making a much broader statement about who in our society matters and why... that is not just a slippery slope, it's a dive straight off the fascist deep end.
Argue for raising the minimum wage, sure. But arguing that non skilled employees shouldn't be paid it? Nah.
I don't suppose the baby daddies are anywhere to be found, or is it politically incorrect to ask such things?
Nope, zero sympathy. She should have ordered a pack of condoms or tubal ligation with her man-burger.
Second article has some interesting content. Take aways: retail and fast food should go back to employing highschool kids and wives looking for pin money. And that at least one liberal has figured out that "above all, you have to get consumers to accept significantly higher, and steadily rising, prices" if you want a higher minimum wage. Good luck with that!
Were these articles supposed to change my mind on something??? Because they are both completely void of any persuasive argument.
"Shut your fucking moron face." not good enough anymore?
If someone does not see the potential in themselves that is where friends and family should step in. But if someone is happy in fast food or that warehouse job. I mean truly happy then that is a form of success because they are happy in what they do. All the power to them. But if you are miserable use that misery as motivation to get a job that will make you happy.
1. A simple, fair & progressive gross income tax for businesses and a similar tax for individuals with a universal deduction per person of 1x the annual income of a full time employee making the prevailing minimum wage - that's it, no other deductions, loopholes or complications.)
2. A living, minimum wage based on cost of living in each state and adjusted for higher/lower average in each city.
3. Universal health care
4. Worker owned co-operatives/corporations, which get a 20-year relatively tax-free headstart like internet commerce did (think Amazon)
...would increase distribution & circulation of capital, increase overall market growth, stabilize market fluctuations, increase number of owners and strengthen the democracy.
So, do you want to live in a strong democracy of financially stable, healthy and informed owners, or do you want to continue the exploitation game of haves and haves nots of plantation capitalism in the hopes that you end up a servant in the master's house instead of the fields?
...with the fool's belief that the life you enjoy because of what the powerful do to others somehow won't be done to you?
We are either in this thing together, or we are all in it alone.
These numbers show that it is the minimum wage workers who are paid a correct and fair salary.
And no one else.
That's why the papers are full of justification upon justification about why someone is a Superman or genius, who deserves each and every penny of his billion.
Worked well in the USSR, North Korea and Cuba! Everyone's equally poor!
In other news, liberals are surprised that a lifetime of shitty choices leads no where. Apparently before even turning 20 our heroine squirted out three fatherless sprogs. How about a raise if she gets her tubes tied?
Well hopefully more people will stop eating that shit and teach themselves to cook fresh, healthier and cheaper food (that's right, cooking at home can be cheaper). But of course if everyone stopped eating junk food, then you'd be out of work with that shitty resume of yours.
Please. When I moved to Seattle 10 years ago and I was working at a retirement home making $9/hour, I NEVER went to restaurants that weren't named Taco del Mar. I would have NEVER gone to the Cheesecake Factory. And 20 years ago, when I was freshly graduated from college during the early 90s recession, I never went out, and neither did my friends. I have to wonder how "poor" this woman is if she can afford to go to the Cheesecake Factory twice a month.
And I know that all of you Slog snobs think that every person deserves to be able to go out to eat all the time. But for GenXers like me ... you know, we grew up thinking that eating out was a special thing that you did once in a while, not every week, but maybe once a month , if you really saved your dough.
Sorry to sound like an old fogey, but us Gen Xers grew up with the expectation of living beneath our means, not just within them. When I was making very little money (not so long ago), I just gave up the idea of going to restaurants, because I knew that my $$ would be better spent elsewhere.
That is not to say that regulations couldn't be crafted to limit techniques that render the underlying idea meaningless or harmful, like counting labor-hours instead of full-time staff members for health care provisions, but the complexity does make it extremely unlikely that anything good will be implemented.
I really liked the Surowiecki article - I like his commentary every issue - and it points out the real issue: these are no longer teenager jobs; they are now disproportionately head-of-household jobs.
The problem is that as we get more and more efficient, rather than spreading the productivity gains out in increased compensation and reduced time demands, we simply shrink the pool of workers. Too many people now who could once find labor demand for their skills have no other options...they're excess capacity, except as consumers.
As the number of people needed to achieve the same revenue keeps dropping, all the earnings from those productivity gains get distributed to a smaller and smaller group of people.
We are reverting to a new Guilded Age where excess agricultural labor became a huge pool for domestic servitude. Fast Food workers are merely the domestic servants in our new economy. It's horrific and the decreased expectations going forward will lead to social and political unrest.
What's it like being a witless fool who accepts the disingenuous use of misappropriated words in a tyrannical government's vocabulary?
Ownership of a business by those workers (aka - employees) whose labor constitutes the business is NOT in any way the same as an entity that is owned and controlled by the government.
Use the dictionary until you have a command of the language.
In response to the whole p/t problem mentioned above: I used to be in that trap- I was trying to support myself (single, childless adult living with roommates), and discovered the jobs that will only give you 30 hours max to keep you p/t will also pitch fits if you try to make their schedule work with a second job- and the second job will pitch the same fit every time you can't fill in because of your first job. Rent notwithstanding, your 30-hour job will whine and threaten to fire you for not having your schedule fully available to them. Me? Bitter? Nah...