Fast-food workers threaten global strikes

[astropheed Veteran]

By not raising the minimum wage you are paying more for their children than if it were to be raised.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/report-minimum-wage-hike-would-cut-food-stamp-spending-by-46-billion-a-year/2014/03/04/150e4bfa-a3db-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html

 

That's not logical. And you're reaching conclusions that story doesn't reach. Saying, "This costs the Government less money" is not the same as saying, "This costs you less money". Remember, not everyone with a $7.25/hr job requires food stamps, which means it's less than the amount of people that would see a wage increase which means logically it must be cheaper.

[123456789A]

By not raising the minimum wage you are paying more for their children than if it were to be raised.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/report-minimum-wage-hike-would-cut-food-stamp-spending-by-46-billion-a-year/2014/03/04/150e4bfa-a3db-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html

 

Well my problem with raising the minimum wage all the time is, what about all the people who worked to obtain skill sets that pay above minimum wage? Right now if you're being paid $15 an hour, chances are you have some kind of basic skill an employer wants. Do the people currently making $15 an hour get an automatic increase when the burger flippers and toilet scrubbers get $15 an hour?

[pack34]

Well my problem with raising the minimum wage all the time is, what about all the people who worked to obtain skill sets that pay above minimum wage? Right now if you're being paid $15 an hour, chances are you have some kind of basic skill an employer wants. Do the people currently making $15 an hour get an automatic increase when the burger flippers and toilet scrubbers get $15 an hour?

 

If you are a skilled worker and an increase to minimum wage brings the minimum pay in-line with yours then you now have leverage to ask for more pay. If your employer won't bite, then leave. You should be able to pick up a minimum job without much effort and then find a place that will pay you what you're worth. 

[RiverCampher]

$15 dollars an hour, that's ridiculous to just flick burgers.  Sooner or later they are going to get what comes to people who increasingly demand more wages to an employer.  I'm sure MD and others will be eying down the line of where they can automate their fast food empires.

 

I've seen a fair amount of union stories that end in tears recently because it's their belief they force the company to comply with their demands.  They forget they are risking employees jobs by forcing their agenda.  They must be reasonable.

[123456789A]

If you are a skilled worker and an increase to minimum wage brings the minimum pay in-line with yours then you now have leverage to ask for more pay. If your employer won't bite, then leave. You should be able to pick up a minimum job without much effort and then find a place that will pay you what you're worth. 

 

When the job market is hardly recovering, employees are hardly in the position to simply leave and go elsewhere - also, what good would jumping from a skilled job to unskilled labor do for your career? Go try asking your boss for a $15,000 raise (along with everyone else in your company). Have fun with that.

 

And what about all the people who might have started off at $10 an hour and worked their way up to $15 an hour through merit increases? Do they get compensated?

[SierraSonic]

Well my problem with raising the minimum wage all the time is, what about all the people who worked to obtain skill sets that pay above minimum wage? Right now if you're being paid $15 an hour, chances are you have some kind of basic skill an employer wants. Do the people currently making $15 an hour get an automatic increase when the burger flippers and toilet scrubbers get $15 an hour?

The problem is that the minimum wage has to rise with the cost of inflation, otherwise it's overall value becomes less and life becomes harder for the same amount of work.

 

 

That's not logical. And you're reaching conclusions that story doesn't reach. Saying, "This costs the Government less money" is not the same as saying, "This costs you less money". Remember, not everyone with a $7.25/hr job requires food stamps, which means it's less than the amount of people that would see a wage increase which means logically it must be cheaper.

 

If our resources from taxes aren't going toward food stamps and instead other programs, I'd consider that pay less for other peoples children if they are on food stamps with children. Most of the people enrolled in snap are parents, and a huge portion of who benefit is families with children, or children themselves.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/09/who-benefits-from-food-stamps/261993/

 

 

When the job market is hardly recovering, employees are hardly in the position to simply leave and go elsewhere - also, what good would jumping from a skilled job to unskilled labor do for your career? Go try asking your boss for a $15,000 raise (along with everyone else in your company). Have fun with that.

 

And what about all the people who might have started off at $10 an hour and worked their way up to $15 an hour through merit increases? Do they get compensated?

They should have been working for more to begin with. It's sickening that we slowly accepted and got used to earning less for equal work only because we are trying to compete with countries where the majority lives in poverty for much harder work. Going to $15 right away is not smart nor realistic,the best thing would be a slow roll out over the years to eventually equal the proper value. $10.10 seems like a good start.

[astropheed Veteran]

And what about all the people who might have started off at $10 an hour and worked their way up to $15 an hour through merit increases? Do they get compensated?

 

As someone who was put in that exact circumstance at one time, no, you don't. Really demeans all your hard work.

If our resources from taxes aren't going toward food stamps and instead other programs, I'd consider that pay less for other peoples children if they are on food stamps with children. Most of the people enrolled in snap are parents, and a huge portion of who benefit is families with children, or children themselves.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/09/who-benefits-from-food-stamps/261993/

 

You really don't see the fallacy, do you?

[SierraSonic]

You really don't see the fallacy, do you?

If less money goes into these government programs, which mainly benefit poverty stricken children and families of children, I don't see how its a fallacy. The money may be going elsewhere, maybe even another program that helps children somehow, but still the point is proven that less would be spent. You have to be able to prove you are working/seeking work to be on most programs. If the minimum wage goes up, they earn enough to be weened off these programs as supporting families becomes easier and your pushed out of the programs requirements.

[Lord Method Man]

If the minimum wage goes up, they earn enough to be weened off these programs as supporting families becomes easier and your pushed out of the programs requirements.

 

Not once has a minimum wage increase resulted in a drop in food stamp/welfare enrollees.

[astropheed Veteran]

If the minimum wage goes up, they earn enough to be weened off these programs as supporting families becomes easier and your pushed out of the programs requirements.

 

And, who pays for them to earn more? I'll try to explain it differently.

 

1. Minimum wage workers don't all require Food Stamps.

2. If all Minimum wage workers get a pay increase they all require pay increase.

3. All is greater than Some

 

That means that it's impossible for it to be cheaper. Logically. It just can't be. Money doesn't come from no where.

[SierraSonic]

Not once has a minimum wage increase resulted in a drop in food stamp/welfare enrollees.

http://mercatus.org/publication/food-stamp-spending-and-enrollment-double-five-years

 

This graph shows that enrollment has gradually increased with spikes in the 70s and early 90s (during crashes), with legislation changes in the mid 2000s spiking it the most recently. Which happens at the same time minimum wage has reached a low value. There is no immediate drop as people still will need assistance until they can support themselves/their families.

 

 

And, who pays for them to earn more? I'll try to explain it differently.

 

1. Minimum wage workers don't all require Food Stamps.

2. If all Minimum wage workers get a pay increase they all require pay increase.

3. All is greater than Some

 

That means that it's impossible for it to be cheaper. Logically. It just can't be. Money doesn't come from no where.

Businesses, which raise prices to cover their labor, and then everyone pays more for cost of goods, but still less money is being spent specifically on assistance programs, and more on labor so people can support themselves. With the lowest earners earning more and spending more, more taxes are collected, which means more is being collected and less of it is being directly spend on assistance programs.

 

Paying for labor is expected as it's part of how an economy works, paying for assistance programs is not the same as paying for labor. One is a tax, one is the cost of doing business so everyone can earn a living wage.

[astropheed Veteran]

Paying for labor is expected as it's part of how an economy works, paying for assistance programs is not the same as paying for labor. One is a tax, one is the cost of doing business so everyone can earn a living wage.

 

Umm, we weren't debating which is which, we were debating which was cheaper. It's cheaper for me to pay the Tax. You're not only wrong, I think you're just saying things now like I'd throw spaghetti on the wall; hoping one will stick.

 

We're getting nowhere, which I concluded earlier yet tried to give the benefit of the doubt. I'm done now. Good day.

[Hum]

Not once has a minimum wage increase resulted in a drop in food stamp/welfare enrollees.

I can just hear the kicking & screaming now, if the food stamp people lose benefits from a minimum wage increase. :laugh:

 

 

 

That means that it's impossible for it to be cheaper. Logically. It just can't be. Money doesn't come from no where.

Tell that to Congress. :laugh:

[SierraSonic]

Umm, we weren't debating which is which, we were debating which was cheaper. It's cheaper for me to pay the Tax. You're not only wrong, I think you're just saying things now like I'd throw spaghetti on the wall; hoping one will stick.

 

We're getting nowhere, which I concluded earlier yet tried to give the benefit of the doubt. I'm done now. Good day.

You're going by cheaper as in the money spent, I'm going by cheaper as in the value of the money spent. Didn't really require that response.

 

 

I can just hear the kicking & screaming now, if the food stamp people lose benefits from a minimum wage increase.  :laugh:

Nobody would lose their benefits just because the minimum wage went up, they would eventually not need them anymore if they could support themselves. Theres a difference between losing them when you're eligible and not meeting the requirements to receive them.

[Hum]

^ In PA, I guarantee you that any Income increase, results in a decrease of one's Welfare benefits. ;)

 

And if worker's pay goes up say, $200, then they will loose all food assistance -- which will result in a zero sum gain.

 

They will be working for the supposed 'upgrade', with no real increase in Income.

[DocM]

The problem is that the minimum wage has to rise with the cost of inflation, otherwise it's overall value becomes less and life becomes harder for the same amount of work.

>

In Michigan a bill from Republican majority leaders in both houses would increase the minimum wage to $9.20 but also index it to inflation. Looks like its going to pass easily.

This, of course, has the support of the Republican Governor, and has left Democrat leaders grumbling.

The Democrats ballot proposal was $10.10 but without indexing, the legislation repealed the existing law the ballot proposal sought to amend making it moot, and many Democrats voted for the Republican bill.

The Dem leaders can't win for losing.

[winrez]

I was a  assistant mgr at Burger King from 96-2000 (so before the economy went to s###) over half the 1st & 2nd shift had bachelor degrees in various fields; accounting, teachers, marketing Ext. They were usually 26-40 in age. The high school kids that worked there went off to college or the military came back to work after they finished (most only made 30-40 cents over minimum wage) so I know this isn't anything new.

 

The people who have better jobs and things worked out for pay more in taxes and don't feel the minimum wage should go up, but if a person is working in any field not just fast food workers but in healthcare, factories Ext that work 40+ hours a week and cannot live without falling into getting government benefits like child care, food stamp's, welfare, low cost housing, electric & gas assistance which is paid by peoples taxes. So when you don't want people to have a living wage increase you, the low wage worker, and the government ALL lose the only winners are the companies and shareholders who manage to find every loophole not to pay a dime in taxes or get government subsidies. in conclusion when a worker can support his or her family or just themselves at a job without having to resort to getting government assistance you will have a larger tax base and less money needed for assistance programs that can either going to pay off the national debt or improving our national infrastructure in some way. 

 

 

BTW I am not against the safety net's we have in place such as food stamps Ext but being able to reduce the amount of people that are on them the right way not just kicking people off for no reason I believe is the right way to go.

[AnotherITguy]

$15 an hour, yea nooo... better working conditions yea definitely.

[SierraSonic]

 

^ In PA, I guarantee you that any Income increase, results in a decrease of one's Welfare benefits.  ;)

 

And if worker's pay goes up say, $200, then they will loose all food assistance -- which will result in a zero sum gain.

 

They will be working for the supposed 'upgrade', with no real increase in Income.

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/18SNAPavg$PP.pdf

Average individual assistance in PA is inline with the national average of around $130 a month. With the minimum wage increase giving almost $450 more a month.

 

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/19SNAPavg$HH.pdf

The average household would still benefit from one person earning more on minimum wage.

 

In Michigan a bill from Republican majority leaders in both houses would increase the minimum wage to $9.20 but also index it to inflation. Looks like its going to pass easily.

This, of course, has the support of the Republican Governor, and has left Democrat leaders grumbling.

The Democrats ballot proposal was $10.10 but without indexing, the legislation repealed the existing law the ballot proposal sought to amend making it moot, and many Democrats voted for the Republican bill.

The Dem leaders can't win for losing.

I'm glad michigan is working toward a better life for minimum wage earners, it doesn't matter which side is voting for it, or who proposed it, that never has, just the policies matter.

 

With the indexing law in the books, if the federal wage is made higher, will the state still be forced, by it own laws, to index over the new federal rate?

[DocM]

Our state minimum wage has always been higher than the feds. Most states are, which is what makes all the hubub in Congress a bit moot.

[SierraSonic]

Our state minimum wage has always been higher than the feds. Most states are, which is what makes all the hubub in Congress a bit moot.

Only if you ignore the minimum wage currently being below a living wage, and it should be at a living wage at the federal level and then adjusted from that at the state level based on state requirements and costs of living.

[DocM]

Ever hear of the Earned Income Tax Credit? A revetse, regundable, income tax. Depending on your kid count you get up to $6,000/year up to an income over $50,000. On top of that numerous other benefits for lower income folks and they do add up.

[SierraSonic]

Ever hear of the Earned Income Tax Credit? A revetse, regundable, income tax. Depending on your kid count you get up to $6,000/year up to an income over $50,000. On top of that numerous other benefits for lower income folks and they do add up.

And even though their benefits may be cut, if they are still earning less than $50,000 a year, which full time minimum wage at $10.10 would only make $19,392 gross, they would still be benefiting, just less from these credits? Still easing the burden of tax payers.

 

Yes, all these benefits would be shifted around due to new their new income level. A slow roll out to higher and proper minimum wages would ease them off as they wouldn't be as needed anymore. Then extra resources would be re-applied toward other benefits or programs for others. I am not going to go through a whole breakdown of economics when at each point some simple math points out that raising the minimum wage helps out overall. Point being, there are more benefits to raising it, than to let it stagnate. Especially when, due to it's value, people are suffering.

[Ryoken]

I wish the Robots would hurry up and replace them already.

 

At least then I'd get what I bloody ordered the way I ordered it.

 

What part of No Veg, followed by listing off the vegies on it that I don't want, means I want extra pickles ? Or no sauce means leave the Ketchup (maybe they think Ketchup is a Veg? But then we're back to point one.. )..

[SierraSonic]

I wish the Robots would hurry up and replace them already.

 

At least then I'd get what I bloody ordered the way I ordered it.

 

What part of No Veg, followed by listing off the vegies on it that I don't want, means I want extra pickles ? Or no sauce means leave the Ketchup (maybe they think Ketchup is a Veg? But then we're back to point one.. )..

It's going to happen sooner rather than later, I just hope you know what your getting yourself into. I truly cannot await the death of fast food, as these stores are becoming huge vending machines. Ill be eating at them less due to their quality that's already faltering, and they are only going to become more expensive(better food elsewhere for the price) or worse in quality.