Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Mitt Romney's latest proposal has been denounced by TEA party leaders, The Club For Growth, and the US Chamber of Commerce and described as "class warfare". The proposal? Making sure the minimum wage keeps up with inflation   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 286
    More: Asinine, Club for Growth, Mitt Romney, Steve Forbes, tea party, human beings, Yahoo News, Andrew McCarthy, Alan Krueger  
•       •       •

1522 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Feb 2012 at 9:28 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



286 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-08 02:16:50 PM  

Fart_Machine: That depends on if you have any preexisting conditions, the area you live in, whether you're single or have a family, and if you can afford the deductible.


Yes, I already stated above that was for a healthy non-smoker. I said that up front. I am not trying to hide anything.
 
2012-02-08 02:19:12 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: patrick767: Citation needed.

Knock yourself out..... In fact, post back, and let us know what age, and zip code you typed in, and your quote. For me it was $198 /per month for health plus dental. Have fun.....

Link (new window)


What deductible was getting you a price that low?
 
2012-02-08 02:21:39 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: ordinarysteve: I will never understand why poor people vote for the republicans year after year.

"Santorum done promised me Jesus will make sure my mansion in heaven has the BIGGEST Dale Jr. flag of all if I vote fer him and make sure them there queerbos don't paint the Washington Monument what for a rainbow pecker!"

That, plus the "sure, I'm a 58-year-old high school dropout pushing a broom at the muffler shop, but someday I'm going to be rich, and when I am, I don't want those filthy POORS taking my money for their Escalade and Champipple parties!"


Pretty much this. Mostly the first, though.
 
2012-02-08 02:21:46 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: patrick767: Citation needed.

Knock yourself out..... In fact, post back, and let us know what age, and zip code you typed in, and your quote. For me it was $198 /per month for health plus dental. Have fun.....

Link (new window)



BTW - if you only want catastrophe health insurance (major hospital, so you don't go bankrupt) without the presciption, dental, and unlimited paid doctor visits, you can get it much lower than $200.
 
2012-02-08 02:22:07 PM  

lennavan: EWreckedSean: 1) I never suggested somebody live off of $3 an hour. Actually my argument all along is that there are jobs that are not meant to be lived off of.

All jobs should be meant to be lived off of.

EWreckedSean: Jobs for teenagers, a retiree trying to make a few extra bucks, a bored housewife while her kids are at school a few days a week.

So workers who do not need the money should make less money. Why is it you'll make that argument but you won't make the argument, corporations who do not need more profits should not make more profits? Walmart doesn't need 11 billion in profits, why can't they pay themselves less?

I get it, you care about corporations and not people. It is what it is.


No, they shouldn't. if you are a mom, and your kids are at school and you are bored at home, so you take up some work in the school library because they are low on funds and can't afford the help, is that taking a job to live off of? If you are 16, have no skills, but really want to buy that 1987 Camero the guy is selling down the road for $1500 so you take weekend and evening work pushing carts at Publix, is that a job meant to be lived off of? Get over it, people work for plenty of reasons other than to provide themselves with food, shelter, clothing and health insurance. If you need those things, you shouldn't be looking at the lowest rung of employment.
 
2012-02-08 02:23:54 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: EWreckedSean: I don't know how people live that cheap. Just my car payment, car insurance and utilities /w cable are almost $1200 a month, let alone rent or you know doing anything.

My 9 year old 4-cylinder high milage econobox is paid for. I don't have cable (nor a TV) and don't desire it. I have the internet and a cell phone.


My 10 year old gas guzzling V8 is paid for, but I have to pay for insurance on it, plus insurance and a car payment on the 4 cylinder I actually drive to work. that adds up.
 
2012-02-08 02:29:17 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: What deductible was getting you a price that low?


$3000 annual. I picked the very first plan (since this is just an example). I didn't play around with trying higher or lower deductibles to change the monthly rate.

To be honest, between the ages of 20 and 35, I would have hit that deductible maybe one year out of 20 (when I broke an ankle playing basketball - twice in one year.)
 
2012-02-08 02:32:23 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Philip Francis Queeg: What deductible was getting you a price that low?

$3000 annual. I picked the very first plan (since this is just an example). I didn't play around with trying higher or lower deductibles to change the monthly rate.

To be honest, between the ages of 20 and 35, I would have hit that deductible maybe one year out of 20 (when I broke an ankle playing basketball - twice in one year.)


A $3000 is not "very high quality" health insurance.

That deductible equates to another $250/month in cost.
 
2012-02-08 02:33:20 PM  

hubiestubert: We need to level the playing field for all businesses--not lower the bar for some, and put up restrictions for competition. We need more local investment, we need more competition in our markets. Not less.


I just want to note that it is impossible to level the playing field for all businesses. Certain businesses have inherent high barriers to entry. And the restrictions for competition in businesses with high barriers to entry are from the other participants in that business field, not through governmental restrictions. If you want to blame the lack of competition on somebody, I'd say 70% of the blame doesn't lie in government, it lies with the market.
 
2012-02-08 02:35:25 PM  

EWreckedSean: No, they shouldn't. if you are a mom, and your kids are at school and you are bored at home, so you take up some work in the school library because they are low on funds and can't afford the help, is that taking a job to live off of?


That's called volunteering. You can already do this at the local library. Were you not aware of that?

EWreckedSean: pushing carts at Publix, is that a job meant to be lived off of?


Yes, all full-time jobs should be able to be lived off of.

EWreckedSean: Get over it, people work for plenty of reasons other than to provide themselves with food, shelter, clothing and health insurance.


Why on earth should why you work be relevant whatsoever to how much you make? That's the stupidest line of reasoning perhaps ever. You're working to support a family? Okay, $12 an hou... wait, you're working to buy a Camaro? $3 an hour.

EWreckedSean: If you need those things, you shouldn't be looking at the lowest rung of employment.


Not everyone is meant for great things. The higher rungs of employment are not filled with infinite jobs. Everyone needs food/shelter/clothing/etc.

You never answered my question, I'll ask it again:

So workers who do not need the money should make less money. Why is it you'll make that argument but you won't make the argument, corporations who do not need more profits should not make more profits? Walmart doesn't need 11 billion in profits, why can't they pay themselves less?
 
2012-02-08 02:39:07 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: That deductible equates to another $250/month in cost


Assuming you hit the deductible year in and year out. As I said, that, on average, would be a rare occurance for a healthy adult. A once annual Dr. checkup with standard blood tests is going to be a few hundred. I don't know anyone in my college age peer group who was paying thousands a year for doctors visits. Just being honest.

And yes there are exceptions. There are people who get cancer at age 22. I am talking about the average person.
 
2012-02-08 02:42:56 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Philip Francis Queeg: That deductible equates to another $250/month in cost

Assuming you hit the deductible year in and year out. As I said, that, on average, would be a rare occurance for a healthy adult. A once annual Dr. checkup with standard blood tests is going to be a few hundred. I don't know anyone in my college age peer group who was paying thousands a year for doctors visits. Just being honest.

And yes there are exceptions. There are people who get cancer at age 22. I am talking about the average person.


You are a fool if you don't take the deductible cost into account when evaluating the cost of an insurance plan. That's not a $200/month plan.
 
2012-02-08 02:43:43 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: A $3000 is not "very high quality" health insurance.


Okay, I looked through the plans more thoroughly (instead of choosing the very first one). For $240/month a nonsmoker under 40 gets a $500 annual deductible. No dental.

Happy now?
 
2012-02-08 02:45:43 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Philip Francis Queeg: A $3000 is not "very high quality" health insurance.

Okay, I looked through the plans more thoroughly (instead of choosing the very first one). For $240/month a nonsmoker under 40 gets a $500 annual deductible. No dental.

Happy now?


For which type of plan?
 
2012-02-08 02:46:28 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: You are a fool if you don't take the deductible cost into account when evaluating the cost of an insurance plan. That's not a $200/month plan.


See above. I already admitted I simply clicked on the very first plan out of the 35 plans offered. I apologize profusely.
 
2012-02-08 02:51:24 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: For which type of plan?


Sigh. Look, I gave you the website address. I don't feel a need to look up quotes for you. I am probably being trolled for having already been goaded into running back to the Blue cross website 3 times now.

I already quoted $240 month with a $500 deductible for national brand name Blue cross insurance. If you have some evidence to the contrary, please do post it.
 
2012-02-08 02:55:58 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: Philip Francis Queeg: For which type of plan?

Sigh. Look, I gave you the website address. I don't feel a need to look up quotes for you. I am probably being trolled for having already been goaded into running back to the Blue cross website 3 times now.

I already quoted $240 month with a $500 deductible for national brand name Blue cross insurance. If you have some evidence to the contrary, please do post it.


The thing is, BC/BS offers a variety of plans of varying degrees of quality, coverage, and flexibility. I'm quite sure you can get a plan that cheap. How good it is is another matter entirely.
 
2012-02-08 03:00:08 PM  

EWreckedSean: KWess: EWreckedSean: mrshowrules: EWreckedSean: mrshowrules: EWreckedSean: Good strawman. The point is whether it is $15 an hour or $24 hour, some jobs don't support that type of wage.

Ontario, has a $10.25 minimum wage. Based on this, would you expect unemployment to be higher or lower than Americans across the border?

What jobs in Canada no longer exist because they can't be supported by that high of a minimum wage?

As to what jobs, I'll give you an example. I used to go to Canada quite a bit. I noticed anytime I was at the food store, they didn't have cart runners. Anywhere here in the US, you get done with your cart, you push it aside, and they pay some kid to run and fetch them all day. This isn't a $10.25 an hour job, this isn't a living wage type of job, it is something cheap you pay a highschool kid a couple bucks to do. I didn't see a one of them in Canada. Actually got yelled at by my friend first time I pushed a cart aside what I thought I was doing.

Cool story bro. I will just pretend I don't see cart runners at every grocery store I ever go to ever in Canada. How the fark do you think the carts get back in the store?

We had a few isolated stores about 10 years ago with a coin return system for the carts but that was a compete failure. A system invented in the US which never took off in Canada. Why did you need them in the US BTW. Another unfortunate counter-indicator I guess.

I didn't see a one in Quebec in all the times i went there. People returned their own carts to the store, and I was told that was standard practice.


I live in Quebec...where I shop they're falling all over themselves to help. Where were you, if you don't mind my asking?

My friend lived right in Quebec City by one of the schools, I forget the name. Would visit her there when she was in school. Her folks have a bed and breakfast place out by ST Anne De Beaupre. Not one food store did I go to there that they had any. This has been a few years back since I have made a t ...


You might me confusing a larger Depanneur (corner store) with a grocery store. In any case, there are not shortage of cart runners in Quebec City, the Province of Quebec or the rest of Canada for that matter.
 
2012-02-08 03:04:00 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: ThrobblefootSpectre: Philip Francis Queeg: What deductible was getting you a price that low?

$3000 annual. I picked the very first plan (since this is just an example). I didn't play around with trying higher or lower deductibles to change the monthly rate.

To be honest, between the ages of 20 and 35, I would have hit that deductible maybe one year out of 20 (when I broke an ankle playing basketball - twice in one year.)

A $3000 is not "very high quality" health insurance.

That deductible equates to another $250/month in cost.


To a poor person, a deductible over a $100-200 is like not having Health insurance at all because you can't afford it. Sure You have coverage if something catastrophic happens (but frankly in that case poor people just go to the ER , promise to pay whatever and then just ignore the bill when it comes because it's unpayable, and they know they won't be sued cause they got nothing to pay the judgement with) But you don't have the $500-1000 to pay out to see Dr's and stuff before the INS kicks in.

I'm employed and my employer kicks in $561/mo for fringe bennies. I'm still paying about $500/mo for basic (Blue Cross HMO) health and dental for me, my wife and 1 kid.

/Fun Facts about health care:
1) The US pays TWICE what the next highest nation on earth spends per capita for health care (Luxemborg strangely enough)
2) all of the other folks in the top ten have universal coverage-we do not
3) We do NOT get better care for our extra spending- the US' avarage life expetancy is 18th in the world, only slightly ahead of Cuba (who spends $400 per capita as opposed to our $6000)
 
2012-02-08 03:06:52 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: The thing is, BC/BS offers a variety of plans of varying degrees of quality, coverage, and flexibility. I'm quite sure you can get a plan that cheap. How good it is is another matter entirely.


Holy mother, okay I let you goad me one more time. The $240 quote is full health insurance, hospital, major medical, Dr. office visits, prescriptions, maternity (no dental, no vision). $500 annual individual deductible.

35$ copay on Dr. office visits, including specialists.
0$ Adult and child preventative care copay
10$ copay on generic prescriptions.
40% copay on name brand presciptions.

Complaints?

P.S. you could see all this yourself on the Blue cross Blue Shield website I already linked to.
 
2012-02-08 03:09:21 PM  

Magorn: /Fun Facts about health care:
1) The US pays TWICE what the next highest nation on earth spends per capita for health care (Luxemborg strangely enough)
2) all of the other folks in the top ten have universal coverage-we do not
3) We do NOT get better care for our extra spending- the US' avarage life expetancy is 18th in the world, only slightly ahead of Cuba (who spends $400 per capita as opposed to our $6000)



Well sure, you're talking population statistics and averages and whatnot. What you're leaving out is the wealthy in this country get better health care in the US than anywhere else. And since we live in a plutocracy, there's an enormous hurdle keeping it that way.
 
2012-02-08 03:10:17 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: mrshowrules: and it is still $10 an hour. Americans get $3 less and have to factor health into that? That's messed up

Don't Canadians pay significantly higher taxes on that income though? In other words, is it really a 3$ difference?

As I already pointed out, very high quality health insurance is about $200 a month in the U.S. So if the difference in taxes comes out to around $200/month, then it would be about even.

(btw - I'm not trying to be argumentative so don't flame me. I don't know how taxes work in Canada, so i am asking out of a spirit of productive discussion.)


Here's the thing that might shock you. Canadians pay the same in taxes on average per capita towards health care. A tiny bit more to be precise. Plus, you pay for insurance premiums on top of that. The net difference is that you pay roughly twice as much as Canada and other industrialized countries with universal care (per capita again).

We get universal health care at half the cost of the US system and have better health outcomes in general.

I call it free because it is independent of your individual taxes. I could get $1,000,000 in health care services in one year and my taxes won't go up.

Our health care is free much in the same way a library book is free. Certainly there is a cost on the back end but from the user perspective, it's free.
 
2012-02-08 03:16:39 PM  

sprawl15: mekki: A Whopper would never cost $100 because no one would pay a $100 for a fast food burger. You can only charge what the public is willing to pay.

Which is the point: increasing minimum wage increases what the public is willing to pay. Were everyone doing great and prosperity on the rise, burger prices would go up to meet the increased demand, not down.

mekki: So, to cover the costs of a wage inflation, Burger King would have to reduce spending elsewhere. (A few less commercials featuring highly paid spokespeople is a good start.)

Bullshiat. The first place a company looks to cut costs is the customer, followed by the lowest employees. Raise prices, then fire the worker bees, and finally close branches. They have no reason to cut from the top down when they have golden parachutes. Better to play fast and loose.


Yeah, there's no way a fast-food chain could save money other than raising prices or firing workers...

www.unathleticmag.com
 
2012-02-08 03:19:00 PM  

mrshowrules: Here's the thing that might shock you. Canadians pay the same in taxes on average per capita towards health care. A tiny bit more to be precise. Plus, you pay for insurance premiums on top of that. The net difference is that you pay roughly twice as much as Canada and other industrialized countries with universal care (per capita again).



Okay, I agree Canada is superior in every way. No argument there, so don't get defensive.

All I am asking, since I don't know about Canadian taxes, is since I pay $240/month for insurance that covers everything, are your taxes in Canada effectively $(240 * 12) higher than mine, for say a middle class salary range? I know they are a least somewhat higher. I just don't know how much.
 
2012-02-08 03:21:05 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: mrshowrules: Here's the thing that might shock you. Canadians pay the same in taxes on average per capita towards health care. A tiny bit more to be precise. Plus, you pay for insurance premiums on top of that. The net difference is that you pay roughly twice as much as Canada and other industrialized countries with universal care (per capita again).


Okay, I agree Canada is superior in every way. No argument there, so don't get defensive.

All I am asking, since I don't know about Canadian taxes, is since I pay $240/month for insurance that covers everything, are your taxes in Canada effectively $(240 * 12) higher than mine, for say a middle class salary range? I know they are a least somewhat higher. I just don't know how much.


It seems like he is saying his taxes are $120/month * 12 higher, since for the same (or better) health care, Canada pays half.
 
2012-02-08 03:21:54 PM  

HighOnCraic: Yeah, there's no way a fast-food chain could save money other than raising prices or firing workers...


Would and could are two entirely separate ideas in the corporate world. They COULD be good employers, or they COULD be money grubbing dickbags. The latter is infinitely more likely when money is on the line.
 
2012-02-08 03:23:39 PM  

lennavan: t seems like he is saying his taxes are $120/month * 12 higher, since for the same (or better) health care, Canada pays half.


Ah, okay, I didn't extract that from his post.
 
2012-02-08 03:30:07 PM  

sprawl15: HighOnCraic: Yeah, there's no way a fast-food chain could save money other than raising prices or firing workers...

Would and could are two entirely separate ideas in the corporate world. They COULD be good employers, or they COULD be money grubbing dickbags. The latter is infinitely more likely when money is on the line.


I was just responding to your original statement: "The first place a company looks to cut costs is the customer, followed by the lowest employees. Raise prices, then fire the worker bees, and finally close branches." Companies frequently consider cutting back on expenses such as advertising and market research during tough times. Just ask anyone who has worked in the advertising and market research fields in the last decade or so.

/It would be interesting to check the figures on how much McDonald's spend on payroll vs. how much it spends on advertising.
//It would also be interesting to check out their profit margin in countries with a slightly higher minimum wage.
 
2012-02-08 03:31:48 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: mrshowrules: Here's the thing that might shock you. Canadians pay the same in taxes on average per capita towards health care. A tiny bit more to be precise. Plus, you pay for insurance premiums on top of that. The net difference is that you pay roughly twice as much as Canada and other industrialized countries with universal care (per capita again).


Okay, I agree Canada is superior in every way. No argument there, so don't get defensive.

All I am asking, since I don't know about Canadian taxes, is since I pay $240/month for insurance that covers everything, are your taxes in Canada effectively $(240 * 12) higher than mine, for say a middle class salary range? I know they are a least somewhat higher. I just don't know how much.


I wasn't defensive. Some Americans really are surprised to find out that Canadians pay less in taxes than Americans for health care. No snark intended.

Anyways, you will find that Americans pay generally the same income tax as Canadians. Slightly more actually.

Five big differences:

- Americans make higher incomes
- we can't deduct mortgage interest
-your defense budget vs. ours (the rest of the world for that matter)
-we have a 5% Federal Sales tax (big money maker for us)
-less corporate tax loop holes
 
2012-02-08 03:33:48 PM  

vartian: It absolutely stuns me how many piss-poor people scream and rant when someone suggest raising the minimum wage.


"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."

--John Steinbeck
 
2012-02-08 03:38:58 PM  

mrshowrules: Anyways, you will find that Americans pay generally the same income tax as Canadians


Ah, this I didn't know. I was under the impression it was higher. I pay an effective rate of about 25% because I am single, no children, no house, no medical expense itemization, etc.

My effective tax rate was significantly lower back when I was investing heavily, since the long-term capital gains tax is lower than regular income. But I haven't played in the market for the past 3 years.
 
2012-02-08 03:38:59 PM  

HighOnCraic: I was just responding to your original statement: "The first place a company looks to cut costs is the customer, followed by the lowest employees. Raise prices, then fire the worker bees, and finally close branches." Companies frequently consider cutting back on expenses such as advertising and market research during tough times. Just ask anyone who has worked in the advertising and market research fields in the last decade or so.


I didn't include mail clerks in my analogy either. What about landscaping? Think of all the possibilities that could exist in the huge range of people employed by McDonalds! I'll be sure to list every single profession in order next time I try to point out that they would sooner fire burger flippers than cut back on their annual bonuses. We have to account for their site survey teams somewhere!
 
2012-02-08 03:40:26 PM  
Its only class warfare when the 99% fights back.
 
2012-02-08 03:46:43 PM  

Generation_D: More evidence the Chamber of Commerce has turned from a moderate businessmens' group to a hard-rightist cabal. With funding from outside the country if I remember the last time they got found out.


As much of their funding that they get from outside the US, they should have to change their name to the Foreign Countries Operating in America Chamber of Commerce.
 
2012-02-08 03:55:06 PM  

mrshowrules: EWreckedSean: KWess:
I live in Quebec...where I shop they're falling all over themselves to help. Where were you, if you don't mind my asking?

My friend lived right in Quebec City by one of the schools, I forget the name. Would visit her there when she was in school. Her folks have a bed and breakfast place out by ST Anne De Beaupre. Not one food store did I go to there that they had any. This has been a few years back since I ...


Yeah, so, there's a lot of tourist attractions in the Quebec City area, and a lot of parks etc. So, if I were a teen looking for a job in the Quebec City area, it wouldn't be at a grocery store, it'd be on a boat cruise, or at the Citadel, or at one of the hundreds of bars and restaurants, or with the City parks, or the Provincial Parks, or the National parks, the area ski hills, or the dozens of tours and hotels, etc.

Anywhere where I could meet girls really.

Don't forget that the population in Quebec is around 800,000 all-in (including all the gov't and university types), and the number of visitors hugely exceeds that per year. Loads of work for teenagers etc.
 
2012-02-08 03:57:14 PM  

sprawl15: HighOnCraic: I was just responding to your original statement: "The first place a company looks to cut costs is the customer, followed by the lowest employees. Raise prices, then fire the worker bees, and finally close branches." Companies frequently consider cutting back on expenses such as advertising and market research during tough times. Just ask anyone who has worked in the advertising and market research fields in the last decade or so.

I didn't include mail clerks in my analogy either. What about landscaping? Think of all the possibilities that could exist in the huge range of people employed by McDonalds! I'll be sure to list every single profession in order next time I try to point out that they would sooner fire burger flippers than cut back on their annual bonuses. We have to account for their site survey teams somewhere!


Well, the original discussion WAS about fast food chains (although the initial poster mentioned Burger King, not McDonalds.

The general argument against minimum wage increases is that cutting back on the number of workers is the only way to offset the cost. It's as if businesses like McDonald's don't have other expenses that could be scaled back.

Seriously, how many people thought, "Well, I WAS gonna eat at Burger King tonight, but then I saw that funny commercial with Michael Jordan and Larry Bird, and I changed my mind!"?
 
2012-02-08 04:00:26 PM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: mrshowrules: Anyways, you will find that Americans pay generally the same income tax as Canadians

Ah, this I didn't know. I was under the impression it was higher. I pay an effective rate of about 25% because I am single, no children, no house, no medical expense itemization, etc.

My effective tax rate was significantly lower back when I was investing heavily, since the long-term capital gains tax is lower than regular income. But I haven't played in the market for the past 3 years.




See below - run the numbers for yourself. Not sure about your specific tax bracket but generally, Americans pay slightly more. However, you can deduct mortgage interest which is a huge deduction we cannot claim. Finally we have that Federal Sales tax which is a big deal but lower income people get a rebate back on that every year.

Link (new window)
 
2012-02-08 04:07:15 PM  

hurdboy: This is more about removing a political issue from the Democrats than anything else, really.


Yep, you nailed it with this. Minimum wage increases have historically been serious winning issues for Democrats (as they should be, IMO). Tying the wage to inflation does a lot to take that away; it's a smart political move.
 
2012-02-08 04:07:59 PM  

sprawl15: mekki: A Whopper would never cost $100 because no one would pay a $100 for a fast food burger. You can only charge what the public is willing to pay.

Which is the point: increasing minimum wage increases what the public is willing to pay. Were everyone doing great and prosperity on the rise, burger prices would go up to meet the increased demand, not down.

mekki: So, to cover the costs of a wage inflation, Burger King would have to reduce spending elsewhere. (A few less commercials featuring highly paid spokespeople is a good start.)

Bullshiat. The first place a company looks to cut costs is the customer, followed by the lowest employees. Raise prices, then fire the worker bees, and finally close branches. They have no reason to cut from the top down when they have golden parachutes. Better to play fast and loose.


Oh, and both McDonald's and Burger King have a special $1 menu that has gone relatively unchanged for the past decade or so. I'm not sure about the various other burgers, but I'm pretty sure the price of a Whopper Jr. hasn't changed since the mid-90s.
 
2012-02-08 04:08:32 PM  

HighOnCraic: The general argument against minimum wage increases is that cutting back on the number of workers is the only way to offset the cost. It's as if businesses like McDonald's don't have other expenses that could be scaled back.


The post you responded to was looking at more than one expense that could be scaled back. Did you mean to respond to somebody else?

HighOnCraic: Seriously, how many people thought, "Well, I WAS gonna eat at Burger King tonight, but then I saw that funny commercial with Michael Jordan and Larry Bird, and I changed my mind!"?


Who gives a shiat?
 
2012-02-08 04:10:12 PM  

HighOnCraic: Oh, and both McDonald's and Burger King have a special $1 menu that has gone relatively unchanged for the past decade or so. I'm not sure about the various other burgers, but I'm pretty sure the price of a Whopper Jr. hasn't changed since the mid-90s.


Which is shocking, considering the HUGE economic boom we're experiencing.
 
2012-02-08 04:17:07 PM  

sprawl15: HighOnCraic: The general argument against minimum wage increases is that cutting back on the number of workers is the only way to offset the cost. It's as if businesses like McDonald's don't have other expenses that could be scaled back.

The post you responded to was looking at more than one expense that could be scaled back. Did you mean to respond to somebody else?

HighOnCraic: Seriously, how many people thought, "Well, I WAS gonna eat at Burger King tonight, but then I saw that funny commercial with Michael Jordan and Larry Bird, and I changed my mind!"?

Who gives a shiat?


This started with:
mekki: So, to cover the costs of a wage inflation, Burger King would have to reduce spending elsewhere. (A few less commercials featuring highly paid spokespeople is a good start.)

sprawl15: Bullshiat. The first place a company looks to cut costs is the customer, followed by the lowest employees. Raise prices, then fire the worker bees, and finally close branches.


I was just agreeing with the specific point that fast-food chains (which cover a huge chunk of the percentage of minimum-wage earners) would probably survive an increase in payroll by spending a few million less on advertising.

/From what I recall, McDonald's was thriving in Ireland, where the minimum wage is slightly higher (and the Euro was worth a bit more than the dollar when was over there).
 
2012-02-08 04:20:50 PM  

HighOnCraic: I was just agreeing with the specific point that fast-food chains (which cover a huge chunk of the percentage of minimum-wage earners) would probably survive an increase in payroll by spending a few million less on advertising.


Ah, I didn't realize you had voices in your head.
 
2012-02-08 04:25:32 PM  

sprawl15: HighOnCraic: Oh, and both McDonald's and Burger King have a special $1 menu that has gone relatively unchanged for the past decade or so. I'm not sure about the various other burgers, but I'm pretty sure the price of a Whopper Jr. hasn't changed since the mid-90s.

Which is shocking, considering the HUGE economic boom we're experiencing.


Actually, Burger King started its dollar menu in '98 (so I was off by a few years), when the economy was pretty good. So, instead of prices going up when the economy was good, prices on certain things went down. And some fast-food joints started giving away free refills.
 
2012-02-08 04:29:51 PM  

sprawl15: HighOnCraic: I was just agreeing with the specific point that fast-food chains (which cover a huge chunk of the percentage of minimum-wage earners) would probably survive an increase in payroll by spending a few million less on advertising.

Ah, I didn't realize you had voices in your head.


Dude, all I did was agree with this post:

mekki: So, to cover the costs of a wage inflation, Burger King would have to reduce spending elsewhere. (A few less commercials featuring highly paid spokespeople is a good start.)


It's okay if you don't agree with it. Life goes on.
 
2012-02-08 04:33:33 PM  

HighOnCraic: Dude, all I did was agree with this post


With a rambling, incoherent response. You're disagreeing that they'll raise prices or cut entry level employees before they incur corporate reductions in salary or profit because...they can cut advertising? It has nothing to do with anything. It's like responding to "Evolution will produce single celled organisms before it produces human beings" with "But evolution can also make giraffes".
 
2012-02-08 04:43:54 PM  

sprawl15: HighOnCraic: Dude, all I did was agree with this post

With a rambling, incoherent response. You're disagreeing that they'll raise prices or cut entry level employees before they incur corporate reductions in salary or profit because...they can cut advertising? It has nothing to do with anything. It's like responding to "Evolution will produce single celled organisms before it produces human beings" with "But evolution can also make giraffes".


All I'm saying is that they have other options besides raising prices or cutting entry-level employees, and that it's at least worth considering how much the big fast-food chains spend on advertising versus how much they spend on labor costs.
 
2012-02-08 04:48:37 PM  

sprawl15: HighOnCraic: Seriously, how many people thought, "Well, I WAS gonna eat at Burger King tonight, but then I saw that funny commercial with Michael Jordan and Larry Bird, and I changed my mind!"?

Who gives a shiat?


Someone paid millions of dollars to make those commercials and air them because they believe that lots of people give a shiat.
 
2012-02-08 04:50:36 PM  
Out of curiosity, on the issue of McDonalds cutting out one superbowl commercial to pay everyone a lot more...again, since I'm bored, and the idea intrigued me, I ran some numbers.

McDonalds U.S. employment is about 700,000. Unfortunately, no data on how much the average work week is per employee. Assume the average work week for a minwage grunt is 35.

That's (35*700,000) man hours of labor per week. If we increase their hourly rate by $3 to put them a $10+ per hour - that is a total cost of $(3*35*700000) per week = $73 million / week = $3.8 billion per year.

Global (worldwide), McDonalds reported a profit of $1.38 billion last quarter. Or about 5.5 billion annually. (I was unable to find just profit in the U.S.)

Unless i did something grossly wrong, it would appear that the hypothetical $3 wage hike isn't quite as simple as cutting one commercial. It would suck up most of the profits globally. (Maybe the 35 hour workweek is wrong, and it's more like 20.)
 
2012-02-08 04:53:10 PM  

EWreckedSean: I didn't see a one in Quebec in all the times i went there. People returned their own carts to the store, and I was told that was standard practice.


Did you go after normal business hours? There is a law on the books here in Quebec that if you are open after normal business hours (6 PM on Monday - Wednesday, 9 PM Thursday - Friday, 5 PM Saturday - Sunday) you are limited to only 4 employees on the premises. So often grocery stores open late have only a few people on the premises, which means no runners or baggers so you do it yourself. That is certainly standard practice, but it applies only late in the day. Runners and baggers are the norm the rest of the time, at least in Montreal anywhere I have been.

Most importantly, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the minimum wage, and does not support your threadbare and motheaten assertion that raising the minimum wage will destroy small business.
 
Displayed 50 of 286 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report