Does AOC know $15 minimum wage in states like Mississippi will put people out of work?

[Andylusion]

Um.... no.

View attachment 264475

The price of beef, has increased barely $1 per lbs, over a period of decades. It's been slowly going up year over year, since the mid-90s.


It most certainly did not double in one year, from 2009, to 2010.
Ridiculous.

Now you might ask the question how can McDonald's handle the cost of beef going up, but not a minimum wage going up?

The answer is simple.... higher prices.

View attachment 264477

All costs are passed onto the consumer. All of them. There is no cost, whether it is the cost of payroll, or the cost of beef, that is not passed onto consumers.

Further, the cost of beef, is actually not a major cost to the store. It just isn't. It may seem like it should be, since they are primarily a burger joint, but in reality the full cost of a single big mac, in terms of food costs, is only 80¢. So out of that $4.80 for a big mac, only 80¢ is the food. That means the cost of the beef used, is less than 80¢ because that 80¢ includes the buns, the cheese, the onions, the sauce, and whatever else that is on it.

So what is the other $4? All profit? No, because if it was all profit, McDonald's would be raking in Trillions instead of Billions.

Of course you have store overhead, and you have to pay for the paper supplies, like the wrapper you put the burger in, and the bag, and so on.

But the single biggest expense, is exactly as the person before pointed out.... payroll. If you increase the price of beef, even by 100%.... we're still talking pennies per burger.

But if you increase payroll by 100%, we're talking $600,000.

Additionally, you seem to be equating a slow increase over 20 years, with a minimum wage increase over 2 years. Not at all comparable.

The price of a Big Mac has increased $1 in the ten years since min wage has increased

How many Big Macs does an employee sell in an hour?

Now you are getting into more complicated territory. When you stated the price of beef doubled, we could look at the price of a single burger, and determine how much effect the price of beef had on a single burger.

But when you talk about the minimum wage, things get drastically more complicated, and it isn't as simple as how many burgers does an employee sell.

I actually was working at a fast food joint in the 90s, when the minimum wage increased. I know that many things change, in order to offset that cost.

For example, the first thing they did was lay off all the part-time employees. We had three part time employees, and they were all laid off. So how did the store function, without those employees? We, the full time employees, were expected to do our normal duties, while we cover the jobs no longer done by part-time employees.

So that's one way to offset the minimum wage cost, which will not drive up the cost of a burger.

Another way was to reduce portion sizes. I discovered this almost by accident. So the fry station had these metal, non-adjustable fry cup holders. One day I was asked to refill the fry station with cups. But when I put the newly purchased cups into the holders, they fell straight through. The cups were physically smaller. So the large cup, was smaller than the old large cup. Medium smaller than the original medium, and so on.

They had reduced the portion sizes of the fries and the drink. This is yet another way to compensate for the increase in the minimum, without driving up prices on anything, burgers or otherwise.

And also they do sometimes also reduce the size of the beef patty as well, but usually they bring it back up to the same size later.

I remember when at Wendy's we had the Single, Double and Triple. And working the grill, I could tell that they had reduced the size of the patties. Then they came out with the "Dave's Classic" and "Dave's Classic Double". Which magically were the exact same patties as before, with a new "Dave's Classic" price. And of course they quickly stopped selling the original Single and Double.

It was a clever way of raising the price, with few people noticing.

But again, here's the bottom line.... Every single cost, is passed onto the consumers. If you demand a higher minimum wage, you are in effect demanding that YOU pay a higher price for everything. Which is exactly what happens.



Now they do eventually increase prices.

Applies to every cost increase due to the price of supplies, taxes, insurance, property values or demands for more profits from stockholders

No reason to freeze wages for a decade

This is strange logic from you. So I assume that you understand that each store is run as a separate business.... right? You do know that?

That store... that individual store... doesn't have stock holders taking money from it. So that was a stupid comment. Stock holders demanding more profits, does not apply to any store anywhere.

And McDonald's corporate does not fund a store. They don't. That store has to make a profit on its own. It has to pay its employees, on its own. It has to pay for repairs to the roof, or the parking lot, on it's own.

So when you bring up the fact that costs like supplies and insurance and property taxes go up, or insurance costs, or anything else.... that is true.

So you are admitting that costs do, over time, go up.... but if those costs go up.... where do you think that store has money to pay employees more wages?

They don't. The money has to come from higher prices to consumers.

Now if you live in a place, where people have low wages, like Mississippi, do you think people in a poor state like that, are going to pay high prices like they would in New York?

No. Of course not. That is ridiculous.

So what happens? They close. And people in a poor state with few employment opportunities, end up with even fewer available jobs.

The poor get poorer. The rich are still going to get richer. McDonald's isn't going to suffer, because all their stores in poor areas closed. Investors are going to invest wisely. They'll just open a store somewhere that they can make money. Meanwhile the unemployed in Mississippi stay poor and impoverished.

The key is....shit happens for any business

Cost of business rises. Only the cost of minimum wage labor remains frozen

That's not even true. If there is no demand for low wage jobs.... meaning that there are no low-skill workers looking for such jobs, then naturally the effects of supply and demand will force up wage.

All the way back in the 90s, the Wendy's in downtown columbus was offering $10/hour to start. It wasn't because downtown had a special minimum wage, or a union, or anything. It was simply that few workers were willing to work down town.

So the supply of low-skill labor being short, forced them to offer more money to work there.

This is why the real solution is not to try and figure out how to force employers to pay more money. Because that will never work. Guarantee you.

The solution is, move up the skill ladder to better paying jobs. As people move out of the low-skill market, the natural shift in supply, will cause wages to adjust accordingly.

 

[Andylusion]

So your fiendishly clever plan is to put companies out of business and their employees out of work?

Name one company that went "out of business" because they paid their employees to much money.

The list is endless, you moron! If you pay your employees a set salary and you are not bringing in the revenue to pay them, what happens, dumbass?

If the list is endless, then name one company.

Why do companies go out to business, dumbass? It is because they could not make a profit. Why couldn't they make a profit? They were obviously paying their employees too much for the job they were performing. My God man, you are dumber than a pile of rocks!

Uber doesn't make a profit. Three of the five companies that I own don't make a profit. Can you answer why?

Likely because you own them. Base on your posts, I can see why any company you own will fail.

 

[OnePercenter]

Wow where are all these big Macs that doubled in price?

.

You are eating them

I just love how they claim that raising min. wages will increase cost yet have zero problem with the increased cost of goods from tariffs from Trumps policies.

If you are paying tariffs, that is your fault for buying foreign goods.

I just purchased a large amount of flooring for my home. The type I originally wanted was made n China and is subject to the tariff. I just bought American made for the same price as the Chinese made flooring and got a vastly superior product for the same price. That is how tariffs are supposed to work. The tariff made it too expensive for me to buy Chinese. Had I known it was Chinese manufactured, I never would have wanted it in the first place.

Since most Chinese made flooring has been pulled from the market in 2015, you'd be hard-pressed (no pun intended) to find any.

My God, how fucking stupid are you?

Show me a link that what you claim is true. The lady who owns the company is a member of my church and is Japanese herself. Her husband won the Silver Star during the Korean War. When they tell me they can't get the flooring I ordered from China without paying the tarif, I believe them and not some internet hoaxer one-percenter!

Flooring from China has a larger than acceptable amount of formaldehyde.

 

[OnePercenter]

Poor are easier to get than beef.

I'll bet they fart just as much as beef cattle!

Yet not as tasty.

You prefer tasty farts? Ewwww!

You are a Putin salad-tosser!

That's all you have. Pathetic lies and insults.

It's the truth. Why would a supposed (you) US Citizen want to make American Workers submissive?

 

[danielpalos]

in that case, welfare may be more appropriate.

we are focusing on the ready reserve labor force.

Be honest, you're not talking about labor force, you're talking about paying those who won't work.

the honest part is that actually working may not be the best option if unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is available. we should not have any homeless problem; those persons should participating in our economy.

IOW, you want to take money OUT of the economy, use some of it to feed the government bureaucracy, then put a little of it back INTO the economy and hope it doesn't just disappear into the pocket of the nearest pot dealer?

You might as well try to fill a swimming pool by dipping water out of the deep end and pouring it into the shallow end. You really need to learn about opportunity cost, because that money has to come from someone who no longer has it to do something he wants.

If someone is working, they deserve to be paid what their work is worth. If they can work but won't, why should they be compensated?

what are you talking about? compensation for simply being unemployed is market friendly.

How? I've already outlined how you're taking money out of the economy and putting some of it back in, and you've completely failed to deal with the opportunity cost. That money you took out is no longer there to be used. Deal with it.

How did you reach your conclusion? The Poor tend to spend most of their income sooner rather than later. Most of that money will be circulating in local economies and engendering a positive multiplier effect in a market friendly manner.

 

[danielpalos]

anyone who is simply unemployed should be able to apply for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States. We should have no homeless problem due to a simply lack of income due to unemployment in our at-will employment States.

Translation to English: You want to be paid when you DECIDE not to work, not just when you're unemployed through no fault of your own.

there is no "fault" under the doctrine of employment at will.

If I'm laid off, I can get unemployment compensation. The employer pays into it and it's there to be used. That's completely different from what you're talking about, which is paying someone for nothing more than existing.

lol. nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics. it is termed and styled, unemployment compensation.

No, what you want certainly is not unemployment compensation. It is welfare.

you simply appeal to emotion instead of reason. it is merely a correction for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment; there is no reason for the Poor bear that onus.

 

[OnePercenter]

Creating a business requires some planning. Planning for cheap, labor from inception is the difference.

Is that why Trump has a private jet and you don't? You didn't plan right?

The point is, and I have pointed this out to you many times, that you cannot say that every business owner can do what Ford did, any more than you can say that because Usain Bolt can run a hundred meters that fast, everyone should be able to.

Now, if you have any integrity at all, you will stop repeating that bilge. I won't hold my breath waiting.

i am willing to work with merely half a million rather than a whole million dollar loan.

Why does Trump fly in a private jet while you don't?

Because the outdated Electoral College make him POTUS.

Change the Constitution if you disagree. We won't hold our breath because they are not enough dumbasses like you to put together a good brainfart, much less a constitutional amendment!

More and more States are adding each year.

 

[OnePercenter]

So your fiendishly clever plan is to put companies out of business and their employees out of work?

Name one company that went "out of business" because they paid their employees to much money.

Uhm you do know 30% companies fail in the first two years right?

No, he really doesn't. We had this discussion before, and he trotted out all these lists of businesses which didn't go under as proof that businesses don't really fail.

The issue is: Name one company that went "out of business" because they paid their employees to much money.

Blockbuster.

That's funny. You should have written Hostess. But seriously, Name one company that went "out of business" because they paid their employees to much money.

 

[OnePercenter]

View attachment 264072

A Heritage Foundation analysis from 2016 estimated that a $15 federal minimum wage would wipe out 7 million jobs. Hardest hit would be workers, businesses, and economies in areas with low costs of living. (like Mississippi where cost of living is 87% of USA standard.
Mississippi cost of living is 87.8% Mississippi Cost of Living

Liberal activists demand a “living wage,” but the truth is that only a tiny handful of hourly wage workers make the minimum wage or less (4 percent), according to the Employment Policies Institute. On the contrary, a whopping 44 percent of hourly workers currently earn at or below the proposed $15 minimum wage.

Now consider what the $15 minimum wage would do.

For a restaurant that employs 10 minimum wage workers, a $15 minimum wage hike would cost them about $170,000 per year. If the restaurant currently earns profit margins of 5 percent, it would have to increase sales by $3.5 million per year, or an extra $67,000 every week.

But that is not realistic. The likely scenario is that they’ll either have to cut working hours or fire some workers altogether. Either way, most people are worse off than before.

Lawmakers Are Pushing a $15 Minimum Wage. Here Are 3 Disastrous Consequences That Would Result.
Robotic waiters...

tRumps corporate tax cut lowered federal taxes paid by corporations by 50%. Why can't the businesses use the tax cuts by raising pay and/or benefits, I did?

A) Corporate taxes were NOT cut by 50%! Once again an exaggeration. Learn About Corporate Tax Rates and How to Calculate What You Owe
B) You asked a dumb question "Why can't the businesses use the tax cuts by raising pay and/or benefits"
Answer : They did you dummy!
List of companies that paid bonuses or boosted pay since tax bill passed
COMPANY BONUS NO. OF EMPLOYEES GETTING BONUS

• AT&T $1,000 200,000
• Alaska Airlines $1,000 19,000
• American Airlines $1,000 130,000
• Bank of America $1,000 145,000
• BB&T $1,200 27,000
• Comcast $1,000 100,000
• Fifth Third Bank $1,000 13,500
• JetBlue $1,000 21,000
• Nationwide $1,000 29,000
• PNC Financial $1,000 47,500
• Sinclair Broadcast $1,000 9,000
• Southwest Airlines $1,000 55,000
• Travelers $1,000 14,000
• U.S. Bancorp $1,000 60,000
• Walmart up to $1,000 n/a

List of companies that paid bonuses or boosted pay since tax bill passed

Finally YOU never paid any "employees" because you are too economically stupid to have any business much less people working for you!
You're ignorance shows you don't have any business!

Corporate tax liability WAS cut by 50%. The IRS collected 20% less and less is being distributed back to the States which means that your State is going to/has increased fee's and/or taxes.

How is less being distributed back to the states, dumbass? That funding is determined by Congress and hasn't been cut by a dime! You really are retarded!

Which increases the deficit.

 

[OnePercenter]

I see another liberal is bad at math/ economics and reality


.

Just as I thought, minimum wage $7.25 in Alabama and McDonald's paying over it

Crew (hiring for overnight shifts starting pay $9.00/hr to $10.25/hr) - Madison, AL 35758 - Indeed.com


Crew (hiring for overnight shifts starting pay $9.00/hr to $10.25/hr)
Johnson Partners, Inc. dba McDonald's

24,691 reviews
Madison, AL 35758

Full-time?

It being McDonald's, one assumes they offer both full- and part-time . . . that is, one assumes it if one has actually been employed and knows something about having a job. I have no idea what YOU assume.

Unless the jobs being listed are full-time (40 hours per-week) the end result is questionable as to how much that employer adds to the economy.

Excuses, excuses, excuses. You got caught in a lie and are trying to backpedal your way out. Again, pathetic!

How can part-time jobs contribute as much as full-time jobs in the economy?

 

[initforme]

Hostess was a bad bad company. Poorly run with poor products. Those were not good jobs. Secondly, working a low wage job is not a good place to start off. That's why a degree is the ONLY way to go. Considering a large percentage of employers are shoddy, it's best to avoid ever working for minimum wage.

 

[Thinker101]

Moving the minimum sage to $15 in mississippi would triple the average wage in state.

I see another liberal is bad at math/ economics and reality


.

Just as I thought, minimum wage $7.25 in Alabama and McDonald's paying over it

Crew (hiring for overnight shifts starting pay $9.00/hr to $10.25/hr) - Madison, AL 35758 - Indeed.com


Crew (hiring for overnight shifts starting pay $9.00/hr to $10.25/hr)
Johnson Partners, Inc. dba McDonald's

24,691 reviews
Madison, AL 35758

Full-time?

It being McDonald's, one assumes they offer both full- and part-time . . . that is, one assumes it if one has actually been employed and knows something about having a job. I have no idea what YOU assume.

Unless the jobs being listed are full-time (40 hours per-week) the end result is questionable as to how much that employer adds to the economy.

You may want to take that one up with Obama.

 

[rightwinger]

[QUOTE="bear513, post: 22521281, member: 3

Wait you vote for high tax democrats in state and local and then bitch about the high cost of living?
/QUOTE]
I voted for Trump. I'm a Republican

Sucker

 

[rightwinger]

The price of a Big Mac has increased $1 in the ten years since min wage has increased

How many Big Macs does an employee sell in an hour?

Now you are getting into more complicated territory. When you stated the price of beef doubled, we could look at the price of a single burger, and determine how much effect the price of beef had on a single burger.

But when you talk about the minimum wage, things get drastically more complicated, and it isn't as simple as how many burgers does an employee sell.

I actually was working at a fast food joint in the 90s, when the minimum wage increased. I know that many things change, in order to offset that cost.

For example, the first thing they did was lay off all the part-time employees. We had three part time employees, and they were all laid off. So how did the store function, without those employees? We, the full time employees, were expected to do our normal duties, while we cover the jobs no longer done by part-time employees.

So that's one way to offset the minimum wage cost, which will not drive up the cost of a burger.

Another way was to reduce portion sizes. I discovered this almost by accident. So the fry station had these metal, non-adjustable fry cup holders. One day I was asked to refill the fry station with cups. But when I put the newly purchased cups into the holders, they fell straight through. The cups were physically smaller. So the large cup, was smaller than the old large cup. Medium smaller than the original medium, and so on.

They had reduced the portion sizes of the fries and the drink. This is yet another way to compensate for the increase in the minimum, without driving up prices on anything, burgers or otherwise.

And also they do sometimes also reduce the size of the beef patty as well, but usually they bring it back up to the same size later.

I remember when at Wendy's we had the Single, Double and Triple. And working the grill, I could tell that they had reduced the size of the patties. Then they came out with the "Dave's Classic" and "Dave's Classic Double". Which magically were the exact same patties as before, with a new "Dave's Classic" price. And of course they quickly stopped selling the original Single and Double.

It was a clever way of raising the price, with few people noticing.

But again, here's the bottom line.... Every single cost, is passed onto the consumers. If you demand a higher minimum wage, you are in effect demanding that YOU pay a higher price for everything. Which is exactly what happens.



Now they do eventually increase prices.

Applies to every cost increase due to the price of supplies, taxes, insurance, property values or demands for more profits from stockholders

No reason to freeze wages for a decade

This is strange logic from you. So I assume that you understand that each store is run as a separate business.... right? You do know that?

That store... that individual store... doesn't have stock holders taking money from it. So that was a stupid comment. Stock holders demanding more profits, does not apply to any store anywhere.

And McDonald's corporate does not fund a store. They don't. That store has to make a profit on its own. It has to pay its employees, on its own. It has to pay for repairs to the roof, or the parking lot, on it's own.

So when you bring up the fact that costs like supplies and insurance and property taxes go up, or insurance costs, or anything else.... that is true.

So you are admitting that costs do, over time, go up.... but if those costs go up.... where do you think that store has money to pay employees more wages?

They don't. The money has to come from higher prices to consumers.

Now if you live in a place, where people have low wages, like Mississippi, do you think people in a poor state like that, are going to pay high prices like they would in New York?

No. Of course not. That is ridiculous.

So what happens? They close. And people in a poor state with few employment opportunities, end up with even fewer available jobs.

The poor get poorer. The rich are still going to get richer. McDonald's isn't going to suffer, because all their stores in poor areas closed. Investors are going to invest wisely. They'll just open a store somewhere that they can make money. Meanwhile the unemployed in Mississippi stay poor and impoverished.

The key is....shit happens for any business

Cost of business rises. Only the cost of minimum wage labor remains frozen

That's not even true. If there is no demand for low wage jobs.... meaning that there are no low-skill workers looking for such jobs, then naturally the effects of supply and demand will force up wage.

All the way back in the 90s, the Wendy's in downtown columbus was offering $10/hour to start. It wasn't because downtown had a special minimum wage, or a union, or anything. It was simply that few workers were willing to work down town.

So the supply of low-skill labor being short, forced them to offer more money to work there.

This is why the real solution is not to try and figure out how to force employers to pay more money. Because that will never work. Guarantee you.

The solution is, move up the skill ladder to better paying jobs. As people move out of the low-skill market, the natural shift in supply, will cause wages to adjust accordingly.

There is always a percentage of low wage workers

 

[danielpalos]

Hostess was a bad bad company. Poorly run with poor products. Those were not good jobs. Secondly, working a low wage job is not a good place to start off. That's why a degree is the ONLY way to go. Considering a large percentage of employers are shoddy, it's best to avoid ever working for minimum wage.

management blamed Labor.

 

[OnePercenter]

AOC talks about about wanting to be like Britain, Sweden, Finland, Norway and Denmark, only Britain has a minimum wage. Universal income? Finland experimented and they just ended the program because it wasn’t sustainable.

It seems she doesn’t know how those countries operate.

Since when is opening dialog a bad thing?

Why open a dialog when they are like you and AOC with room temperature IQs at best? Why do you deflect every statement when it blows your whole concept of how the world works?

I believe that the American Worker needs a raise. You can either agree or continue your Putin-communist manifesto.

 

[Thinker101]

Hostess was a bad bad company. Poorly run with poor products. Those were not good jobs. Secondly, working a low wage job is not a good place to start off. That's why a degree is the ONLY way to go. Considering a large percentage of employers are shoddy, it's best to avoid ever working for minimum wage.

You talking about before Bimbo or after Bimbo?

 

[OnePercenter]

Most McDonald's workers in 1968 probably knew how to work. Today, anything more than pushing a button is bound to lead to an emotional breakdown!

In 1968, most McD's workers were teenagers. Entry level jobs were great training for teenagers to learn a good work ethic. These jobs were never meant to enable someone to support a family.

Most, not all.

Uh, I said most. There are management employees who can make quite a good salary. (In-N-Out Burger pays their managers over $160K per year!) The point is that either the teenagers learn a work ethic which serves them well during the rest of their working life, or if they are motivated to do so, they have the opportunity for a career path into higher paying positions at McD's.

The issue was supervisors, not managers.

Supervisors are step in the ladder, bub.

Supervisors aren't managers.

 

[danielpalos]

higher paid labor pay more in taxes and create more in demand.

 

[hadit]

Be honest, you're not talking about labor force, you're talking about paying those who won't work.

the honest part is that actually working may not be the best option if unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed is available. we should not have any homeless problem; those persons should participating in our economy.

IOW, you want to take money OUT of the economy, use some of it to feed the government bureaucracy, then put a little of it back INTO the economy and hope it doesn't just disappear into the pocket of the nearest pot dealer?

You might as well try to fill a swimming pool by dipping water out of the deep end and pouring it into the shallow end. You really need to learn about opportunity cost, because that money has to come from someone who no longer has it to do something he wants.

If someone is working, they deserve to be paid what their work is worth. If they can work but won't, why should they be compensated?

what are you talking about? compensation for simply being unemployed is market friendly.

How? I've already outlined how you're taking money out of the economy and putting some of it back in, and you've completely failed to deal with the opportunity cost. That money you took out is no longer there to be used. Deal with it.

How did you reach your conclusion? The Poor tend to spend most of their income sooner rather than later. Most of that money will be circulating in local economies and engendering a positive multiplier effect in a market friendly manner.

You're still not dealing with the opportunity cost. Every dollar you take out of the economy represents a dollar less that is available to the person who earned it.