Fast-food workers strike, seeking $15 wage, political muscle

[Conservative65]

The only thing it furthers is the leech mindset that someone owes you something life. That's never an improvement.

Tell me what about the skills of a person that can only sweep floors, empty trash, and clean toilets or the like is worth $15/hour.

Well I make dramatically more than $15/hr. 15 really isn't very much so yes someone who does those things is worth 15.

Is the problem that you only make 15? You are mad they will make as much as you with little effort? I don't get it.

For the record I would only go to 10.10 and see what happens in the places that went 15.

While I do make significantly more than $15/hour, although my income is based on salary rather than a wage, I won't make that an official claim because I would have to provide proof to you. Since you did make the claim, prove it.

You still didn't say what about those skills make them worth that much. What about skills a 5 year old can do is worth $15/hour?

We've seen what happened in places that went to $15. Try Seattle. The argument was that these people wanted to make a living wage so they could support themselves. After the increase, some were going to their employers and asking for less hours because they were now making too much causing their benefits to be less. In other words, they weren't concerned about making more you getting what they thought was owed to them in handouts funded by someone else.

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

I know what you said. What you haven't said is what makes those skills worth $15/hour.

Many still won't pay taxes. If they do, it's high time. If they don't, your argument is invalid.

Seattle tried $15/hour and those that had been receiving welfare still received some types of it but when they saw making more meant some of the amounts they were getting were reduced, they asked for less hours so they could get more benefits.

Are MY taxes going to go down since some may be paying them and less are on benefits? Unless the answer is yes, your argument is worthless.

 

[Brain357]

Well I make dramatically more than $15/hr. 15 really isn't very much so yes someone who does those things is worth 15.

Is the problem that you only make 15? You are mad they will make as much as you with little effort? I don't get it.

For the record I would only go to 10.10 and see what happens in the places that went 15.

While I do make significantly more than $15/hour, although my income is based on salary rather than a wage, I won't make that an official claim because I would have to provide proof to you. Since you did make the claim, prove it.

You still didn't say what about those skills make them worth that much. What about skills a 5 year old can do is worth $15/hour?

We've seen what happened in places that went to $15. Try Seattle. The argument was that these people wanted to make a living wage so they could support themselves. After the increase, some were going to their employers and asking for less hours because they were now making too much causing their benefits to be less. In other words, they weren't concerned about making more you getting what they thought was owed to them in handouts funded by someone else.

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

I know what you said. What you haven't said is what makes those skills worth $15/hour.

Many still won't pay taxes. If they do, it's high time. If they don't, your argument is invalid.

Seattle tried $15/hour and those that had been receiving welfare still received some types of it but when they saw making more meant some of the amounts they were getting were reduced, they asked for less hours so they could get more benefits.

Are MY taxes going to go down since some may be paying them and less are on benefits? Unless the answer is yes, your argument is worthless.

Your taxes should go down yes. But that would involve politicians doing the right thing.

 

[Conservative65]

While I do make significantly more than $15/hour, although my income is based on salary rather than a wage, I won't make that an official claim because I would have to provide proof to you. Since you did make the claim, prove it.

You still didn't say what about those skills make them worth that much. What about skills a 5 year old can do is worth $15/hour?

We've seen what happened in places that went to $15. Try Seattle. The argument was that these people wanted to make a living wage so they could support themselves. After the increase, some were going to their employers and asking for less hours because they were now making too much causing their benefits to be less. In other words, they weren't concerned about making more you getting what they thought was owed to them in handouts funded by someone else.

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

I know what you said. What you haven't said is what makes those skills worth $15/hour.

Many still won't pay taxes. If they do, it's high time. If they don't, your argument is invalid.

Seattle tried $15/hour and those that had been receiving welfare still received some types of it but when they saw making more meant some of the amounts they were getting were reduced, they asked for less hours so they could get more benefits.

Are MY taxes going to go down since some may be paying them and less are on benefits? Unless the answer is yes, your argument is worthless.

Your taxes should go down yes. But that would involve politicians doing the right thing.

My taxes should be lower now and could be if those freeloaders in the 50% that haven't paid any would do their part for living in society.

The reason I asked whether or not they would go down is that I knew politicians, specifically Democrats, wouldn't do the right thing.

 

[Conservative65]

It is the big corps bringing in workers and they gladly work with both parties. Repubs are in control and it continues.

It can't replace workers. Those workers are also customers. They would also be eliminating customers.

It's funny how smart you pretend to be. So far I have owned you.

McDonalds isn't Shackley. It isn't designed to sell to it's workers. They can an are replacing the unskilled help with automation, and this will continue. The workers add very, very little value. Use of automation eleminates mistakes and ends the issue with employee misconduct.

Rich people aren't eating at McDonald's.

When these leeches starting demanding $15/hour for doing a $5/hour job a few years ago, I did my own experiment at the local McDonalds in the city where I work. I went to the same McDonalds every day in the month of July I worked. It was 21 times. I ordered off the dollar menu. Each time, I would alter the order such as no pickles, extra ketchup, etc. There was a new item on the menu at the time. Since I don't eat pickles or mayo, I ordered it without either one only to be told that it didn't come with either one. When I got it, it had both. Out of the 21 times, 11 times produced an incorrect order. I don't know about you but that's not a good record for those demanding over a 100% pay increase.

That is a lot of McDonald's. It is still a statistically insignificant sample size. I've been to good and bad fast food places. I blame the managers if there are lots of errors. Either they hired the wrong people or manage them poorly.

I didn't eat it just did my experiment.

I went to the same one with the same workers at roughly the same time. It's significant when those same ones make mistakes 11/21 times.

The managers aren't the ones filling the orders. I'm sure you do blame the managers. You're good at blaming the higher level when things go bad and giving credit to the lower level when things go well. Had they done a perfect job, you would have said it was all the workers fault with no mention of management.

 

[Brain357]

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

I know what you said. What you haven't said is what makes those skills worth $15/hour.

Many still won't pay taxes. If they do, it's high time. If they don't, your argument is invalid.

Seattle tried $15/hour and those that had been receiving welfare still received some types of it but when they saw making more meant some of the amounts they were getting were reduced, they asked for less hours so they could get more benefits.

Are MY taxes going to go down since some may be paying them and less are on benefits? Unless the answer is yes, your argument is worthless.

Your taxes should go down yes. But that would involve politicians doing the right thing.

My taxes should be lower now and could be if those freeloaders in the 50% that haven't paid any would do their part for living in society.

The reason I asked whether or not they would go down is that I knew politicians, specifically Democrats, wouldn't do the right thing.

It would be silly to ask those who are so poor they are on welfare to pay taxes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The only thing it furthers is the leech mindset that someone owes you something life. That's never an improvement.

Tell me what about the skills of a person that can only sweep floors, empty trash, and clean toilets or the like is worth $15/hour.

Well I make dramatically more than $15/hr. 15 really isn't very much so yes someone who does those things is worth 15.

Is the problem that you only make 15? You are mad they will make as much as you with little effort? I don't get it.

For the record I would only go to 10.10 and see what happens in the places that went 15.

While I do make significantly more than $15/hour, although my income is based on salary rather than a wage, I won't make that an official claim because I would have to provide proof to you. Since you did make the claim, prove it.

You still didn't say what about those skills make them worth that much. What about skills a 5 year old can do is worth $15/hour?

We've seen what happened in places that went to $15. Try Seattle. The argument was that these people wanted to make a living wage so they could support themselves. After the increase, some were going to their employers and asking for less hours because they were now making too much causing their benefits to be less. In other words, they weren't concerned about making more you getting what they thought was owed to them in handouts funded by someone else.

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

You have a business and are considering several states to move to. You have enough jobs for 150 employees at different levels from starting positions to professional. Do you think you would consider a state or city that has a $15.00 minimum wage?

I guarantee you that for most business owners, that city or state would be the first crossed off the list.

 

[Conservative65]

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

I know what you said. What you haven't said is what makes those skills worth $15/hour.

Many still won't pay taxes. If they do, it's high time. If they don't, your argument is invalid.

Seattle tried $15/hour and those that had been receiving welfare still received some types of it but when they saw making more meant some of the amounts they were getting were reduced, they asked for less hours so they could get more benefits.

Are MY taxes going to go down since some may be paying them and less are on benefits? Unless the answer is yes, your argument is worthless.

Your taxes should go down yes. But that would involve politicians doing the right thing.

My taxes should be lower now and could be if those freeloaders in the 50% that haven't paid any would do their part for living in society.

The reason I asked whether or not they would go down is that I knew politicians, specifically Democrats, wouldn't do the right thing.

It would be silly to ask those who are so poor they are on welfare to pay taxes.

It's silly that they think welfare is owed to them. No one owes them a damn thing. If you want them to have it, give them yours voluntarily or they can fucking do without.

 

[Brain357]

It is the big corps bringing in workers and they gladly work with both parties. Repubs are in control and it continues.

It can't replace workers. Those workers are also customers. They would also be eliminating customers.

It's funny how smart you pretend to be. So far I have owned you.

McDonalds isn't Shackley. It isn't designed to sell to it's workers. They can an are replacing the unskilled help with automation, and this will continue. The workers add very, very little value. Use of automation eleminates mistakes and ends the issue with employee misconduct.

Rich people aren't eating at McDonald's.

When these leeches starting demanding $15/hour for doing a $5/hour job a few years ago, I did my own experiment at the local McDonalds in the city where I work. I went to the same McDonalds every day in the month of July I worked. It was 21 times. I ordered off the dollar menu. Each time, I would alter the order such as no pickles, extra ketchup, etc. There was a new item on the menu at the time. Since I don't eat pickles or mayo, I ordered it without either one only to be told that it didn't come with either one. When I got it, it had both. Out of the 21 times, 11 times produced an incorrect order. I don't know about you but that's not a good record for those demanding over a 100% pay increase.

That is a lot of McDonald's. It is still a statistically insignificant sample size. I've been to good and bad fast food places. I blame the managers if there are lots of errors. Either they hired the wrong people or manage them poorly.

I didn't eat it just did my experiment.

I went to the same one with the same workers at roughly the same time. It's significant when those same ones make mistakes 11/21 times.

The managers aren't the ones filling the orders. I'm sure you do blame the managers. You're good at blaming the higher level when things go bad and giving credit to the lower level when things go well. Had they done a perfect job, you would have said it was all the workers fault with no mention of management.

Did the managers hire the right person? Did they train them properly? Is the manager staffing them properly? So you want to blame everyone but the person in charge making decent money? Sorry but problems should fall on the manager.

 

[Brain357]

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

I know what you said. What you haven't said is what makes those skills worth $15/hour.

Many still won't pay taxes. If they do, it's high time. If they don't, your argument is invalid.

Seattle tried $15/hour and those that had been receiving welfare still received some types of it but when they saw making more meant some of the amounts they were getting were reduced, they asked for less hours so they could get more benefits.

Are MY taxes going to go down since some may be paying them and less are on benefits? Unless the answer is yes, your argument is worthless.

Your taxes should go down yes. But that would involve politicians doing the right thing.

My taxes should be lower now and could be if those freeloaders in the 50% that haven't paid any would do their part for living in society.

The reason I asked whether or not they would go down is that I knew politicians, specifically Democrats, wouldn't do the right thing.

It would be silly to ask those who are so poor they are on welfare to pay taxes.

It's silly that they think welfare is owed to them. No one owes them a damn thing. If you want them to have it, give them yours voluntarily or they can fucking do without.

They can vote. And as inequality grows they have a bigger say.

 

[Brain357]

Well I make dramatically more than $15/hr. 15 really isn't very much so yes someone who does those things is worth 15.

Is the problem that you only make 15? You are mad they will make as much as you with little effort? I don't get it.

For the record I would only go to 10.10 and see what happens in the places that went 15.

While I do make significantly more than $15/hour, although my income is based on salary rather than a wage, I won't make that an official claim because I would have to provide proof to you. Since you did make the claim, prove it.

You still didn't say what about those skills make them worth that much. What about skills a 5 year old can do is worth $15/hour?

We've seen what happened in places that went to $15. Try Seattle. The argument was that these people wanted to make a living wage so they could support themselves. After the increase, some were going to their employers and asking for less hours because they were now making too much causing their benefits to be less. In other words, they weren't concerned about making more you getting what they thought was owed to them in handouts funded by someone else.

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

You have a business and are considering several states to move to. You have enough jobs for 150 employees at different levels from starting positions to professional. Do you think you would consider a state or city that has a $15.00 minimum wage?

I guarantee you that for most business owners, that city or state would be the first crossed off the list.

Yet that doesn't happen.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A worker is worth what the one doing the paying determines he/she is worth when it comes to wages.

Are you saying that someone like you should determine what someone doing the paying should pay? You can do that when it's your money.

So you have no concerns about our slow economy? You realize massive inequality slows an economy right? Do you care out middle class is disappearing?

You do realize that simply handing someone a higher wage isn't the way to improve it?

Let's talk about unequal. I have two master's degrees in my field. That means I've spent thousands upon thousands of hours studying and applying what I've studied in order to earn a higher income. Compare that to the little to nothing someone sweeping floor, emptying trash, and cleaning toilets spent learning something my children have helped do at the house since they were in single digit ages. Since time is money and I've spent much more time than the low skilled worker getting where I am, I don't have a problem make much, much more than they do.

It is a way to improve it.

I assume you make more than minimum wage....

The only thing it furthers is the leech mindset that someone owes you something life. That's never an improvement.

Tell me what about the skills of a person that can only sweep floors, empty trash, and clean toilets or the like is worth $15/hour.

Well I make dramatically more than $15/hr. 15 really isn't very much so yes someone who does those things is worth 15.

Is the problem that you only make 15? You are mad they will make as much as you with little effort? I don't get it.

For the record I would only go to 10.10 and see what happens in the places that went 15.

Let me put it this way: if I made $15.00 per hour and my state increased minimum wage to $15.00 per hour, do you think I would just accept I am now working for minimum wage? Of course not. I would demand my employer pay me at least double.

Employers would have no choice but to honor their workers demands. These are semi-skilled or skilled workers who could walk off the job and work at Burger King for the same money.

 

[Conservative65]

McDonalds isn't Shackley. It isn't designed to sell to it's workers. They can an are replacing the unskilled help with automation, and this will continue. The workers add very, very little value. Use of automation eleminates mistakes and ends the issue with employee misconduct.

Rich people aren't eating at McDonald's.

When these leeches starting demanding $15/hour for doing a $5/hour job a few years ago, I did my own experiment at the local McDonalds in the city where I work. I went to the same McDonalds every day in the month of July I worked. It was 21 times. I ordered off the dollar menu. Each time, I would alter the order such as no pickles, extra ketchup, etc. There was a new item on the menu at the time. Since I don't eat pickles or mayo, I ordered it without either one only to be told that it didn't come with either one. When I got it, it had both. Out of the 21 times, 11 times produced an incorrect order. I don't know about you but that's not a good record for those demanding over a 100% pay increase.

That is a lot of McDonald's. It is still a statistically insignificant sample size. I've been to good and bad fast food places. I blame the managers if there are lots of errors. Either they hired the wrong people or manage them poorly.

I didn't eat it just did my experiment.

I went to the same one with the same workers at roughly the same time. It's significant when those same ones make mistakes 11/21 times.

The managers aren't the ones filling the orders. I'm sure you do blame the managers. You're good at blaming the higher level when things go bad and giving credit to the lower level when things go well. Had they done a perfect job, you would have said it was all the workers fault with no mention of management.

Did the managers hire the right person? Did they train them properly? Is the manager staffing them properly? So you want to blame everyone but the person in charge making decent money? Sorry but problems should fall on the manager.

If things had been a 21/21 correct, would you only give managers credit?

You say you make way more than $15/hour. You still haven't proven it, and won't, but you sure sound like one of the whiners that wants that much for nothing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

While I do make significantly more than $15/hour, although my income is based on salary rather than a wage, I won't make that an official claim because I would have to provide proof to you. Since you did make the claim, prove it.

You still didn't say what about those skills make them worth that much. What about skills a 5 year old can do is worth $15/hour?

We've seen what happened in places that went to $15. Try Seattle. The argument was that these people wanted to make a living wage so they could support themselves. After the increase, some were going to their employers and asking for less hours because they were now making too much causing their benefits to be less. In other words, they weren't concerned about making more you getting what they thought was owed to them in handouts funded by someone else.

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

You have a business and are considering several states to move to. You have enough jobs for 150 employees at different levels from starting positions to professional. Do you think you would consider a state or city that has a $15.00 minimum wage?

I guarantee you that for most business owners, that city or state would be the first crossed off the list.

Yet that doesn't happen.

It doesn't happen because there are few places with $15.00 per hour minimum wage. Wait and see. In a couple of years, it will be reported that no industry would move to such a place. The wage is one thing, but an increased wage means increases in SS and Medicare deductions which the employer has to match, so for the employer, $15.00 per hour is just the start of his loss.

 

[Brain357]

So you have no concerns about our slow economy? You realize massive inequality slows an economy right? Do you care out middle class is disappearing?

You do realize that simply handing someone a higher wage isn't the way to improve it?

Let's talk about unequal. I have two master's degrees in my field. That means I've spent thousands upon thousands of hours studying and applying what I've studied in order to earn a higher income. Compare that to the little to nothing someone sweeping floor, emptying trash, and cleaning toilets spent learning something my children have helped do at the house since they were in single digit ages. Since time is money and I've spent much more time than the low skilled worker getting where I am, I don't have a problem make much, much more than they do.

It is a way to improve it.

I assume you make more than minimum wage....

The only thing it furthers is the leech mindset that someone owes you something life. That's never an improvement.

Tell me what about the skills of a person that can only sweep floors, empty trash, and clean toilets or the like is worth $15/hour.

Well I make dramatically more than $15/hr. 15 really isn't very much so yes someone who does those things is worth 15.

Is the problem that you only make 15? You are mad they will make as much as you with little effort? I don't get it.

For the record I would only go to 10.10 and see what happens in the places that went 15.

Let me put it this way: if I made $15.00 per hour and my state increased minimum wage to $15.00 per hour, do you think I would just accept I am now working for minimum wage? Of course not. I would demand my employer pay me at least double.

Employers would have no choice but to honor their workers demands. These are semi-skilled or skilled workers who could walk off the job and work at Burger King for the same money.

What skilled workers are getting so little?

 

[Conservative65]

I know what you said. What you haven't said is what makes those skills worth $15/hour.

Many still won't pay taxes. If they do, it's high time. If they don't, your argument is invalid.

Seattle tried $15/hour and those that had been receiving welfare still received some types of it but when they saw making more meant some of the amounts they were getting were reduced, they asked for less hours so they could get more benefits.

Are MY taxes going to go down since some may be paying them and less are on benefits? Unless the answer is yes, your argument is worthless.

Your taxes should go down yes. But that would involve politicians doing the right thing.

My taxes should be lower now and could be if those freeloaders in the 50% that haven't paid any would do their part for living in society.

The reason I asked whether or not they would go down is that I knew politicians, specifically Democrats, wouldn't do the right thing.

It would be silly to ask those who are so poor they are on welfare to pay taxes.

It's silly that they think welfare is owed to them. No one owes them a damn thing. If you want them to have it, give them yours voluntarily or they can fucking do without.

They can vote. And as inequality grows they have a bigger say.

So you won't voluntarily do what you say someone else should be forced to do? Not surprised.

Statistically, they don't at about half the level of those of us who actually contribute to society. Like I said before, there are two groups of people. Those that work for a living and contribute to society vs. those who vote for a living and demand society support them.

 

[Conservative65]

While I do make significantly more than $15/hour, although my income is based on salary rather than a wage, I won't make that an official claim because I would have to provide proof to you. Since you did make the claim, prove it.

You still didn't say what about those skills make them worth that much. What about skills a 5 year old can do is worth $15/hour?

We've seen what happened in places that went to $15. Try Seattle. The argument was that these people wanted to make a living wage so they could support themselves. After the increase, some were going to their employers and asking for less hours because they were now making too much causing their benefits to be less. In other words, they weren't concerned about making more you getting what they thought was owed to them in handouts funded by someone else.

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

You have a business and are considering several states to move to. You have enough jobs for 150 employees at different levels from starting positions to professional. Do you think you would consider a state or city that has a $15.00 minimum wage?

I guarantee you that for most business owners, that city or state would be the first crossed off the list.

Yet that doesn't happen.

It absolutely does happen. If it doesn't happen, why are so many companies moving overseas where things aren't as expensive to operate? The answer is that they are going to go where it's cheaper to operate in order to increase profits. If it happens at that level, what makes you think it doesn't happen at the more local level?

 

[Brain357]

Rich people aren't eating at McDonald's.

When these leeches starting demanding $15/hour for doing a $5/hour job a few years ago, I did my own experiment at the local McDonalds in the city where I work. I went to the same McDonalds every day in the month of July I worked. It was 21 times. I ordered off the dollar menu. Each time, I would alter the order such as no pickles, extra ketchup, etc. There was a new item on the menu at the time. Since I don't eat pickles or mayo, I ordered it without either one only to be told that it didn't come with either one. When I got it, it had both. Out of the 21 times, 11 times produced an incorrect order. I don't know about you but that's not a good record for those demanding over a 100% pay increase.

That is a lot of McDonald's. It is still a statistically insignificant sample size. I've been to good and bad fast food places. I blame the managers if there are lots of errors. Either they hired the wrong people or manage them poorly.

I didn't eat it just did my experiment.

I went to the same one with the same workers at roughly the same time. It's significant when those same ones make mistakes 11/21 times.

The managers aren't the ones filling the orders. I'm sure you do blame the managers. You're good at blaming the higher level when things go bad and giving credit to the lower level when things go well. Had they done a perfect job, you would have said it was all the workers fault with no mention of management.

Did the managers hire the right person? Did they train them properly? Is the manager staffing them properly? So you want to blame everyone but the person in charge making decent money? Sorry but problems should fall on the manager.

If things had been a 21/21 correct, would you only give managers credit?

You say you make way more than $15/hour. You still haven't proven it, and won't, but you sure sound like one of the whiners that wants that much for nothing.

No. But you can't just blame the workers. The manager isn't good if they are doing bad, that is certain. Even good workers will have issues if they have a bad manager.

Sure I'll post my w2, don't be such an idiot.

 

[Conservative65]

You do realize that simply handing someone a higher wage isn't the way to improve it?

Let's talk about unequal. I have two master's degrees in my field. That means I've spent thousands upon thousands of hours studying and applying what I've studied in order to earn a higher income. Compare that to the little to nothing someone sweeping floor, emptying trash, and cleaning toilets spent learning something my children have helped do at the house since they were in single digit ages. Since time is money and I've spent much more time than the low skilled worker getting where I am, I don't have a problem make much, much more than they do.

It is a way to improve it.

I assume you make more than minimum wage....

The only thing it furthers is the leech mindset that someone owes you something life. That's never an improvement.

Tell me what about the skills of a person that can only sweep floors, empty trash, and clean toilets or the like is worth $15/hour.

Well I make dramatically more than $15/hr. 15 really isn't very much so yes someone who does those things is worth 15.

Is the problem that you only make 15? You are mad they will make as much as you with little effort? I don't get it.

For the record I would only go to 10.10 and see what happens in the places that went 15.

Let me put it this way: if I made $15.00 per hour and my state increased minimum wage to $15.00 per hour, do you think I would just accept I am now working for minimum wage? Of course not. I would demand my employer pay me at least double.

Employers would have no choice but to honor their workers demands. These are semi-skilled or skilled workers who could walk off the job and work at Burger King for the same money.

What skilled workers are getting so little?

You, based on a claim you have yet to prove, and calling you skilled is a stretch.

 

[Brain357]

15 is very little. I see no reason even unskilled shouldn't make that much. I couldn't live off it.

Now you realize welfare is not going away right? So when workers are paid less they collect welfare and that means more taxes. Why do you think that is a better option than skipping the gov and having money go direct from employer to employee?

You still haven't said what about that skill set is worth $15/hour.

That's the problem. Someone, due to their own doing, has low skills. Perhaps they quit school without a high school diploma or really anything. When they can't make it, they think someone owes them something. If someone is in a place due to their own actions, choices, or doing, I don't have a problem letting them go without. They caused their situation and no one else is responsible for offsetting that.

If they were paid $15/hour, are you saying taxes would go down and there would be less taxes? You said yesterday that someone making more would pay taxes. I proved that wasn't necessarily true. What those situations mean is the person is getting more, not paying income taxes, and the taxes on the rest of us are still the same. Tell me where that benefits ME.

I said 15 is very little so why not pay them? If they don't get paid they will make it up in welfare.

Many will pay taxes and many will collect less welfare. I would think 15 would get them off welfare.

You have a business and are considering several states to move to. You have enough jobs for 150 employees at different levels from starting positions to professional. Do you think you would consider a state or city that has a $15.00 minimum wage?

I guarantee you that for most business owners, that city or state would be the first crossed off the list.

Yet that doesn't happen.

It absolutely does happen. If it doesn't happen, why are so many companies moving overseas where things aren't as expensive to operate? The answer is that they are going to go where it's cheaper to operate in order to increase profits. If it happens at that level, what makes you think it doesn't happen at the more local level?

So then our economy is doomed? There will always be much cheaper countries. You just accept we will fail do you?

 

[Brain357]

It is a way to improve it.

I assume you make more than minimum wage....

The only thing it furthers is the leech mindset that someone owes you something life. That's never an improvement.

Tell me what about the skills of a person that can only sweep floors, empty trash, and clean toilets or the like is worth $15/hour.

Well I make dramatically more than $15/hr. 15 really isn't very much so yes someone who does those things is worth 15.

Is the problem that you only make 15? You are mad they will make as much as you with little effort? I don't get it.

For the record I would only go to 10.10 and see what happens in the places that went 15.

Let me put it this way: if I made $15.00 per hour and my state increased minimum wage to $15.00 per hour, do you think I would just accept I am now working for minimum wage? Of course not. I would demand my employer pay me at least double.

Employers would have no choice but to honor their workers demands. These are semi-skilled or skilled workers who could walk off the job and work at Burger King for the same money.

What skilled workers are getting so little?

You, based on a claim you have yet to prove, and calling you skilled is a stretch.

As I already stated I make far more than that.