See we told you.. Mcdonalds is ordering 7K touch screen to replace cashiers

[rightwinger]

Let's look at it this way. The taxpayer is subsidizing their profit margin by allowing them to pay an artificially low wage. A wage where their own workers could not afford to live in their community

Very well put.

No, the taxpayers are subsidizing a person who hasn't the skills or ambition to get a job that pays enough for their needs, or to get a second or third part time MW job. The MW job is not a head-of-household job. It's meant for a teen living with their parents, or older adult wishing to supplement the household income.

Again you offer up a solution where an individual can possibly improve his lot in life and assume it applies to the tens of millions of Americans who no longer earn enough to support themselves.
Tens of millions of workers cannot get second and third jobs. Tens of millions of workers cannot get more skills to move up the employment ladder
The problem is that low level workers do not earn enough to support their families.......the answer is not Get a second job

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So what you're saying -- and this is a question, I don't want to put words in your mouth, er, keyboard -- is that it is the responsibility of a business to pay someone whatever it takes to support their family.

Is this correct?

.

It is hard to respond in an absolute context. We have a major portion of our population that does not earn sufficient wages to support a family. The answer is not that those tens of millions of workers need to hunker down and work harder.
We are not just talking McDonalds workers who earn $7.25 an hour but single mothers struggling in a factory at $10 an hour.
If the answer was.....everyone is taking a hit in this economy. Then there is not much more we can ask a business to do
But business is making money, profits are up, Executive compensation is through the roof. Prosperity of our corporations is not trickling down to the workers at all levels
So the answer is .....Yes, we should demand that our employers pay more and the taxpayers should pay less

I have so many questions, but I'll ask this one:

What happens to those businesses that aren't making any profits, or when a business that is currently making a profit does not in the future?

.

Liberals will celebrate their demise and blame it on the company not being competitive rather than realizing their own regulation (as usual) kills jobs.

 

[zeke]

So what you're saying -- and this is a question, I don't want to put words in your mouth, er, keyboard -- is that it is the responsibility of a business to pay someone whatever it takes to support their family.

Is this correct?

.

It is hard to respond in an absolute context. We have a major portion of our population that does not earn sufficient wages to support a family. The answer is not that those tens of millions of workers need to hunker down and work harder.
We are not just talking McDonalds workers who earn $7.25 an hour but single mothers struggling in a factory at $10 an hour.
If the answer was.....everyone is taking a hit in this economy. Then there is not much more we can ask a business to do
But business is making money, profits are up, Executive compensation is through the roof. Prosperity of our corporations is not trickling down to the workers at all levels
So the answer is .....Yes, we should demand that our employers pay more and the taxpayers should pay less

I have so many questions, but I'll ask this one:

What happens to those businesses that aren't making any profits, or when a business that is currently making a profit does not in the future?

.

Well Mac, those business's will have to fail. It is the American way. Unless they are bankers, then the government will bail them out.

But really Mac, if a viable business is operating on such a shoestring that 3% of their employees receiving a raise of 2 dollars an hour will cause the business to fail, how viable was the business to begin with?

But don't you worry your little head about the CEO's Mac. They will get out with their golden parachutes intact. Hell maybe even get a bonus for shutting down the company.
And moving it to China.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Very well put.

No, the taxpayers are subsidizing a person who hasn't the skills or ambition to get a job that pays enough for their needs, or to get a second or third part time MW job. The MW job is not a head-of-household job. It's meant for a teen living with their parents, or older adult wishing to supplement the household income.

Again you offer up a solution where an individual can possibly improve his lot in life and assume it applies to the tens of millions of Americans who no longer earn enough to support themselves.
Tens of millions of workers cannot get second and third jobs. Tens of millions of workers cannot get more skills to move up the employment ladder
The problem is that low level workers do not earn enough to support their families.......the answer is not Get a second job

Yes, that is the answer. Stop excusing laziness

 

[beagle9]

McDonald's orders 7,000 touchscreen kiosks to replace cashiers - Neowin


YOu wanna walk out on your job for more money. Guess what you now might lose your jobs all because of UNIONS who are greedy..

Oh yeah, well I think the feds should prepare to raise taxes on these corporations then, and not on us. WHY ? Because when these fallen employee's come screaming to the feds doorsteps for help, then the feds are going to have to help them, so who has won or who loses in the end ? WE LOSE AS A NATION ON WHOLE! The feds have to do as they have to do, and that is to always win against these kinds of crybaby corporations who want to use the feds as a subsidizer for their industries, and this when they do these kinds of things to their employee's as they have been doing lately or for sometime now it seems.

Hey, don't we as citizens scream to keep the federal budget in line always, and to keep our taxes within reason ? I mean aren't we the same as the shareholders are, for whom are screaming to keep their bottom lines for their investments in corporations "lucrative", otherwise for them as the investors of those corporations ? So shouldn't we as for whom are invested in America's bottom line, also direct the feds by representation of us as investors in America, to then go after those who threaten our bottom lines in these ways also, especially when they didn't have to threaten our bottom lines in these ways as they do ? I think so.

It's time for the feds to get wiser to the game that is being played on them by these super rich corporations on all of us, and to somehow get them out of our offices crying so much as they do in justification of. If they want to play hard ball, then the feds should weigh in on the impact of their hard ball games, and then they should adjust accordingly also to these games. Go ahead McDonalds, but America has a reaction as well towards these things, so be ready for that one also.

It's high time we get out from under the tyranny of corporations upon our system in these ways, I mean don't yall think so ? I mean should we have to continue to absorb the impacts of these kinds of tactics upon all of us as taxpayers who will take the hit in it all, therefore making all of our taxes go sky high while the rich who own and run these corporations are crying for less and less taxation on themselves ? I mean they threaten the government to lower their taxes all the time, in so that they will grace us with their presence in our communities, and then offer their products in our communities.

I ask this now, does our frequenting their establishments (making them what they are), mean nothing to them in the end ? Why are they so hostile to that which has made them, because people could very easily boycott them now, as the choices are huge in competition against them these days. So why won't they establish a proper pay grade system, where as the employee has hope that he or she won't be stuck for over two years at a minimum wage level, as to be found in a position in the company like that or if that is what the case is maybe ? When they had put the effort in to get a raise as it should be in the situation, and this per their contributions in this manor, shouldn't they get a raise or raises as the incentive to stay on ? If MCDONALDS had a system of pay like it should be, then there would be no problem, but undoubtedly they have been working people at the same levels for to long, and therefore they have been dis-incentivizing the want by an employee to want to stay at these levels for to long of a time period, because it holds no future in them raising themselves out of poverty, and they (the employee's) have seen this as the case now being found within these types of jobs I guess or they wouldn't be striking in these ways.

 

[rightwinger]

So what you're saying -- and this is a question, I don't want to put words in your mouth, er, keyboard -- is that it is the responsibility of a business to pay someone whatever it takes to support their family.

Is this correct?

.

It is hard to respond in an absolute context. We have a major portion of our population that does not earn sufficient wages to support a family. The answer is not that those tens of millions of workers need to hunker down and work harder.
We are not just talking McDonalds workers who earn $7.25 an hour but single mothers struggling in a factory at $10 an hour.
If the answer was.....everyone is taking a hit in this economy. Then there is not much more we can ask a business to do
But business is making money, profits are up, Executive compensation is through the roof. Prosperity of our corporations is not trickling down to the workers at all levels
So the answer is .....Yes, we should demand that our employers pay more and the taxpayers should pay less

I have so many questions, but I'll ask this one:

What happens to those businesses that aren't making any profits, or when a business that is currently making a profit does not in the future?

.

That is a good question. Should we have welfare for businesses that can only survive if taxpayers support their workforce?

 

[007]

Pretty simple what's going on here folks... on the one hand we have conservatives that believe if you want to make a decent living wage, you have to further your education and work for it.

Then on the other hand we have the give me something for nothing liberals that believe they shouldn't have to do jack shit to get paid more money. They believe that they're entitled to something for nothing, this is what they've been taught. The obama-phone, SNAPS, welfare, sudsidized, afirmative action, ACORN, EBT card carrying leftist, who in this day and age aren't much different than the communists of China or Cuba. They want something, for nothing, and that's why their santa claus was elected for a second term.

We have half a nation full of fat ass, lazy, beholding, entitlement class people folks. They figure the rich OWE them JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE RICH. They don't believe they should have to do ANYTHING to DESERVE MORE MONEY. They just WANT IT.

Sick sons a bitches, and they are ruining this country with their LAZINESS and ILLITERATE ways. An entire segment of the population that is nothing more than LEACHES.

 

[Mac1958]

.

I don't know about anyone else, but this thread has been very instructive for me.

We really are talking about the individual being relieved of a level of personal responsibility, with an employer taking that load on in addition to trying to maximize shareholder value. Then, the government is there to enforce. In America.

Let your mind wander through the potential ramifications here.

I'm beginning to wish I hadn't seen this thread. I would have thought I'd have heard this from some guy screaming on the radio with a conspiracy theory, but it's all right here.

Not even sure what else to say.

.

 

[tap4154]

Very well put.

No, the taxpayers are subsidizing a person who hasn't the skills or ambition to get a job that pays enough for their needs, or to get a second or third part time MW job. The MW job is not a head-of-household job. It's meant for a teen living with their parents, or older adult wishing to supplement the household income.

Again you offer up a solution where an individual can possibly improve his lot in life and assume it applies to the tens of millions of Americans who no longer earn enough to support themselves.
Tens of millions of workers cannot get second and third jobs. Tens of millions of workers cannot get more skills to move up the employment ladder
The problem is that low level workers do not earn enough to support their families.......the answer is not Get a second job

Maybe they should have thought about that before having ten kids?

In any case, it's not a franchise owner's responsibility or duty to just pay them more than their labor is worth to make up for their lack of education, ambition, skills, or poor decision making.

 

[Katzndogz]

Very well put.

No, the taxpayers are subsidizing a person who hasn't the skills or ambition to get a job that pays enough for their needs, or to get a second or third part time MW job. The MW job is not a head-of-household job. It's meant for a teen living with their parents, or older adult wishing to supplement the household income.

Again you offer up a solution where an individual can possibly improve his lot in life and assume it applies to the tens of millions of Americans who no longer earn enough to support themselves.
Tens of millions of workers cannot get second and third jobs. Tens of millions of workers cannot get more skills to move up the employment ladder
The problem is that low level workers do not earn enough to support their families.......the answer is not Get a second job

If they cannot make enough money to support families, they should not have families they cannot support.

 

[rightwinger]

Yep. The problem is the nature of the work and the value the employee brings to the employer.

There are going to be far fewer McDonald's employees supporting a family on their wages than Apple, for example. The obvious reason is skill set. I asked before, and I can never get a straight answer, how many people are really trying to support a family at McDonald's?

You folks are simply refusing to honestly address three critical questions:

Why is it the responsibility of a corporation - whose only objective is to maximize shareholder value -- to base pay on some arbitrary "living wage" that varies wildly from employee to employee?

Why do you not acknowledge and promote the fact that people are capable of improving their own lives via workplace advancement, new employment, and/or improving their own skill set to make themselves more attractive on the employment market?

Isn't it the fundamental responsibility of an able-bodied adult to make a higher income than their monthly costs so that they can avoid needing public assistance, a drain on our tax money? How could that possibly be someone else's problem?

.

about (5) percent of workers are low wage

then there is a subset of low wage earners with children

then there is a subset of low wage earners with children without other family member with income

it certainly is a low number most likely below 5 million

which of course when 5 million lose insurance in is insignificant according to the white house

and this not including the subset of minimum wage earners

in 2012 3.7 million Americans reported earning $7.25 or less per hour—just 2.9 percent of all workers in the United States

Is that all?

Then it should be no problem if we raise the minimum wage? It is only four million workers

 

[rightwinger]

No, the taxpayers are subsidizing a person who hasn't the skills or ambition to get a job that pays enough for their needs, or to get a second or third part time MW job. The MW job is not a head-of-household job. It's meant for a teen living with their parents, or older adult wishing to supplement the household income.

Again you offer up a solution where an individual can possibly improve his lot in life and assume it applies to the tens of millions of Americans who no longer earn enough to support themselves.
Tens of millions of workers cannot get second and third jobs. Tens of millions of workers cannot get more skills to move up the employment ladder
The problem is that low level workers do not earn enough to support their families.......the answer is not Get a second job

If they cannot make enough money to support families, they should not have families they cannot support.

What if they had those families while they were serving in the military and now cannot get a job that can support their families on? It is happening to hundreds of thousand of vets
What if they had those children in a marriage and the scum bag husband skipped out?

 

[rightwinger]

No, the taxpayers are subsidizing a person who hasn't the skills or ambition to get a job that pays enough for their needs, or to get a second or third part time MW job. The MW job is not a head-of-household job. It's meant for a teen living with their parents, or older adult wishing to supplement the household income.

Again you offer up a solution where an individual can possibly improve his lot in life and assume it applies to the tens of millions of Americans who no longer earn enough to support themselves.
Tens of millions of workers cannot get second and third jobs. Tens of millions of workers cannot get more skills to move up the employment ladder
The problem is that low level workers do not earn enough to support their families.......the answer is not Get a second job

Maybe they should have thought about that before having ten kids?

In any case, it's not a franchise owner's responsibility or duty to just pay them more than their labor is worth to make up for their lack of education, ambition, skills, or poor decision making.

Again you offer up a single worker solution to a problem affecting tens of millions of workers

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Applebees is doing the same thing.
DailyTech - Applebee's to Place Tablets at Each Table for Paying the Check, Ordering Food

Can't say that I blame em....

A waiter is part of the reason people go out to eat.

Not when you're talking about low end restaurants.
I do agree with that point though. It's one of the reasons I go to restaurants as well.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

about (5) percent of workers are low wage

then there is a subset of low wage earners with children

then there is a subset of low wage earners with children without other family member with income

it certainly is a low number most likely below 5 million

which of course when 5 million lose insurance in is insignificant according to the white house

and this not including the subset of minimum wage earners

in 2012 3.7 million Americans reported earning $7.25 or less per hour—just 2.9 percent of all workers in the United States

Is that all?

Then it should be no problem if we raise the minimum wage? It is only four million workers

4 million who make or prepare products for everyone else who will now pay a higer price for the same cheap product.

You're not very bright. Why is it so many of you liberals think everything exists in its own little bubble?

 

[tap4154]

Pretty simple what's going on here folks... on the one hand we have conservatives that believe if you want to make a decent living wage, you have to further your education and work for it.

Then on the other hand we have the give me something for nothing liberals that believe they shouldn't have to do jack shit to get paid more money. They believe that they're entitled to something for nothing, this is what they've been taught. The obama-phone, SNAPS, welfare, sudsidized, afirmative action, ACORN, EBT card carrying leftist, who in this day and age aren't much different than the communists of China or Cuba. They want something, for nothing, and that's why their santa claus was elected for a second term.

We have half a nation full of fat ass, lazy, beholding, entitlement class people folks. They figure the rich OWE them JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE RICH. They don't believe they should have to do ANYTHING to DESERVE MORE MONEY. They just WANT IT.

Sick sons a bitches, and they are ruining this country with their LAZINESS and ILLITERATE ways. An entire segment of the population that is nothing more than LEACHES.

Talk to any teacher in a poor district. My sister is one. Kids are being brought up to EXPECT free breakfast, lunch AND dinner. They're being taught that there's no shame in being a state dependent, in fact it's just a fact of life which they carry to adulthood. They're also taught that they don't have to try very hard to learn, and everyone gets a trophy, win or lose.

Dem/union-run gov't schools are spitting out generations of gov't dependents, instead of challenging them and their parents to excel and be personally responsible, as they did back when we older folks were in the public system. In short, they're churning out mindless, helpless Democrats.

 

[Wry Catcher]

McDonald's orders 7,000 touchscreen kiosks to replace cashiers - Neowin


YOu wanna walk out on your job for more money. Guess what you now might lose your jobs all because of UNIONS who are greedy..

Kool, now the Republicans have one more reason not to oppose immigration reform, they can concentrate on ending the minimum wage, privatizing Social Security, ending Medicare and Medicaid, and putting a stop to paying people who don't work (Unemployment). Next they can make all corporations and LLP's citizens, work to arm every citizen with at least one hand-gun for personal protection, make sexual activity between adults illegal unless they are provided a certificate by the government and repeal all amendments to the which conflict Constitution not in effect in 1789.

What a wonderful world that will be.

 

[Wry Catcher]

McDonald's orders 7,000 touchscreen kiosks to replace cashiers - Neowin


YOu wanna walk out on your job for more money. Guess what you now might lose your jobs all because of UNIONS who are greedy..

Kool, now the Republicans have one more reason not to oppose immigration reform, they can concentrate on ending the minimum wage, privatizing Social Security, ending Medicare and Medicaid, and putting a stop to paying people who don't work (Unemployment). Next they can make all corporations and LLPs citizens, work to arm every citizen with at least one hand-gun for personal protection, make sexual activity between adults illegal unless they are provided a certificate by the government, make labor unions illegal and repeal all amendments to the which conflict Constitution not in effect in 1789.

What a wonderful world that will be. We can become the Union of Capitalist Republic, with our Representatives not elected but appointed by the Plutocatbureau, whose membership is limited to those who have assets over $50.000,000 and are WASP's.

 

[william the wie]

RW, your problem is solved. The ACA has created incentives for the poor to migrate to states who hold your position and for the money grubbing evil rich people to leave those states. Do some victory laps.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

McDonald's orders 7,000 touchscreen kiosks to replace cashiers - Neowin


YOu wanna walk out on your job for more money. Guess what you now might lose your jobs all because of UNIONS who are greedy..

Kool, now the Republicans have one more reason not to oppose immigration reform, they can concentrate on ending the minimum wage, privatizing Social Security, ending Medicare and Medicaid, and putting a stop to paying people who don't work (Unemployment). Next they can make all corporations and LLP's citizens, work to arm every citizen with at least one hand-gun for personal protection, make sexual activity between adults illegal unless they are provided a certificate by the government and repeal all amendments to the which conflict Constitution not in effect in 1789.

What a wonderful world that will be.

That makes sense, claimed no one ever.