Wage Strikes Planned at Fast-Food Outlets

[The Rabbi]

Greed is good! Except when it's destroying the Country from the inside out.

Of course you can't define greed in any meaningful way, or demonstrate that all people are not at some level greedy.
That's what makes you one of the most flatulent posters on here.

 

[G.T.]

Greed is good! Except when it's destroying the Country from the inside out.

Of course you can't define greed in any meaningful way, or demonstrate that all people are not at some level greedy.
That's what makes you one of the most flatulent posters on here.

What do you do for a living
?

 

[Rshermr]

The franchisee writes the freakin' check. They're paying the wage. Not McDonald's.

Jesus.

.

Jesus, you are being ignorant. In many cases, yes, the franchisee writes the check. In others, McDonalds writes the check. You see, and I suspect you know, the biggest mcd's are corporate owned, NOT franchises.
But, as with all businesses, customers provide the demand for the product. Economic demand. Look it up. And that means that NO checks are written without the consumer byuying the product. And without the worker producing the product.

So, did you have a point????????????????????? Or are you just bored???

About 80% of McDonald's restaurants are owned by franchisees. Which is precisely why I said "most". I try to choose my words carefully.

And yes, I'm bored. As I said, it's impossible to have an intellectual discussion about business economics with people who are clearly ignorant of the topic. I tried, it didn't work, I continue to see people say things that are demonstrably incorrect with zero understanding of the issue simply because they're emoting, I became bored.

Ya got me on that one.

.

So, you now admit that the consumer creates the economic demand for the product. In other words, he buys it. And the worker produces the product. The franchisee, or the mcd management, write the check with money from consumers who pay for the product produced by the workers at the mcd rest. And, of course, the franchisee or the owner produces NOTHING. That is, they are non productive members of this supply chain, overall. They are MANAGERS. They do not produce, they simply take the money from consumers and provide the management needed to make money for THEMSELVES. The worker is paid as little as the franchise can get away with. Because, of course, the franchisee and mcd's are in business to MAXIMIZE profits.

There. A quick free education in business economics. Any questions??

 

[The Rabbi]

Greed is good! Except when it's destroying the Country from the inside out.

Of course you can't define greed in any meaningful way, or demonstrate that all people are not at some level greedy.
That's what makes you one of the most flatulent posters on here.

What do you do for a living
?

Pffft. Phew, you farted again.
How about answering the question?

 

[G.T.]

I wasn't asked a question, dipstick

 

[Rshermr]

[


About 80% of McDonald's restaurants are owned by franchisees. Which is precisely why I said "most". I try to choose my words carefully.

And yes, I'm bored. As I said, it's impossible to have an intellectual discussion about business economics with people who are clearly ignorant of the topic. I tried, it didn't work, I continue to see people say things that are demonstrably incorrect with zero understanding of the issue simply because they're emoting, I became bored.

Ya got me on that one.

.

I guess what I get bored with are the plutocrats who destroyed the middle class and the American economy lecturing me about what constitutes good economics.

We had good economics. Most of the work force was unionized and the rich paid their fair s hare in taxes to keep them from accumulating too much of the wealth. And you know what, it worked.

Yeah, there were "McDonalds" jobs for teenagers. It was usually an incentive to get a college education or join a union or sign up for the military so you don't have to do that kind of shit work when you're older.

Today those jobs are worked by 29 year olds, who have to go back to the government for food stamps and medical care. But the Franchisees are making money sometimes, and that's the important thing.

FUck the people who actually DO the work.

So, assuming that your final sentence is indeed based on your belief, then thanks for coming clean. We now can all understand what that twisted bunch of drivel that you tried to pass as honest questions was all about. It HAD no meaning. And you HAVE no meaning. Thanks for that.

 

[expat_panama]

...$15 an hour minimum wage nationwide sounds about right to me.

How about $15,000/hr.?

 

[Rshermr]

I wasn't asked a question, dipstick

Rabbi is just here to throw in some conservative dogma and attack anyone who does not agree with him. He is completely incapable of intellectual conversation. I tend to look at him as fly shit. Gets in your way a little when you are trying to read stuff, but is easily brushed aside.

 

[expat_panama]

...MANAGERS. They do not produce, they simply take the money from consumers...

That's what people say who've never had to manage anything or who've always had everything managed for them. Anyone who's ever had to contend with mismanagement knows how very valuable and important good management is.

 

[G.T.]

Jesus, you are being ignorant. In many cases, yes, the franchisee writes the check. In others, McDonalds writes the check. You see, and I suspect you know, the biggest mcd's are corporate owned, NOT franchises.
But, as with all businesses, customers provide the demand for the product. Economic demand. Look it up. And that means that NO checks are written without the consumer byuying the product. And without the worker producing the product.

So, did you have a point????????????????????? Or are you just bored???

About 80% of McDonald's restaurants are owned by franchisees. Which is precisely why I said "most". I try to choose my words carefully.

And yes, I'm bored. As I said, it's impossible to have an intellectual discussion about business economics with people who are clearly ignorant of the topic. I tried, it didn't work, I continue to see people say things that are demonstrably incorrect with zero understanding of the issue simply because they're emoting, I became bored.

Ya got me on that one.

.

So, you now admit that the consumer creates the economic demand for the product. In other words, he buys it. And the worker produces the product. The franchisee, or the mcd management, write the check with money from consumers who pay for the product produced by the workers at the mcd rest. And, of course, the franchisee or the owner produces NOTHING. That is, they are non productive members of this supply chain, overall. They are MANAGERS. They do not produce, they simply take the money from consumers and provide the management needed to make money for THEMSELVES. The worker is paid as little as the franchise can get away with. Because, of course, the franchisee and mcd's are in business to MAXIMIZE profits.

There. A quick free education in business economics. Any questions??

Yes, the BIG question.

Why has 95% of workers' compensation grown 23% since the 1970's, and executive level compensation grown between 100-300%?

Of course in real dollars execs earn way more. They've earned their prestige. Without them, many of the 95% of America's jobs do not exist.

But what - since the 70's, have execs done to increase their actual value to society and what, since the 70's, has the average accountant, machinist, engineer, small business owner, etc. done wrong to where production and the economy in general has increased at a FAR greater rate than their compensation?

That is the crux of what I see as the problem.

 

[Rshermr]

...MANAGERS. They do not produce, they simply take the money from consumers...

That's what people say who've never had to manage anything or who've always had everything managed for them. Anyone who's ever had to contend with mismanagement knows how very valuable and important good management is.

I have managed. For over 40 years. But I PRODUCED nothing when I managed. Nor did you if and when you managed. Those that worked for you did, I am sure. As my employees did for me.

Now, you misquoted what I said. Which is very dishonest. I did not say that management has little or no value. They are indeed valuable. Just not productive.

 

[G.T.]

...MANAGERS. They do not produce, they simply take the money from consumers...

That's what people say who've never had to manage anything or who've always had everything managed for them. Anyone who's ever had to contend with mismanagement knows how very valuable and important good management is.

I have managed. For over 40 years. But I PRODUCED nothing when I managed. Nor did you if and when you managed. Those that worked for you did, I am sure. As my employees did for me.

Now, you misquoted what I said. Which is very dishonest. I did not say that management has little or no value. They are indeed valuable. Just not productive.

I don't know, man.

I think you can spin it either way. They don't physically produce, but their Management of the producers results in production. So DONT THEY?

I can see it both ways.

 

[Rshermr]

About 80% of McDonald's restaurants are owned by franchisees. Which is precisely why I said "most". I try to choose my words carefully.

And yes, I'm bored. As I said, it's impossible to have an intellectual discussion about business economics with people who are clearly ignorant of the topic. I tried, it didn't work, I continue to see people say things that are demonstrably incorrect with zero understanding of the issue simply because they're emoting, I became bored.

Ya got me on that one.

.

So, you now admit that the consumer creates the economic demand for the product. In other words, he buys it. And the worker produces the product. The franchisee, or the mcd management, write the check with money from consumers who pay for the product produced by the workers at the mcd rest. And, of course, the franchisee or the owner produces NOTHING. That is, they are non productive members of this supply chain, overall. They are MANAGERS. They do not produce, they simply take the money from consumers and provide the management needed to make money for THEMSELVES. The worker is paid as little as the franchise can get away with. Because, of course, the franchisee and mcd's are in business to MAXIMIZE profits.

There. A quick free education in business economics. Any questions??

Yes, the BIG question.

Why has 95% of workers' compensation grown 23% since the 1970's, and executive level compensation grown between 100-300%?

Of course in real dollars execs earn way more. They've earned their prestige. Without them, many of the 95% of America's jobs do not exist.

But what - since the 70's, have execs done to increase their actual value to society and what, since the 70's, has the average accountant, machinist, engineer, small business owner, etc. done wrong to where production and the economy in general has increased at a FAR greater rate than their compensation?

That is the crux of what I see as the problem.

I agree. That IS the problem. The fact is that we have seen massive redistribution of wealth. But not to the poor or the middle class, but to the wealthy.

What have they done to gain more and more and more of the wealth?? They have bought and paid for politicians. They now completely own the republican party, and part of the democratic party. And they are working on the rest of the politicians they do not yet own. Actually, they do not own them, they RENT them. And that is important, and really our only hope.

The problem is huge. It is the crux of the problem that we know as money in politics. But it is also a problem seen on this board over and over. Which is that they have spen hundreds of billions over the years in "educating" as much of the public as they can to their brand of politics.

This Bloomberg article capsulizes the problem well:

Top 1% Got 93% of Income Growth as Rich-Poor Gap Widened - Bloomberg

 

[depotoo]

And an fyi, the ceo of McDonald's actual salary was only $753,000. Less than a million. He was given stock options which are worth only what stock price he can garner through good management, which also affects millions in this country invested in McDonald's stock- as well as those invested in their over 31,000 franchises. He is a keeper of much more than the left would ever give him credit for.

and there are over a billion stock shares issued. Have any idea how many Americans retirement relies on stock prices remaining up? How many lives are affected by his decisions?
And how many people that work for McDonald's have bought stocks through their direct stock options program?

so, let me understand this. You claim he only made $750K. But got a couple million stock options. Did you think that the stock options are of no value.

Here is the thing, me boy. Stock options do not depend on the fact that a ceo does a great job. It would take YEARS, and YEARS, to bring the stock value of McDonalds to really low levels. And that is not going to happen. Because they would fire the ceo, who would leave with the stock options AND a golden parachute, most likely.

Were you born STUPID, or have you worked at getting that way?

are you serious? Seriously, are you really serious? All it would take is one major wrong move and those stock options for millions could become worthless. Enron ring a bell? GM ring a bell?

http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/charts?symbol=US:GM#{"zRange":"9","startDate":"2003-12-6","endDate":"2013-12-6","chartStyle":"mountain","chartCursor":"1","scaleType":"0","yaxisAlign":"right","mode":"pan"}
AND you only discussed one of the many I listed.

 

[Rshermr]

That's what people say who've never had to manage anything or who've always had everything managed for them. Anyone who's ever had to contend with mismanagement knows how very valuable and important good management is.

I have managed. For over 40 years. But I PRODUCED nothing when I managed. Nor did you if and when you managed. Those that worked for you did, I am sure. As my employees did for me.

Now, you misquoted what I said. Which is very dishonest. I did not say that management has little or no value. They are indeed valuable. Just not productive.

I don't know, man.

I think you can spin it either way. They don't physically produce, but their Management of the producers results in production. So DONT THEY?

I can see it both ways.

What I was discussing was business economics. Looking specifically at supply chain. In the case of mcd, what goes in to the production of what the consumer buys. From the bakery for the buns and the meet producers for the hamburger, etc. And the labor to produce. In which case, management and ownership is NOT involved.

I did not say that management is not important. It is. Usually vital. It is just not productive in an economic sense. The job of management is to make the pieces work together. And to look for new processes and methodologies. And to hire, train, and manage the workers who produce the product. But they are not productive.

 

[depotoo]

GM CEO Akerson compensation was $11.1 million, up 44%
Akerson's base salary remained the same as it was in 2011 — $1.7 million
more than double the CEO of McDonald's.

 

[Rshermr]

and there are over a billion stock shares issued. Have any idea how many Americans retirement relies on stock prices remaining up? How many lives are affected by his decisions?
And how many people that work for McDonald's have bought stocks through their direct stock options program?

so, let me understand this. You claim he only made $750K. But got a couple million stock options. Did you think that the stock options are of no value.

Here is the thing, me boy. Stock options do not depend on the fact that a ceo does a great job. It would take YEARS, and YEARS, to bring the stock value of McDonalds to really low levels. And that is not going to happen. Because they would fire the ceo, who would leave with the stock options AND a golden parachute, most likely.

Were you born STUPID, or have you worked at getting that way?

are you serious? Seriously, are you really serious? All it would take is one major wrong move and those stock options for millions could become worthless. Enron ring a bell? GM ring a bell?

GM - Stock chart - MSN Money
AND you only discussed one of the many I listed.

Yup. I am serious.

McD's is not gm or enron. Quite difference, me boy. And in the case of enron and gm, it took YEARS. The fact that you just heard about it after the fact had nothing at all to do with what was going on for years, in the case of gm, as they mismanaged their company. But it was going on in the 1970's. And the management who owned stock options {the general public and 401K's do not own stock OPTIONS. They own stocks) had all the time they needed to exercise their options. And make MILLIONS.

Read. It will help. Ignorance is curable.

By the time that gm, for instance, tubed, the vast majority of stock options had been exercised under the control of the investment managers used by the managers who owned the stock options.

 

[depotoo]

so, let me understand this. You claim he only made $750K. But got a couple million stock options. Did you think that the stock options are of no value.

Here is the thing, me boy. Stock options do not depend on the fact that a ceo does a great job. It would take YEARS, and YEARS, to bring the stock value of McDonalds to really low levels. And that is not going to happen. Because they would fire the ceo, who would leave with the stock options AND a golden parachute, most likely.

Were you born STUPID, or have you worked at getting that way?

are you serious? Seriously, are you really serious? All it would take is one major wrong move and those stock options for millions could become worthless. Enron ring a bell? GM ring a bell?

GM - Stock chart - MSN Money
AND you only discussed one of the many I listed.

Yup. I am serious.

McD's is not gm or enron. Quite difference, me boy. And in the case of enron and gm, it took YEARS. The fact that you just heard about it after the fact had nothing at all to do with what was going on for years, in the case of gm, as they mismanaged their company. But it was going on in the 1970's. And the management who owned stock options {the general public and 401K's do not own stock OPTIONS. They own stocks) had all the time they needed to exercise their options. And make MILLIONS.

Read. It will help. Ignorance is curable.

By the time that gm, for instance, tubed, the vast majority of stock options had been exercised under the control of the investment managers used by the managers who owned the stock options.

after the fact? Really? No, you are being selective in your outrage, plain and simply. And so far as the options versus stocks, you just might want to educate yourself. Because you are wrong.

Read. It will help. Ignorance is curable

 

[Rshermr]

GM CEO Akerson compensation was $11.1 million, up 44%
Akerson's base salary remained the same as it was in 2011 — $1.7 million
more than double the CEO of McDonald's.

AND, the ceo of McDonalds, James A. Skinner, had compensation for 2012 of.......$27,741,408. As with most ceo's, his actual salary is only a very small portion of what he makes.

 

[Defiant1]

I have managed. For over 40 years. But I PRODUCED nothing when I managed. Nor did you if and when you managed. Those that worked for you did, I am sure. As my employees did for me.

Now, you misquoted what I said. Which is very dishonest. I did not say that management has little or no value. They are indeed valuable. Just not productive.

I don't know, man.

I think you can spin it either way. They don't physically produce, but their Management of the producers results in production. So DONT THEY?

I can see it both ways.

What I was discussing was business economics. Looking specifically at supply chain. In the case of mcd, what goes in to the production of what the consumer buys. From the bakery for the buns and the meet producers for the hamburger, etc. And the labor to produce. In which case, management and ownership is NOT involved.

I did not say that management is not important. It is. Usually vital. It is just not productive in an economic sense. The job of management is to make the pieces work together. And to look for new processes and methodologies. And to hire, train, and manage the workers who produce the product. But they are not productive.

Is your utopia for everyone to be "middle class?"