Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Smart of you not to show a link because a follow up study showed that the new jobs were all in Pennsylvania across the river....an increase in the minimum wage (.80 cents) in NJ resulted in a 2.76 full-time equivalent rise in employment...
Look --if some guy's labor results in a loss to the company above a certain level, there is no minimum wage law that can possibly make the hiring worth while. If it could, then hey --why wouldn't you want a $million/hr min. wage?
So, let me understand this. You think that gm went down the tube in a really fast manner. And that it was not obvious that they were in trouble for YEARS.Yup. I am serious.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.
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
No. Did you think I said so??? Or are you just trying to change my words to fit your agenda??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 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.
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?"
Yup. I am serious.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.
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
Good for you....managed. For over 40 years. But I PRODUCED nothing ...
It is not producing. It is managing. Good managing, I hope. But the manager hired and produced nothing. And if he hired another manager, that person produced nothing. Workers produce. Management manages. Both functions are necessary and important.Good for you....managed. For over 40 years. But I PRODUCED nothing ...
It's like the argument a hundred years ago when farmers said factory workers were useless 'cause if they didn't make anything we could eat they didn't make anything important. Back then half the American workforce was farming now it's half a percent and we 'produce' more food than ever.
When an owner hires a manager he either gets a big improvement in production or he finds a different manager. If that ain't 'producing' it'll do until some real 'producing' comes along.
That's the idea some folks have tossed around, and what happens in real life is raising the min. wage comes with fewer jobs. There's no getting around the fact that a higher price make it hard to sell something....increase the minimum wage, which translates into increased incomes, it will result in more consumption, then firms will hire more people...
That's the idea some folks have tossed around, and what happens in real life is raising the min. wage comes with fewer jobs. There's no getting around the fact that a higher price make it hard to sell something....increase the minimum wage, which translates into increased incomes, it will result in more consumption, then firms will hire more people...
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.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.
.
There. A quick free education in business economics. Any questions??
But, of course, you lie. Or maybe not. Maybe you are just stupid. At any rate, raising the min wage does not decrease jobs. At least to any meaningful degree. Which is why you can not produce a impartial source supporting your position.That's the idea some folks have tossed around, and what happens in real life is raising the min. wage comes with fewer jobs. There's no getting around the fact that a higher price make it hard to sell something....increase the minimum wage, which translates into increased incomes, it will result in more consumption, then firms will hire more people...
Uh, you are too stupid for words. You just said what I have agreed with. That management has many functions that are HIGHLY VALUABLE. And that they do indeed provide the capital needed. Are you arguing with yourself???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.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.
.
There. A quick free education in business economics. Any questions??
Then why dont the workers just bypass the management and set out on their own to sell burgers for profit? OH, I know why! Because they have no capital. They can not purchase the real estate, the fixtures needed to make the burgers, house the product, nor can they purchase the goods needed to make the burgers.
That's why they are employees who flip and then package the products owned by the "managers". The employees are paid to flip and package the burgers. The "manager" keeps inventory, maintains/repairs tools, places orders, hires more flippers and sweepers and manages the holdings to make all of this happen.
Your simplistic view in on par with your simplistic mind.
Dick Slaps.
Right. Then you would agree that we need to stimulate the job market. Create more meaningful jobs so that people are not forced to take these poor paying jobs.The fault of having people trying to live on a fast food salary and support families on those wages is with the business hiring people who clearly should not be working there in the first place. Don't hire breadwinners. Keep those jobs for what they were intended to be, for kids entering the work force, retirees exiting the work force and someone looking for a little second income.
Uh, you are too stupid for words. You just said what I have agreed with. That management has many functions that are HIGHLY VALUABLE. And that they do indeed provide the capital needed. Are you arguing with yourself???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??
Then why dont the workers just bypass the management and set out on their own to sell burgers for profit? OH, I know why! Because they have no capital. They can not purchase the real estate, the fixtures needed to make the burgers, house the product, nor can they purchase the goods needed to make the burgers.
That's why they are employees who flip and then package the products owned by the "managers". The employees are paid to flip and package the burgers. The "manager" keeps inventory, maintains/repairs tools, places orders, hires more flippers and sweepers and manages the holdings to make all of this happen.
Your simplistic view in on par with your simplistic mind.
Dick Slaps.
I simply said they do not produce. As opposed to you who seems to believe that labor has no real value, and are lucky to have a poor paying job, I simply provided a bit of reality that you want to avoid. They provide the productivity. Not just flipping burgers as you so simplistically suggest, but provide all of the functionality that running the day to day operations of the rest. requires.
Really, you seem to like to spend a lot of your time arguing with yourself. I suspect that you need to get out. Playing with yourself can make you blind.
This sounds contradictory so let's sort it out for clarity....Whenever we have a recession, firms don't hire and lay people off to decrease costs. Labor is an input cost. Firms will only hire if they have a boost in sales or an expectation of increased sales...
Good for you. that is your opinion. You are welcome to it. But in an economic, and real sense, they manage, they organize, they plan, and many other things. But they do not produce in an economic sense. Had you EVER studied economics you would understand that.Uh, you are too stupid for words. You just said what I have agreed with. That management has many functions that are HIGHLY VALUABLE. And that they do indeed provide the capital needed. Are you arguing with yourself???Then why dont the workers just bypass the management and set out on their own to sell burgers for profit? OH, I know why! Because they have no capital. They can not purchase the real estate, the fixtures needed to make the burgers, house the product, nor can they purchase the goods needed to make the burgers.
That's why they are employees who flip and then package the products owned by the "managers". The employees are paid to flip and package the burgers. The "manager" keeps inventory, maintains/repairs tools, places orders, hires more flippers and sweepers and manages the holdings to make all of this happen.
Your simplistic view in on par with your simplistic mind.
Dick Slaps.
I simply said they do not produce. As opposed to you who seems to believe that labor has no real value, and are lucky to have a poor paying job, I simply provided a bit of reality that you want to avoid. They provide the productivity. Not just flipping burgers as you so simplistically suggest, but provide all of the functionality that running the day to day operations of the rest. requires.
Really, you seem to like to spend a lot of your time arguing with yourself. I suspect that you need to get out. Playing with yourself can make you blind.
So you some how separate production from production.
You stated that managers and owners produce "NOTHING". That's not only wrong, but now you're saying you didn't say it. Without managers and owners, there are no flippers. There are no people like you who sweep the floor at night. There are no cashiers. There is nothing.
I'd say that owners and managers produce everything inside of their respective business. Including the jobs for people like you who sweep late at night.
It make me insane that some people have actually recommended abolishing the minimum wage. The problem in the US is lack of demand. Firms simply wont hire until they have increased sales. Consumers wont spend until they have jobs. Most of the numbers Ive seen say that between 250,000-300,000 jobs per month need to be created to induce a broad economic recovery. The private sector will not hire until we have demand in the economy.
If we increase the minimum wage, which translates into increased incomes, it will result in more consumption, then firms will hire more people. We have to realize wages are input costs and a source of demand.
By the way, Ive read BS in the thread about how the competitiveness of wages would be reduced from an increased minimum wage. The may apply to other sectors, such as health care, IT, manufacturing, or banking, where people earn much more than the minimum wage. Were talking about fast food workers, cahiers, and other low-skilled jobs in the labor market.
Good for you. that is your opinion. You are welcome to it. But in an economic, and real sense, they manage, they organize, they plan, and many other things. But they do not produce in an economic sense. Had you EVER studied economics you would understand that.Uh, you are too stupid for words. You just said what I have agreed with. That management has many functions that are HIGHLY VALUABLE. And that they do indeed provide the capital needed. Are you arguing with yourself???
I simply said they do not produce. As opposed to you who seems to believe that labor has no real value, and are lucky to have a poor paying job, I simply provided a bit of reality that you want to avoid. They provide the productivity. Not just flipping burgers as you so simplistically suggest, but provide all of the functionality that running the day to day operations of the rest. requires.
Really, you seem to like to spend a lot of your time arguing with yourself. I suspect that you need to get out. Playing with yourself can make you blind.
So you some how separate production from production.
You stated that managers and owners produce "NOTHING". That's not only wrong, but now you're saying you didn't say it. Without managers and owners, there are no flippers. There are no people like you who sweep the floor at night. There are no cashiers. There is nothing.
I'd say that owners and managers produce everything inside of their respective business. Including the jobs for people like you who sweep late at night.
So, no, I contradicted nothing I said. You just seem to have a problem with comprehension. Which I suspect is self imposed.
The fault of having people trying to live on a fast food salary and support families on those wages is with the business hiring people who clearly should not be working there in the first place. Don't hire breadwinners. Keep those jobs for what they were intended to be, for kids entering the work force, retirees exiting the work force and someone looking for a little second income.
