Why should a hamburger flipper make the same as a highly skilled worker???

[LoneLaugher]

From Matt Walsh Blog on the Blaze....
I've excerpted a few paragraphs but there is so much more that the entire blog should be read!

Dear fast food workers,

It’s come to my attention that many of you, supposedly in 230 cities across the country, are walking out of your jobs today and protesting for $15 an hour. You earnestly believe — indeed, you’ve been led to this conclusion by pandering politicians and liberal pundits who possess neither the slightest grasp of the basic rules of economics nor even the faintest hint of integrity — that your entry level gig pushing buttons on a cash register at Taco Bell ought to earn you double the current federal minimum wage.

I’m aware, of course, that not all of you feel this way. Many of you might consider your position as Whopper Assembler to be rather a temporary situation, not a career path, and you plan on moving on and up not by holding a poster board with “Give me more money!” scrawled across it, but by working hard and being reliable. To be clear, I am not addressing the folks in this latter camp. They are doing what needs to be done, and I respect that.

Instead, I want to talk to those of you who actually consider yourselves entitled to close to a $29 thousand a year full time salary for doing a job that requires no skill, no expertise, and no education;
those who think a fry cook ought to earn an entry level income similar to a dental assistant;
those who insist the guy putting the lettuce on my Big Mac ought to make more than the Emergency Medical Technician who saves lives for a living; those who believe you should automatically be able to “live comfortably,” as if “comfort” is a human right.

To those in this category, I have a few things I need to say, for your own sake:

First, let me start with a story. It’s anecdotal, obviously, but then this whole #FightFor15 “movement” is based entirely on anecdotes.

I submit mine: I’m 28 years old now. I started working when I was about 15. I did hourly, customer service-type stuff at grocery stores, snowball stands, and pizza places, never making much more than the bare minimum at any of them.

When I was 20 I moved out of the house and got my first job in radio. Starting out as a rock DJ in Delaware, I made $17,000 a year, or about $8 an hour. I lived off of that, earning a few small raises through the years — having to eat fewer meals, buy fewer things, and, God forbid, even forgo cable and internet access in my apartment — right up to when I got married at 25.

Fast Food Workers You Don t Deserve 15 an Hour to Flip Burgers and That s OK TheBlaze.com

Because the only reason they are flipping hamburgers is some rich jack shit decided to discriminate against them and prevent them from getting a good job, but for some reason the trained workers was liked by the rich bastard who owns his company and he decided not to discriminate against them.

Don't you know everyone wants to succeed and it's just a question whether the wealthy and the corporations allow us to?

You are aware of the Jews controlling the international financial community, aren't you? You do know that basics of the world?

Awesome!! You and NOLA ought to open a strawman factory. You'll make a killing!

 

[Moonglow]

Because there is no reason someone working 40 hours/week should be struggling to make ends meet.

The assumption made in this article is that they are living high off the hog. That is simply not the case.

Not to mention people who learn a skill are not paid well as indicated in the article. People deserve to be able to survive when they work 40 hours/week. Home healthcare workers learned a skill yet are paid $9/hour at best.

I also find it ironic is the Republican party talk about the "dignity of work" when passing laws to restrict government assistance. Then when workers want to get a wage that would help them survive by working, Republicans are strictly oppose to it.

So how is their dignity to work if no matter how hard they work, they will never get by?

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

Well, seriously, if your so concerned that people who obviously have zero skills, should be paid enough to live comfortably, why not go all in? What's the matter? You that gutless? Come on man... go for the gold comrade!!!

Do you always answer your own post with disparaging remarks?

 

[kaz]

I bet if the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor then it will make sense.

You speak as if there is some fixed value of ones labor and that everyone naturally gets paid that value.....no less and no more. It's a weird thing to consider.

First of all, you're stupid. He was saying when the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor you will be unemployed. Again, yes, Seawytch, you people can't read, it's incredible.

Second, there is a vlue of one's labor everyone naturally gets paid. It's set by a free market. Seriously, econ101 should be a basic high school requirement. The Democratic party would be devasated

 

[Asclepias]

There are three million Americans employed in food prep and service. They make about $9.10 per hour on average.

Hard working people making shit wages.

It's going to change, nutters.

If it changes expect the the prices to go up. If the prices go up people will stop buying. If people stop buying then businesses will close. If businesses close then people will lose their jobs. I would support welfare for those that dont make a living wage as long as they are working to make themselves more valuable.

That's the "common sense" approach that I mentioned. Your chain of events doesn't happen when the minimum wage is raised. It's a fantasy that seems like it makes sense. Check the facts.

I bet if the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor then it will make sense.

You speak as if there is some fixed value of ones labor and that everyone naturally gets paid that value.....no less and no more. It's a weird thing to consider.

There is a fixed value. No not everyone gets paid that because they will accept less just to have a job. Think of it like this. If your company made a product that sold at the rate of $10 an hour would you pay someone $15 an hour to make it? Thats a very simplistic example but it makes the point.

 

[Camp]

Because there is no reason someone working 40 hours/week should be struggling to make ends meet.

The assumption made in this article is that they are living high off the hog. That is simply not the case.

Not to mention people who learn a skill are not paid well as indicated in the article. People deserve to be able to survive when they work 40 hours/week. Home healthcare workers learned a skill yet are paid $9/hour at best.

I also find it ironic is the Republican party talk about the "dignity of work" when passing laws to restrict government assistance. Then when workers want to get a wage that would help them survive by working, Republicans are strictly oppose to it.

So how is their dignity to work if no matter how hard they work, they will never get by?

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

No one is really attempting to make that argument. The argument is, and has always been, that successful employers who make enough money to do all the things you speak of, and more, should not rely on taxpayers to subsidize the businesses that allow those employers to live so luxuriously. If they are really deserving business owners they should not rely on that taxpayer subsidized work force. Especially when competitors are able to pay better wages, not depend on that tax payer money. The low wages paid to workers just turns out to be a simple act of basic greed by the business owner.

 

[JFK_USA]

Because there is no reason someone working 40 hours/week should be struggling to make ends meet.

The assumption made in this article is that they are living high off the hog. That is simply not the case.

Not to mention people who learn a skill are not paid well as indicated in the article. People deserve to be able to survive when they work 40 hours/week. Home healthcare workers learned a skill yet are paid $9/hour at best.

I also find it ironic is the Republican party talk about the "dignity of work" when passing laws to restrict government assistance. Then when workers want to get a wage that would help them survive by working, Republicans are strictly oppose to it.

So how is their dignity to work if no matter how hard they work, they will never get by?

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

Serious question, are you fucking retarded?

Where did I say ANY of that? Nowhere except in your crazy mind.

I said they should be able to make ends meet. Food, shelter, transportation (money for a car or bus), clothes that aren't ripped or work clothes, heat, water, and eletricity. Is that concept too hard for your peanut size brain to understand?

 

[Moonglow]

I think the sooner people accept the fact that you are a tool for the business owner to get wealthy the more emotionally detached you will view this issue. The business owner does not exist to make your life comfortable. In fact its pretty much the opposite. The psychology of the game is that the more you are worried about your job the harder you can be worked and the lower you can be paid.

I was always told two things,
1. get a trade
2. you can either make money for someone else, or you can make it for yourself..

 

[Mr Natural]

Where does a highly skilled trades person only earn 15 an hour?

In Conservatopia.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I bet if the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor then it will make sense.

You speak as if there is some fixed value of ones labor and that everyone naturally gets paid that value.....no less and no more. It's a weird thing to consider.

First of all, you're stupid. He was saying when the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor you will be unemployed. Again, yes, Seawytch, you people can't read, it's incredible.

Second, there is a vlue of one's labor everyone naturally gets paid. It's set by a free market. Seriously, econ101 should be a basic high school requirement. The Democratic party would be devasated

Fuck off. You are failing to understand the discussion. Get an education.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Because there is no reason someone working 40 hours/week should be struggling to make ends meet.

The assumption made in this article is that they are living high off the hog. That is simply not the case.

Not to mention people who learn a skill are not paid well as indicated in the article. People deserve to be able to survive when they work 40 hours/week. Home healthcare workers learned a skill yet are paid $9/hour at best.

I also find it ironic is the Republican party talk about the "dignity of work" when passing laws to restrict government assistance. Then when workers want to get a wage that would help them survive by working, Republicans are strictly oppose to it.

So how is their dignity to work if no matter how hard they work, they will never get by?

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

No one is really attempting to make that argument. The argument is, and has always been, that successful employers who make enough money to do all the things you speak of, and more, should not rely on taxpayers to subsidize the businesses that allow those employers to live so luxuriously. If they are really deserving business owners they should not rely on that taxpayer subsidized work force. Especially when competitors are able to pay better wages, not depend on that tax payer money. The low wages paid to workers just turns out to be a simple act of basic greed by the business owner.

Your term deserving business owner says it all... If I start a business, I deserve it.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I bet if the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor then it will make sense.

You speak as if there is some fixed value of ones labor and that everyone naturally gets paid that value.....no less and no more. It's a weird thing to consider.

First of all, you're stupid. He was saying when the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor you will be unemployed. Again, yes, Seawytch, you people can't read, it's incredible.

Second, there is a vlue of one's labor everyone naturally gets paid. It's set by a free market. Seriously, econ101 should be a basic high school requirement. The Democratic party would be devasated

Fuck off. You are failing to understand the discussion. Get an education.

Oooh... hit a nerve fast food boy?

 

[Moonglow]

Because there is no reason someone working 40 hours/week should be struggling to make ends meet.

The assumption made in this article is that they are living high off the hog. That is simply not the case.

Not to mention people who learn a skill are not paid well as indicated in the article. People deserve to be able to survive when they work 40 hours/week. Home healthcare workers learned a skill yet are paid $9/hour at best.

I also find it ironic is the Republican party talk about the "dignity of work" when passing laws to restrict government assistance. Then when workers want to get a wage that would help them survive by working, Republicans are strictly oppose to it.

So how is their dignity to work if no matter how hard they work, they will never get by?

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

No one is really attempting to make that argument. The argument is, and has always been, that successful employers who make enough money to do all the things you speak of, and more, should not rely on taxpayers to subsidize the businesses that allow those employers to live so luxuriously. If they are really deserving business owners they should not rely on that taxpayer subsidized work force. Especially when competitors are able to pay better wages, not depend on that tax payer money. The low wages paid to workers just turns out to be a simple act of basic greed by the business owner.

Your term deserving business owner says it all... If I start a business, I deserve it.

not really, it's a work thing...

 

[Moonglow]

I bet if the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor then it will make sense.

You speak as if there is some fixed value of ones labor and that everyone naturally gets paid that value.....no less and no more. It's a weird thing to consider.

First of all, you're stupid. He was saying when the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor you will be unemployed. Again, yes, Seawytch, you people can't read, it's incredible.

Second, there is a vlue of one's labor everyone naturally gets paid. It's set by a free market. Seriously, econ101 should be a basic high school requirement. The Democratic party would be devasated

Please notify me of when this free market system starts....

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Because there is no reason someone working 40 hours/week should be struggling to make ends meet.

The assumption made in this article is that they are living high off the hog. That is simply not the case.

Not to mention people who learn a skill are not paid well as indicated in the article. People deserve to be able to survive when they work 40 hours/week. Home healthcare workers learned a skill yet are paid $9/hour at best.

I also find it ironic is the Republican party talk about the "dignity of work" when passing laws to restrict government assistance. Then when workers want to get a wage that would help them survive by working, Republicans are strictly oppose to it.

So how is their dignity to work if no matter how hard they work, they will never get by?

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

No one is really attempting to make that argument. The argument is, and has always been, that successful employers who make enough money to do all the things you speak of, and more, should not rely on taxpayers to subsidize the businesses that allow those employers to live so luxuriously. If they are really deserving business owners they should not rely on that taxpayer subsidized work force. Especially when competitors are able to pay better wages, not depend on that tax payer money. The low wages paid to workers just turns out to be a simple act of basic greed by the business owner.

Your term deserving business owner says it all... If I start a business, I deserve it.

not really, it's a work thing...

Oh, really? Then if I buy a car I don't necessarily deserve it? Is that a work thing?

Where do you moonbats get these fucked up ideas? No wonder you're obsessed with McDonalds.

 

[Asclepias]

Because there is no reason someone working 40 hours/week should be struggling to make ends meet.

The assumption made in this article is that they are living high off the hog. That is simply not the case.

Not to mention people who learn a skill are not paid well as indicated in the article. People deserve to be able to survive when they work 40 hours/week. Home healthcare workers learned a skill yet are paid $9/hour at best.

I also find it ironic is the Republican party talk about the "dignity of work" when passing laws to restrict government assistance. Then when workers want to get a wage that would help them survive by working, Republicans are strictly oppose to it.

So how is their dignity to work if no matter how hard they work, they will never get by?

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

No one is really attempting to make that argument. The argument is, and has always been, that successful employers who make enough money to do all the things you speak of, and more, should not rely on taxpayers to subsidize the businesses that allow those employers to live so luxuriously. If they are really deserving business owners they should not rely on that taxpayer subsidized work force. Especially when competitors are able to pay better wages, not depend on that tax payer money. The low wages paid to workers just turns out to be a simple act of basic greed by the business owner.

Your term deserving business owner says it all... If I start a business, I deserve it.

No you dont deserve it just like a worker doesnt deserve to be paid more than the value they bring.

 

[Moonglow]

Because there is no reason someone working 40 hours/week should be struggling to make ends meet.

The assumption made in this article is that they are living high off the hog. That is simply not the case.

Not to mention people who learn a skill are not paid well as indicated in the article. People deserve to be able to survive when they work 40 hours/week. Home healthcare workers learned a skill yet are paid $9/hour at best.

I also find it ironic is the Republican party talk about the "dignity of work" when passing laws to restrict government assistance. Then when workers want to get a wage that would help them survive by working, Republicans are strictly oppose to it.

So how is their dignity to work if no matter how hard they work, they will never get by?

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

No one is really attempting to make that argument. The argument is, and has always been, that successful employers who make enough money to do all the things you speak of, and more, should not rely on taxpayers to subsidize the businesses that allow those employers to live so luxuriously. If they are really deserving business owners they should not rely on that taxpayer subsidized work force. Especially when competitors are able to pay better wages, not depend on that tax payer money. The low wages paid to workers just turns out to be a simple act of basic greed by the business owner.

Your term deserving business owner says it all... If I start a business, I deserve it.

not really, it's a work thing...

Oh, really? Then if I buy a car I don't necessarily deserve it? Is that a work thing?

Where do you moonbats get these fucked up ideas? No wonder you're obsessed with McDonalds.

Deserve and possession is two different emotional issues..

 

[LoneLaugher]

There are three million Americans employed in food prep and service. They make about $9.10 per hour on average.

Hard working people making shit wages.

It's going to change, nutters.

If it changes expect the the prices to go up. If the prices go up people will stop buying. If people stop buying then businesses will close. If businesses close then people will lose their jobs. I would support welfare for those that dont make a living wage as long as they are working to make themselves more valuable.

That's the "common sense" approach that I mentioned. Your chain of events doesn't happen when the minimum wage is raised. It's a fantasy that seems like it makes sense. Check the facts.

I bet if the minimum wage is raised higher than the value of your labor then it will make sense.

You speak as if there is some fixed value of ones labor and that everyone naturally gets paid that value.....no less and no more. It's a weird thing to consider.

There is a fixed value. No not everyone gets paid that because they will accept less just to have a job. Think of it like this. If your company made a product that sold at the rate of $10 an hour would you pay someone $15 an hour to make it? Thats a very simplistic example but it makes the point.

It doesn't make the point. It's way too simplistic and as such...is meaningless. Try another.

 

[kaz]

From Matt Walsh Blog on the Blaze....
I've excerpted a few paragraphs but there is so much more that the entire blog should be read!

Dear fast food workers,

It’s come to my attention that many of you, supposedly in 230 cities across the country, are walking out of your jobs today and protesting for $15 an hour. You earnestly believe — indeed, you’ve been led to this conclusion by pandering politicians and liberal pundits who possess neither the slightest grasp of the basic rules of economics nor even the faintest hint of integrity — that your entry level gig pushing buttons on a cash register at Taco Bell ought to earn you double the current federal minimum wage.

I’m aware, of course, that not all of you feel this way. Many of you might consider your position as Whopper Assembler to be rather a temporary situation, not a career path, and you plan on moving on and up not by holding a poster board with “Give me more money!” scrawled across it, but by working hard and being reliable. To be clear, I am not addressing the folks in this latter camp. They are doing what needs to be done, and I respect that.

Instead, I want to talk to those of you who actually consider yourselves entitled to close to a $29 thousand a year full time salary for doing a job that requires no skill, no expertise, and no education;
those who think a fry cook ought to earn an entry level income similar to a dental assistant;
those who insist the guy putting the lettuce on my Big Mac ought to make more than the Emergency Medical Technician who saves lives for a living; those who believe you should automatically be able to “live comfortably,” as if “comfort” is a human right.

To those in this category, I have a few things I need to say, for your own sake:

First, let me start with a story. It’s anecdotal, obviously, but then this whole #FightFor15 “movement” is based entirely on anecdotes.

I submit mine: I’m 28 years old now. I started working when I was about 15. I did hourly, customer service-type stuff at grocery stores, snowball stands, and pizza places, never making much more than the bare minimum at any of them.

When I was 20 I moved out of the house and got my first job in radio. Starting out as a rock DJ in Delaware, I made $17,000 a year, or about $8 an hour. I lived off of that, earning a few small raises through the years — having to eat fewer meals, buy fewer things, and, God forbid, even forgo cable and internet access in my apartment — right up to when I got married at 25.

Fast Food Workers You Don t Deserve 15 an Hour to Flip Burgers and That s OK TheBlaze.com

Because the only reason they are flipping hamburgers is some rich jack shit decided to discriminate against them and prevent them from getting a good job, but for some reason the trained workers was liked by the rich bastard who owns his company and he decided not to discriminate against them.

Don't you know everyone wants to succeed and it's just a question whether the wealthy and the corporations allow us to?

You are aware of the Jews controlling the international financial community, aren't you? You do know that basics of the world?

Awesome!! You and NOLA ought to open a strawman factory. You'll make a killing!

LOL, another skill we know you don't have, detecting obvious sarcasm. So far the skill list you do have remains empty

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You know, you're right.... if you work 40 hours a week you should make at least enough to buy a new car every year, go to Disney World, eat out 5 nights a week, have 3 MK suits, own a $250,000 home, a housekeeper and a yard guy... oh, and a swimming pool and a pool guy.

No one is really attempting to make that argument. The argument is, and has always been, that successful employers who make enough money to do all the things you speak of, and more, should not rely on taxpayers to subsidize the businesses that allow those employers to live so luxuriously. If they are really deserving business owners they should not rely on that taxpayer subsidized work force. Especially when competitors are able to pay better wages, not depend on that tax payer money. The low wages paid to workers just turns out to be a simple act of basic greed by the business owner.

Your term deserving business owner says it all... If I start a business, I deserve it.

not really, it's a work thing...

Oh, really? Then if I buy a car I don't necessarily deserve it? Is that a work thing?

Where do you moonbats get these fucked up ideas? No wonder you're obsessed with McDonalds.

Deserve and possession is two different emotional issues..

No, no they are not. Simply put, I deserve whatever I rightfully own.

Are you drunk?

 

[healthmyths]

CEO's? They don't do shit, they make millions sitting around all day

They real workers who deserve millions are the dumb fucks that need 4 of them to figure out how to change a light bulb

It's a give-take relationship, yet CEO's earn millions even if the company losses money....Employees, not so much..Both need each other to operate and produce product...

Yeah, because there is a vast pool of people out there that can run a company... burger flippers? They are a dime-a-dozen.

There is a vast pool of people that can run companies. We actually have a system for picking our business leaders that sucks. That is a major problem we have in this country. We have a selection process for business leaders that is based on corruption that allows the privileged opportunities not afforded to the less privileged. That is one of the reasons over 70% of news businesses fail and end up costing everyone from creditors to taxpayers. The dime a dozen people you seem dependent on looking down on contain many highly qualified and fine people who are forced to maintain themselves in their low paying job because their priorities are restricted to the immediate needs of their families and the weekly paycheck that is so important to those who in fact live paycheck to paycheck.

NO there isn't!
Obviously you've NEVER been a CEO much less what it takes to "run" a company.
Do you know what the term "medical liability ratio"? Do you understand what "Safe Harbor--(nothing to do with water by the way...)" means in a public company? How about the acronym "EBIT" any idea what those terms mean?
You think the average worker knows what these terms...much less how to make decisions based on the meanings?