Fast Food Workers Go On Strike For Higher Pay From The Business Men

I seem to have missed where the video actually described the income breakdown of McDonalds. Or even where the video addressed INCOME at all.

The video is about another topic entirely - wealth. Wealth is an interesting topic, but not relevant when you are talking about the income distribution of McDonalds and a significant increase in the wages of McDonalds workers.

I gave numbers, so I'm waiting to see your numbers. How would the proposed increase affect the McDonalds balance sheet, and how much of it could be covered by raiding the salaries of the executives?

 

Come on now..REALLY?!? People who get higher education are now looked DOWN on?? Are you freaking kidding me right now?!? I worked my ASS off and put myself through school working full time at a crappy paying job..Got my degree and then worked as a paramedic, which, in addition to education, requires you to maintain 4-6 different certifications and 48 hours a year of continuing education, to work a job that included 24-72 hours straight shifts, nights, weekends and holidays in every weather element and covered in bodily fluids. Guess what I made at the TOP of my pay scale. $15.25! And high school dropouts doing their unskilled jobs stoned out of their minds want $15, and you are pointing fingers at people who DID go to school?? What planet are you from?!?!

 

Socialism has nothing to do with taking money from one person and giving it to another. Socialism is when the government controls all means of production, distribution, and labor.

That isn't completely true. Not that I think you have ever read an issue or would listen to the NY Times, but...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/u...ise-from-lower-rungs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

But corporations like McDonalds and WalMart use taxpayer subsidies as a way to keep their employees happy enough to work. WalMart will even help monitor your hours to ensure you don't make enough money to lose your government benefits.

Those corporations are the ones who buy and sell the politicians that make the laws. The laws exist in the manner they do because these corporations allow them to exist.

 

Why is it that the Right doesn't have any problem being, immoral, illegal, and repugnant to a federal doctrine regarding employment at will while calling kettles black, and insist poverty is an Individual problem instead of an Institutional problem?

 

My mistake, I thought the link between wealth and income was obvious.

When you have more income than you need to live from day to day, you start to accumulate wealth. The idea is (at least for me anyway) that you save up enough wealth where you can live without income if things go wrong or for when you grow to old to work.

So wealth is actually generated by income which means they are directly related to one another. That is what makes this relevant.

 

It certainly won't if the person earns it, but it they don't it certainly will. How can a business survive paying someone more than their labor is worth?

Can you name me any companies who have successfully paid their workers more than they are worth and what countries which have survived or are surviving economically mandating that workers earn more than they are worth?

- - - Updated - - -

Not according to the leftist. If you earn more than you need then your are greedy. If you have enough to save and you do so your are greedy? If you manage to save enough to retire and lift of the income it produces you are evil and it is unfair.

 

It depends on what you mean by "more than they are worth". Didn't Ford find greater value in paying his employees more than the, then "standard" worth?

 

Except that just isn't true. Many people with very large incomes actually have a low or negative net worth. They get that way by quickly buying cars with loans and houses with mortgages. Those same people also often have six-figure school loans that further contribute to their low, or even negative amount of wealth.

On the other side of the coin, many millionaires have got that way with relatively low income levels throughout their lives. They simply accumulated through responsible behavior with what they do get in, and did it over a lifetime.

So lets get back to the topic at hand - the income disparity at McDonalds, and real numbers. Since you claim my numbers don't work, supply your own. How much more than is deserved is currently paid to the top executives of McDonalds? How much more will it cost McDonalds to increase pay to the levels that these striking employees want, or to whatever level you think they deserve? How much of that increase could be covered by that extra pay from executives, and how much would have to come out of the rather small profit margin, or come in through increased prices?

They are simple questions and are what is needed to refute my claim. Or you can acknowledge that what I put was accurate, and that even raiding every dime of compensation of every executive making 7 figures, or even a high 6 figures would mean less than a dollar a week to the rest of the workers, even if it was only distributed to the workers earning less than the median wage.

 

In other words, when the government TAKES money and hands it to another.

Nice try as disguising the world's most evil religion with semantic bull(*)(*)(*)(*), but it doesn't work.

No, the Mayor doesn't read religious tracts. He prefers honest newspapers.

No, just because you're looking at it wrong doesn't mean you're right. The "workers" take advantage of the corrupt offerings their socialist masters offer them in exchange for votes, they being too *******ned stupid to understand that they're poor because they're stupid. In exchange for being stupid, they reward politicians for money stolen from their betters, and have the nerve to feel that they understand the issues that are keeping them in poverty.

The reality is that they're keeping themselves in poverty because they're stupid and being stupid they vote for DemocRATS.....who prey on the stupid.

Being a business, employers pay the least they can get away with. Being stupid, the Stupids that vote DemocRAT can't even figure out that their ignorant demands for ever higher taxes on the Evil Corporations means....that the Stupids pay more for their purchases, since, as everyone but the Stupids know, it's the customer that pays corporate taxes, not the corporation.

But only people who aren't Stupid can figure that out. After all, who else but a Stupid would want to fit themselves for socialist slave collars?

The laws exist they way they do because the Stupids demanded them. Don't take the blame away from the Stupids. It's the only thing they've ever honestly earned.

 

Why do conservatives hate laborers so much?

 

Because it may be much more fun claiming we need drug tests for marijuana instead of morals tests for people who may not mind engaging in the moral turpitude of the abomination of hypocrisy, knowing that a powerful mood altering drug known as alcohol is both legal and socially acceptable.

 

Correct Answer: Zero.

Reason: The Corporate Officers determine the value of the executive and what they should be paid. There is no other mechanism for determining the worth of the executive, and hence what the Board of Directors says is the final and only abirter of executive worth. Ergo, the executives are valued at 100% of their worth by the ONLY group of people that matter.

Your opinions aren't important.

The opinions of the Stupids who need pictures on the cash register buttons don't matter.

Depends on how much of that non-existent pay hike can be passed on to customers, who are usually Stupids themselves. Generally speaking, since the pay hike won't happen, one can say that it will cost McDonald's nothing.

It might even be a cost saver for the company to close the most offensive outlets and see how the Stupids like not working at all.

Why should any of it be? Good executives are hard to find, Stupids breed like rats.

Why should prices be increased when the striking Stupids can be replaced with different Stupids?

Why bother, when it's none of your business what McDonald's pays it's Stupids in the first place?

- - - Updated - - -

Generally speaking all one needs to do to find if someone is engaged in the moral crime of hypocrisy is find out if they voted for Obama. EVERYONE that voted for King Obama, Fascist and Traitor, is a major hypocrite.

 

They don't.

Stupids have their place in society. Just keep them out of the voting both. After all, only Stupids vote DemocRAT.

Why do Stupids hate America so much?

 

You don't sound very intelligent

 

I like my little test better; all you need to do is resort to fallacy for your Cause.

 

What does sacrificing your youth like that, working without pay in college, have to do with how well we need you to do your job? This indentured-servitude education excludes people with self-respect. Those who submit to this unfunded mandate have no self-respect because they have no talent to be proud of. Take out your bitterness on the upper classes, who demand this sacrifice from you and give their Heirheadd students plenty of money to live on. You're exhibiting the Stockholm Syndrome. If you put up with this slave education for more than a year, you get to like being a slave and worship your Master.

If people aren't paid a salary in college, they aren't worth anything. So why should I swallow the propaganda that you have a right to your job? Am I supposed to feel sorry for your unnecessary sacrifice? Sacrifice has no merit; it is merely brown-nosing. Most graduates had no more right to be in college than they had to be on the college football team, which is based on talent and not self-humiliation. Only the most naturally talented should be encouraged to go to college and they should get the same benefits that the athletes at Top Ten universities get.

You just have generic talent, which I can tell by the fact that you don't brag about your achievements on the job; you only whine about how much you sacrificed in order to "get a good job," not how to do a good job. And no wonder you have nothing to brag about. You had to spend too much time, energy, and focus on earning a living rather than studying. You sacrificers pass your courses by taking short-cuts such as cramming for exams. You only "know how to" do your job. That tells me nothing about deserving the job. Most American boys "know how to" play baseball, but that doesn't give them a right to even make their high school teams, which again are based on talent and not just attendance at practice.

 

The rule of law is the law of the rulers. Since these laws are up for sale and not up for vote, we don't have to obey them. This pre-owned system is not self-government, it is government for the selfish.

 

Those that work hard in college and choose wisely will be repaid for their effort. You don't have to be paid a salary while you are working to be doing something valuable.
Consider an artist or craftsman. Most are paid only when what they create sells. They work for hours or weeks on a an item - whether it be a work of art, a piece of furniture, etc. They are paid nothing while they create it. Does that mean that what they are doing has no value? What about when the item they created sells for thousands of dollars? Was the work still worthless?

Or consider a person starting a business. Most times they aren't able to pay themselves anything for the first 1-5 years. They are working that whole time living off of their savings, credit or relatives - not being paid anything for their work. Yet after the business grows it may reach a point where they are making more income than 90% of their peers. Does that mean that the work they did for the first few years was worthless?

Or consider a simple farmer. They aren't paid anything while they prepare the ground, plant it, tend it, water it or any of the other work they do. They are paid only when they actually harvest the fruit and sell it. Does that mean that they shouldn't have done any of the prep work because it was worthless?

 

We have a rare opportunity in a depression like this, where 20 million people have already been cut out of the work force, and business has spent 5 years lowering overhead and scaling the work force to a minimum.

Raising the Minimum Wage now will have virtually no effect on the teens working, or anyone else.
Now is the ideal time when the cash flowing into the economy by a Minimum Wage increase will grow the GNP, increase demand in general, and MOST important, make the debts held by the people still working seem much smaller as a % of their weekly paycheck, since that debt remains fixed, as their take home has increased.

 

That came in loud and clear to me as well.

 

Taking money from the pocket of executives to put it in the pockets of the unskilled workers defeats the whole purpose of interjecting more money into the economy, because it merely lets the recipients spend that money which the executive would have spent.
And, sharing a few million of the executives wages among thousands of workers, a little each week, amounts to peanuts.

When Mac D raises the $1.00 hamburger to $1.49, the wages are covered and the public has expanded the Gross National Product.

The effect of this expansion of the GNP is to raise more money in taxes for the government which lowers the amounts now borrowed from China.

 

Then don't come on here and snivel about high taxes because working people have to get assistance from the government so they can make ends meet. Life just ain't fair is it?

 

What? To slow growth again? What about the kids who want to train for free instead of pay for expensive trade school? Why do you think wages will increase instead of more jobs cut? Or moved offshore etc... The law doesn't raise incomes, it makes it illegal to hire anyone who wants to work for less then the minimum wage. If it worked like you infer, why not make it $150 an hour so we could all be rich? Why not a global minimum wage of $10000000 a day so we could all be warren buffet? Why is your arbitrary number better then mine?

 

Working people wouldn't need welfare if you didn't take so much of their cash. Every worker is paying at least 30% these days if they work full time. Not to the federal income tax maybe but after it is all said and done. How would an extra year salary every 3 years change a persons life who was living paycheck to paycheck.

 

Why not jump on the "let's ditch the drug war" bandwagon if you are so concerned about taxes? Doesn't simply advocating for reducing social spending for the least wealthy merely, sacrifice the end to the means, contrary to the dictates of "plain reason and legal axioms"?