First of all, I agree with RBN. Most companies absolutely can pay their workers a higher wage with barely a dent in their profits. The payment is simply taken away from millionaires who spend it on luxury cruises and lobbying, or simply hoard it (which is even worse for the economy).
However, It seems you’re using Twitter. I politely ask you never to post anything from that site here, because then people will need an account to respond. It isn’t just the content on the site that is awful – the website mechanics, like the removal of dislikes, blue checkmarks, and lack of characters, make it impossible to say what you mean. Tweeting your opinion is like trying to talk with clay in your mouth, or trying to write while your hands itch. As for me, Twitter does not constitute any valid information. All Tweets are useless prattle, and the massive presence of the site outside Twitter – and the internet itself – is a horrible thing. So, please, source your memes from somewhere else.
Minimum wage goes up slightly every year, but the cost of everything goes up slightly more.
It’s just a brake on our decline.
Everyday life has gone from: single income 4 person family: no issues. All the way to: dual income, 2 person household: not enough money to buy the food required to keep doing your job.
Something needs to break, i can only hope it’s all these planet ruining, greedy ass, underpaying and overcharging businesses.
Price increases without an increase to minimum wage: “That’s just companies charging what the market has decided as a fair price”
Price increases along with an increase to minimum wage: “OMG! GREEDY WORKERS ARE BLEEDING US DRY!”
If we’re going to have a system that’s foundationally built off greed, then a workers “greed” of wanting a wage they can live off of is just as valid as a corporation’s actual greed of wanting to maximize profits, except we should prioritize the “greed” that benefits actual human beings.
This is the wrong argument and I’m tired of it. The real argument here is - McDonald’s et al don’t need to raise prices because of the new wage law. They choose to raise prices rather than cut executive pay, or adjust profit margins, or make any other kind of internal adjustments.
This discussion needs to stop being “x raised prices because they had to and government bad” and start being “Billion-dollar-profit company is screwing over consumers because they can”.
Even worse, they have empirical proof that they are able to use good ingredients, pay a living wage, provide paid parental leave, and give retirement and medical while having lower prices than they charge here. It’s called Denmark.
I wish there was a goddamn economic calculator. Revenue minus (operating costs + re-investment + R&D) then divide it amongst all employees. Let us rank companies based on how bad that number is vs what the employees are actually paid.
This is like the housing shortage issue, the real issue is not that there are not enough houses and we need to build more, it’s that wealthy people need to adjust their hoarding to leave enough for others to have a home.
We know of course wealthy people will not do this voluntarily, so that leaves two options – we need more good people running for office to displace the psychopathic hoarder class (and people to vote for them, i.e. political reform) or some sort of revolution that eliminates that hoarder class.
so that leaves two options – we need more good people running for office to displace the psychopathic hoarder class (and people to vote for them, i.e. political reform) or some sort of revolution that eliminates that hoarder class.
Well, you say two options, but I only see one restated two times with slightly different wordings. As in, it’s gonna be more or less both of those things, to some extent.
the real issue is not that there are not enough houses and we need to build more, it’s that wealthy people need to adjust their hoarding to leave enough for others to have a home.
Yep. It’s fucking insane that we’re having to pretend like there’s not enough to go around when there’s just not enough to satiate a minuscule part of the population for whom nothing will ever be enough.
It’s like a hospital pretending there’s not enough supplies to give patients with terminal cancer and broken bones pain medication because 95% of meds are being shot up by some junkies on the roof, and everyone knows it and even curry favour from the junkies (who wouldn’t mind stealing your grandmas cancer meds.)
It’s like a hospital pretending there’s not enough supplies to give patients with terminal cancer and broken bones pain medication because 95% of meds are being shot up by some junkies on the roof, and everyone knows it and even curry favour from the junkies (who wouldn’t mind stealing your grandmas cancer meds.)
Well thank you. Now that I thought about where it came from, one guy who definitely helped me realise how many traits proper junkies and some hustle-life hedgies share. Sam Polk.
IN my last year on Wall Street my bonus was $3.6 million — and I was angry because it wasn’t big enough. I was 30 years old, had no children to raise, no debts to pay, no philanthropic goal in mind. I wanted more money for exactly the same reason an alcoholic needs another drink: I was addicted.
Wealth addiction was described by the late sociologist and playwright Philip Slater in a 1980 book, but addiction researchers have paid the concept little attention. Like alcoholics driving drunk, wealth addiction imperils everyone. Wealth addicts are, more than anybody, specifically responsible for the ever widening rift that is tearing apart our once great country. Wealth addicts are responsible for the vast and toxic disparity between the rich and the poor and the annihilation of the middle class. Only a wealth addict would feel justified in receiving $14 million in compensation — including an $8.5 million bonus — as the McDonald’s C.E.O., Don Thompson, did in 2012, while his company then published a brochure for its work force on how to survive on their low wages. Only a wealth addict would earn hundreds of millions as a hedge-fund manager, and then lobby to maintain a tax loophole that gave him a lower tax rate than his secretary.
It’s literally the worst addiction there is, because with money, you can get any other thing you might also be addicted to, and with enough money, you don’t just start perceiving the world differently (like say when you’re reeeaally high on certain substances), your world literally and actually changes, twists, as no-one around you wants to be honest with you and you end up fucked up and delusional like JKR or Elon Musk.
And that sort of thing happens with drug dealers as well, now that I think about it, actually. A lot of them, even minor ones, start thinking they’re hot shit because they have some drooling junkies chasing then anywhere, chasing freebies.
So a 25% wage increase resulted in price rises of less than 4%. This is such a good trade off that you’d have to be extremely intellectually dishonest to be able to be against it.
Or extremely selfish. They see their wage stagnating while costs increase and think of lower-income earners as deserving of their place in squalor, rather than respected and dignified.
Meanwhile, others have already adjusted their prices over the previous months in anticipation of the new law, so In-N-Out seems to be very much the outlier here.
Those price increases of 25%+ are not because of this change, that’s just opportunism. Price increases of between 5 and 7% still seem worth it to me.
I found a McDonald’s franchise cost breakdown where staff wages were 27.5% of the total cost: mymoneyblog.com/mcdonalds-franchise-cost-vs-profi… . A 25% increase on those wages, would mean a total cost increase of almost 7%, so it seems like Mr Rodrick is honest with his pricing.
I think a lot of people here seem not to be aware In-N-Out has crazy good pay for their employees.
A store manager at In-N-Out makes $160,000 per year.
I don’t think they even pay minimum wage for their newest and lowest tiered employees, having always paid at least a few dollars per hour more than minimum.
So it’s an exceptionally bad example of a business impacted by a minimum wage increase despite being in the fast food category.
I don’t know about that, it really depends on the quality and size. At McDonald’s in Italy you can find the simple hamburger for around 1€ and the double cheeseburger for around 2,50€, but the quality is horrendous. Instead, you can go to a proper pub, and you can get a proper burger, with a thick fresh patty and fresh ingredients, but you’ll probably pay 10-15€ for that.
It’s all about the quality really, and I have no idea if this US joint is better in terms of quality than other similar chains. Also Europe means very little, the prices in Italy, Greece, England, Norway and Switzerland are wildly different, sometimes 2-3 times different.
Yes, fast food is dirt cheap here, mostly because we have a LOT of food available and the supply chain is very efficient.
But I ain’t eating Mickey D’s because it tastes really good. I eat it because it’s fast, cheap, and filling and readily available everywhere when you need it.
If you really want the best of the worst, hit up the nearest convenience store and get a burger there. (Just don’t eat the sushi - ever)
literally just said that thrown out food/produce is free. I realize the implications of the statement, but look at the fucking context.
this was OP by “end wokeness” Do you really think they care about poor people? There’s also a difference between bitching about the high price of food because you have nothing better to be doing, and simply not being able to afford food, those are two entirely different problems.
And besides, what i said is still true, that shits STILL free. You can literally just take it. Ideally we should be having a bigger conversation about the fact that we THROW AWAY PERFECTLY GOOD FOOD but no, right now calling me a piece of shit for mentioning the fact that you can just nab that shit for free is somehow worse and morally corrupt.
I will say, the use of hyperbole statement as i tend to do to satirize others is respectable, unsure if post history digging or if you are simply like minded, but i respect it.
25 for a double burger. Lesser burgers are not the high. Looks like it’s 10 per patty, and 5 for cheese. I think I’ll notice Wendy’s “dynamic prices that totally doesn’t count as surge pricing, stop saying it”
Add comment