Fight for $15. (Fast food protest)

[Exorcet]

What I meant was that if the 1% wanted to, they could end poverty worldwide. The amount the USA spends on national defense in a month could end world hunger forever.

If so, then it must by asked if they have to. They don't, because no one is entitled to someone else's property, including money. Make no mistake, I'm not against sharing and charity, but forced help is not a valid solution.

Beyond that, you have the practical problems. Remove the possibility to become wealthy and you remove the motivation to do those things that would make you wealthy. Things like inventing or running a business. You also need to ask what standard of living is good enough. There isn't enough money to make every as rich as the top 1%, so that wouldn't be the target. Whatever it was, you'd essentially be arguing that it would be illegal to become so wealthy. That makes no sense.

If you are well off, you feel far more entitled than idealistic poor people. Well-off people tend to overplay how hard they worked to get to where they are. A lot of it has to do with where you were raised, how wealthy your parents were, how lucky you were to find the jobs you had, etc.

This still isn't about life being hard though. It's about what's fair and what's realistic. It's not fair to force people to pay for other people's lives. It's not realistic to give everyone a perfect life. Minimum wage just transfers problems from one group to another, at least until those problems come back around and hurt the people they were supposed to help. Low wage earners need to take responsibility (some do and some don't) and work their way out. People who are better off can choose to assist them if they like, but it should only ever be by choice.

Also, I don't see the wealthy being more entitled by default. Let's not forget that they don't necessarily start off wealthy either.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

If so, then it must by asked if they have to. They don't, because no one is entitled to someone else's property, including money. Make no mistake, I'm not against sharing and charity, but forced help is not a valid solution.

If you're against forced charity, then surely you must be against forced taxation, yes?

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

If you're against forced charity, then surely you must be against forced taxation, yes?

I think most people are ok with taxes because they get things like roads and schools in return. "Forced" charity has no such mutual benefit.

edit: "Forced charity" is actually just robbery.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

edit: "Forced charity" is actually just robbery.

And taxation isn't? I don't recall being given the option not to pay taxes. Just because we get stuff in return doesn't make it right. We could have roads without taxes, but I'll leave it at that and get things get back on topic.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

And taxation isn't? I don't recall being given the option not to pay taxes. Just because we get stuff in return doesn't make it right. We could have roads without taxes, but I'll leave it at that and get things get back on topic.

Then we would have roads with tolls. You cant make something from nothing. Taxation is the price you pay for a functioning government with services. Its a reasonably fair deal. If you don't want to pay taxes, go live in the wilderness. Nobody will bother you.

How did you get through business school?

 

[MidFieldMaven]

How did you get through business school?

Accounting and Economics classes don't talk much at all about taxation. So you think we need taxation to have roads?

 

[Exorcet]

If you're against forced charity, then surely you must be against forced taxation, yes?

Yes, if you don't want the protection/services of a government you shouldn't pay for it.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Accounting and Economics classes don't talk much at all about taxation. So you think we need taxation to have roads?

How do you propose to have roads then?

 

[Northstar]

So you think we need taxation to have roads?

If you want more than major roads, yes.

Highways and other heavy traffic roads would be just fine under private ownership. The side roads that lead to your house on the other hand or country roads wouldn't be worthwhile for a company to maintain though.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

If you want more than major roads, yes.

Highways and other heavy traffic roads would be just fine under private ownership. The side roads that lead to your house on the other hand or country roads wouldn't be worthwhile for a company to maintain though.

Even if they were privately owned, they would be toll roads. You still have to pay for them somehow. It's still a tax, essentially. I'm a major proponent of expanded private sector infrastructure projects, but roads are one domain that the government is better served to provide.

 

[Johnnypenso]

If you are well off, you feel far more entitled than idealistic poor people. Well-off people tend to overplay how hard they worked to get to where they are. A lot of it has to do with where you were raised, how wealthy your parents were, how lucky you were to find the jobs you had, etc.

Do you know very many successful people? I doubt it very much. I work in the trades and I deal every day with guys who have built successful businesses from their own blood, sweat and tears. At least half of my friends and acquaintances are self-employed. Maybe 1/10 got a boost from a parent being in the same business and handing down something to their kids, but the only kids that were successful with the hand off were those that put in the time and effort to learn and grow the business. The "entitled" ones failed miserably and lost all their money because they didn't work hard enough and expected the business to run itself.

"Success is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration"
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work"

- Thomas Edison

True then and true now.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

Edison, really? The guy who screwed over Tesla should not be a role model.

 

[ildd]

Edison, really? The guy who screwed over Tesla should not be a role model.

It's not like he was the modern Da Vinci or anything when it comes to science and mathematics

 

[McLaren]

Edison, really? The guy who screwed over Tesla should not be a role model.

The harsh reality of success for many is by screwing over others, whether with business owners or their own employees fighting for promotion.

As been said already, nothing is fair in this world. A basic extinct whether in animals or humans is fighting for survival.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

$1,150 per month is a lot in most states, but in NJ, NYC, and CA, it's only enough to pay rent for a 1,000 sq. ft. apartment (smaller in NYC + more expensive) and eat Ramen every night. No utilities except maybe electric if not included in the rent.

You definitely won't be saving any money at all.

Then find a smaller/cheaper place. I live in a condo smaller than that and it's plenty of space for my girlfriend and I. Well, I assume it's okay for her, anyway; she says it is, but she's one of those people that have it super easy in life, because she has a chair at work.

I love when people say they would do something if they had no other choice. The object is to not have it be an option at all. Nobody should have to room with a stranger to survive. Not in a developed nation, anyway. How primitive. Changes need to be made to prevent things like that.

Last year, I moved into a house with two strangers, with a third renting out the basement. Okay, not complete strangers - one was a friend of a friend, and I was introduced to him a month before the room opened up, as a potential candidate - but close enough. Was it ideal? Nope. But it was the best I could do with my then-current situation, thinking long-term*. It's also, it should be noted, more efficient: three of us were using less utilities than if we all lived separately, and food costs per person were lower too. That's one of the reasons my girlfriend and I are in the condo we've got, too: it's more efficient to share community amenities like a gym, party/theatre rooms and BBQ patios than it is to hunt down a place for ourselves with all of those.

...

All this talk of the rich owing the rest of society is, well, rich. You're posting this from a smartphone or computer, no? You're already far closer to the 1% than the remainder.

Perhaps there needs to be a thread about what I'm feeling.

Go ahead, I don't see an "Entitlement" thread yet.

* - I had ended a relationship with a girl I lived with. It had to happen, but it was certainly not financially beneficial while being a student. I had to make sacrifices to keep my studies a priority, and simply asking my employer to nearly double my wage wasn't (and shouldn't) be an option.

What's even funnier is that people that don't even live here think they know better when it doesn't even effect their lives.

It's never stopped you, or the US in general, for that matter.

This whole $15/hour debacle certainly affects me, though probably not how you'd hope. As much as I disagree with it, I'll definitely enjoy the benefits if it does spread. The CDN dollar isn't doing so well against the USD right now, so it'll be beneficial for me if this hike brings the economy to a halt and the dollars end up at par again.

Maybe if they moved here and worked a minimum wage job for a few months they would see how hard it is and change their tune.

Ah, we're back to how hard they are.

 

[Famine]

What I meant was that if the 1% wanted to, they could end poverty worldwide.

Imagine what "the 1%" could do if they took some of their money and piled it into the research and development of things that could make everyone's lives easier, better or longer - like, say, drugs or electronic devices, or ways to make crop yields higher and better quality. Then they could also put aside some more of their money and use it to give other people in exchange for, say, 37 hours of their week making these things. Then they could sell them to people who want them and get more money back, to research and develop more things and pay more people more money to make more things...

... wait, that sounds like a job. Nuts to that.

The amount the USA spends on national defense in a month could end world hunger forever.

Yeah, it turns out that taxation is a real bummer like that. Nothing to do with "the 1%" of course, so I'm not sure why these two sentences were hammered together.

 

[Danoff]

What I meant was that if the 1% wanted to, they could end poverty worldwide. The amount the USA spends on national defense in a month could end world hunger forever.

Nope. Poverty in the US at least is defined to intentionally capture a percentage of the population. If you increase the wealth of everyone, the poverty line just moves. Almost no one in the US today would be considered in poverty a century ago. Congratulations, we've eliminated poverty.

After taxes, minimum wage is only $6.70.

Spoiler

267.80

The weekly take-home pay for a 40-hour-a-week minimum-wage employee, after Social Security and Medicare taxes. That adds up to $13,926.38 per year, or just over $1,150 per month. The commonly cited minimum wage annual salary for a 40-hour-a-week worker is $15,080 -- before taxes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/minimum-wage-increase-numbers_n_5868848.html

After taxes minimum wage goes up, not down. Social security is not a tax (at least not according to the left), because you get the money back in benefits. It's a "lock box" where you put your own money away for yourself. It's for your own good. Medicare is similar.

If you're just talking about taxes, the minimum wage is actually higher than it is, because almost everyone earning minimum wage will qualify for an "earned income tax credit", wherein the IRS gives them money for not making enough money.

 

[FoolKiller]

To be honest, Truman doubled the minimum wage in 1946, and that worked despite all the screaming that it wouldn't.

Worked so well they did it again in five years, then they did it again, then they did it again, then they did it again, then they did it again. Sometimes they were back-to-back increases.

That's the biggest reason why people don't move. I want to move to the west coast, but I can't save money to move because it all goes to paying rent, food, and utilities. I don't have much in assets either, maybe $5,000 if I also sell my car. I don't know anyone out there I could stay with. How did people migrate to America with no money and no job? Where did they sleep? What did they do? I would only move over 50 miles away if I was guaranteed a job nearby.

I met a waitress here in Kentucky once. She never lived in one place for more than six months to a year. She was moving from California to the East Coast. She stopped in a city and worked and saved and then moved on to the next city. She was in Kentucky when I met her, which had her close enough to be only one or two more stops from where she wanted to be. She wasn't even sure if she would stay on the East Coast or head south. I found it intriguing. She was happy. She didn't have to settle down and her ability to live happily was not tied at all to her pay.

Some people figure out how to move. Some don't.

I can't guarantee a good life for my potential children, so I can't procreate in good conscience.

1) I applaud you for using some forethought in your choice to have children.

2) As a parent, I don't care how rich you are you cannot guarantee a good life for your child. Every second of every day they are one second from something destroying their lives. You don't see the dangers that exist in the world until you have a child. Suddenly, every single thing is something that can do anything from cause a scrape to leave them debilitated for the rest of their life.

Then there is always the chance that a random bad combination of genes leaves them with a struggle from birth.

I identify and empathize more with the unfortunate than the fortunate. I have a college degree in Business and have had no luck finding stable work. I only manage to get hired for seasonal jobs. The last job I had ended in January, working for UPS as a full-time driver for $18.75/hr. I had an interview last month with the USPS and they decided not to hire me for some reason.

This means nothing to me without knowing more than that you have "a degree in business." I lost my job a few years back. The company went bankrupt. I had a new job within seven miles of my house paying slightly more than I was making in less than four months. I had the offer in roughly three, but couldn't start due to the holidays and the training schedule.

I applied to 20-30 jobs in a week. I didn't realize how much I was doing until I had to turn in paperwork for my unemployment insurance and they wanted a list of jobs applied for, but only had six spots. When I tried to attach my six pages of jobs that I had applied to they asked me to just pick six and hand-write it on the form. I was doing five times what was expected.

I applied for any job that even roughly looked like I might qualify for, knowing that if I could get into the interview I could explain how my lack of experience in one area would not be a setback. And it worked. I walked into a job where my only applicable skill was proficiency with Microsoft Office.

So, I have to ask, where do you live, what jobs are you applying to, how do you present yourself in interviews (the attitude you show here is a quick way to find the door), what kind of business degree is it, and do you ever think that you don't get jobs simply because someone else might be better qualified than you?



And finally, I am still waiting for an answer to this:

Are you suggesting that base pay should be based on need not effort? So, a guy that has 4 kids should get more than a guy who has no kids while doing the same job? I mean, if we are basing it on housing costs, the guy with no kids is fine in a studio apartment, but that would never work with four kids.

 

[Joel]

I spent 11 hours working in a 40C+ kitchen yesterday, we served over 260 people by 3pm, serving real food with everything in the restaurant being hand made requiring tons of prep, while we were dealing with the busiest morning/lunch of the year. I'm paid $11/hour ($8.44 USD).

Remind me again why throwing frozen boxed garbage in a deep fryer and frozen patties on an automated grill is worth $15/hour.

 

[Danoff]

Remind me again why throwing frozen boxed garbage in a deep fryer and frozen patties on an automated grill is worth $15/hour.

because wishful thinking.

 

[Joel]

because wishful thinking.

Well and I don't mean to toot my own horn but the work I do here is far more skillful than any non-management fast food employee's and it isn't close. We're serving quality $14-25 entrees and doing crazy volumes (over 40 entrees an hour at peak times) with almost always less than 15 minute order times.

I just don't understand how anyone can tell me with a straight face that someone throwing McNuggets in a deep fryer "deserves" $15/hour, while experienced line cooks like me working in real kitchens making quality food are paid $11. Even most chefs and sous chefs who have been to culinary school are paid ~$13, and they take on managerial roles too, usually being in charge of scheduling, procurement, and ordering all the food. Even in sexy cities like NYC, the line cook at a celebrity chef's Michelin star signature restaurant is getting maybe 12/13 bucks an hour.

 

[McLaren]

I spent 11 hours working in a 40C+ kitchen yesterday, we served over 260 people by 3pm, serving real food with everything in the restaurant being hand made requiring tons of prep, while we were dealing with the busiest morning/lunch of the year. I'm paid $11/hour ($8.44 USD).

Remind me again why throwing frozen boxed garbage in a deep fryer and frozen patties on an automated grill is worth $15/hour.

I have a friend at work whose family owns an upper class restaurant & asked him how he felt about it. He responded that he had not discussed it with any of his chefs to avoid distracting them with the topic, but shared the same sentiment as you. His father is more worried that if fast food workers feel they should make $15/hour, that his chefs will ask for even more or leave & the restaurant will go under in just months.

 

[Joel]

I have a friend at work whose family owns an upper class restaurant & asked him how he felt about it. He responded that he had not discussed it with any of his chefs to avoid distracting them with the topic, but shared the same sentiment as you. His father is more worried that if fast food workers feel they should make $15/hour, that his chefs will ask for even more or leave & the restaurant will go under in just months.

I'd be out the door in a heartbeat if that happened here. Why would I work 11 hour days, burn myself, cut myself, deal with stressful dinner rushes, hardly ever get a chance to eat lunch or dinner, and sweat so much that dehydration is a legitimate concern if I could get $15 at McDonald's for easy peasy work with mandated breaks? I do genuinely enjoy my job, the camaraderie in a kitchen is great and clearing the board during a crazy busy dinner rush is a great feeling and I get a real charge out of it. But I don't like it enough to leave $4 an hour on the table, foodservice isn't my career, I've done it for 4 years in high school and I do it now in the summers to help pay for university, ultimately the money would be too enticing for me.

That's the other issue with the minimum wage rising at fast food joints. $15 is more than a lot of very skilled chefs with 10yrs experience and a culinary school education make. Are the single moms without a high school diploma or 15 year olds looking for a first job going to be able to compete on the labour market at $15/hour with guys who've worked 10 years in fine dining with culinary school educations?

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

That's another big thing. Architecture interns (most bachelor's holding professional-track interns, actually) make usually between $12-$20/hr depending on location and firm specifics. If minimum wage goes to $15/hr does that mean interns will still make $15/hr? A professional degree in a professional environment making minimum wage? I sure as hell know I couldn't hire an intern and pay them $30/hr. Or if I did, that intern would be working like 10 hour weeks. Is it fair that a job with far less responsibility that requires far less skill, intelligence, education, and work ethic pay the same?

 

[samurai8juice]

Fast Food Workers aren't even going to get $15 an hour in New York until 2020 anyways...

 

[Northstar]

Fast Food Workers aren't even going to get $15 an hour in New York until 2020 anyways...

2020 isn't that far away...

Although it is more than enough time to install self-serve ordering kiosks.

 

[McLaren]

Fast Food Workers aren't even going to get $15 an hour in New York until 2020 anyways...

This isn't just a New York issue though, as evident by Los Angeles & Seattle. What's to stop another city's residents start protesting for it as well?

 

[MidFieldMaven]

Automation will replace just about everything, eventually. Just let it happen.

 

[1241Penguin]

I think you ought to answer a few questions first before you try to make a new argument.

 

[MidFieldMaven]

I think you ought to answer a few questions first before you try to make a new argument.

There is no question I need to answer. Watch the video. That is my answer to everything. Automation will take all of your jobs, and you will be unemployable. Labor is worth only how much it costs to automate. Computers started out so expensive, nobody could afford one. Now everyone has one. So too will the same happen with automation. It will be cheap enough to replace every job imaginable, in time.