Min Wage Increase Doesn't Impact Employement

[Captainant 28620]

4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

This doesn’t happen overnight but it does happen.

Lol we've been waiting over 40 years for the trickle to reach it's way all the way down. I'm pretty sure it doesn't happen at fuckin all, just based on my having eyes and all that 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13751]

14 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Lol we've been waiting over 40 years for the trickle to reach it's way all the way down. I'm pretty sure it doesn't happen at fuckin all, just based on my having eyes and all that 

I wasn’t describing the trickle down economics.

[Foosters 18287]

On 6/9/2024 at 5:52 AM, bernorange said:

https://cabia.org/full-page-ad-calls-out-governor-newsom-highlights-victims-of-recent-minimum-wage-hike/

 

Surprise, surprise:

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2024-06-12/the-fast-food-industry-claims-the-california-minimum-wage-law-is-costing-jobs-its-numbers-are-fake

Quote

The fast-food industry has been wringing its hands over the devastating impact on its business from California’s new minimum wage law for its workers.

Their raw figures certainly seems to bear that out. A full-page ad recently placed in USA Today by the California Business and Industrial Alliance asserted that nearly 10,000 fast-food jobs had been lost in the state since Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the law in September.

The ad listed a dozen chains, from Pizza Hut to Cinnabon, whose local franchisees had cut employment or raised prices, or are considering taking those steps. According to the ad, the chains were “victims of Newsom’s minimum wage,” which increased the minimum wage in fast food to $20 from $16, starting April 1.

Here’s something you might want to know about this claim. It’s baloney, sliced thick. In fact, from September through January, the period covered by the ad, fast-food employment in California has gone up, as tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Federal Reserve. The claim that it has fallen represents a flagrant misrepresentation of government employment figures.

Something else the ad doesn’t tell you is that after January, fast-food employment continued to rise. As of April, employment in the limited-service restaurant sector that includes fast-food establishments was higher by nearly 7,000 jobs than it was in April 2023, months before Newsom signed the minimum wage bill.

 

Quote

That brings us back to the claim that job losses among California’s fast-food restaurants are due to the new minimum wage law.

The assertion appears to have originated with the Wall Street Journal, which reported on March 25 that restaurants across California were cutting jobs in anticipation of the minimum wage increase taking effect on April 1.

The article stated that employment in California’s fast food and “other limited-service eateries was 726,600 in January, “down 1.3% from last September,” when Newsom signed the minimum wage law. That worked out to employment of 736,170 in September, for a purported loss of 9,570 jobs from September through January.

The Journal’s numbers were used as grist by UCLA economics professor Lee E. Ohanian for an article he published on April 24 on the website of the Hoover Institution, where he is a senior fellow.

Ohanian wrote that the pace of the job loss in fast-food was far greater than the overall decline in private employment in California from September through January, “which makes it tempting to conclude that many of those lost fast-food jobs resulted from the higher labor costs employers would need to pay” when the new law kicked in.

CABIA cited Ohanian’s article as the source for its claim in its USA Today ad that “nearly 10,000” fast-food jobs were lost due to the minimum wage law. “The rapid job cuts, rising prices, and business closures are a direct result of Governor Newsom and this short-sighted legislation,” CABIA founder and president Tom Manzo says on the organization’s website.

Here’s the problem with that figure: It’s derived from a government statistic that is not seasonally adjusted. That’s crucial when tracking jobs in seasonal industries, such as restaurants, because their business and consequently employment fluctuate in predictable patterns through the year. For this reason, economists vastly prefer seasonally adjusted figures when plotting out employment trendlines in those industries.

The Wall Street Journal’s figures correspond to non-seasonally adjusted figures for California fast-food employment published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. (I’m indebted to nonpareil financial blogger Barry Ritholtz and his colleague, the pseudonymous Invictus, for spotlighting this issue.)

Quote

Figures for California fast-food restaurants from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis show that on a seasonally adjusted basis employment actually rose in the September-to-January period by 6,335 jobs, from 736,160 to 742,495.

That’s not to say that there haven’t been employment cutbacks this year by some fast-food chains and other companies in hospitality industries. From the vantage point of laid-off workers, the manipulation of statistics by their employers doesn’t ease the pain of losing their jobs.

Still, as Ritholtz and Invictus point out, it’s hornbook economics that the proper way to deal with non-seasonally adjusted figures is to use year-to-year comparisons, which obviate seasonal trends.

BUSINESS

Column: It’s a happy Labor Day indeed after NLRB cracks down on employer sabotage of union elections

Sept. 1, 2023

Doing so with the California fast-food statistics give us a different picture from the one that CABIA paints. In that business sector, September employment rose from a seasonally adjusted 730,000 in 2022 to 741,079 in 2024. In January, employment rose from 732,738 in 2023 to 742,495 this year.

ADVERTISEMENT

Restaurant lobbyists can’t pretend that they’re unfamiliar with the concept of seasonality. It’s been a known feature of the business since, like, forever.

The restaurant consultantship Toast even offers tips to restaurant owners on how to manage the phenomenon, noting that “April to September is the busiest season of the year,” largely because that period encompasses Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, “two of the busiest restaurant days of the year,” and because good weather encourages customers to eat out more often.

What’s the slowest period? November to January, “when many people travel for holidays like Thanksgiving or Christmas and spend time cooking and eating with family.”

In other words, the lobbyists, the Journal and their followers all based their expressions of concern on a known pattern in which restaurant employment peaks into September and then slumps through January — every year.

They chose to blame the pattern on the California minimum wage law, which plainly had nothing to do with it. One can’t look into their hearts and souls, but under the circumstances their arguments seem more than a teensy bit cynical.

CABIA’s Manzo said by email that the alliance’s source for the job-loss statistic in its advertisement was the Hoover Institution, whose “work and credibility speaks for itself.”

He’s wrong about the source. Ohanian explicitly drew the number he cited in his Hoover Institution post from the Wall Street Journal; he didn’t do any independent analysis.

Ohanian acknowledged by email that “if the data are not seasonally adjusted, then no conclusions can be drawn from those data regarding AB 1228,” the minimum wage law. He said he interpreted the Wall Street Journal’s figures as seasonally adjusted and said he would query the Journal about the issue in anticipation of writing about it later this summer.

The author of the Wall Street Journal article, Heather Haddon, didn’t reply to my inquiry about why she appeared to use non-seasonally adjusted figures when the adjusted figures were more appropriate.

[Gil Bang 26286]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/12/california-minimum-wage-myth/681145/

The California Job-Killer That Wasn’t

The state raised the minimum wage for fast-food workers—and employment kept rising. So why has the law been proclaimed a failure?

By Rogé Karma

The story seemed to fit into a familiar theme: naive California progressives overreaching and generating a predictable fiasco. “Let me give you the downside,” Donald Trump responded when recently asked whether he would agree to raise the federal minimum wage during his second term. “In California, they raised it up to a very high number, and your restaurants are going out of business all over the place. The population is shrinking. It’s had a very negative impact.”

Except it hasn’t. In the six months after California’s new minimum wage came into effect in April, the state’s fast-food sector actually gained jobs and did so at a faster pace than much of the rest of the country. 

[royiv 9916]

22 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/12/california-minimum-wage-myth/681145/

The California Job-Killer That Wasn’t

The state raised the minimum wage for fast-food workers—and employment kept rising. So why has the law been proclaimed a failure?

By Rogé Karma

The story seemed to fit into a familiar theme: naive California progressives overreaching and generating a predictable fiasco. “Let me give you the downside,” Donald Trump responded when recently asked whether he would agree to raise the federal minimum wage during his second term. “In California, they raised it up to a very high number, and your restaurants are going out of business all over the place. The population is shrinking. It’s had a very negative impact.”

Except it hasn’t. In the six months after California’s new minimum wage came into effect in April, the state’s fast-food sector actually gained jobs and did so at a faster pace than much of the rest of the country. 

I have a crazy theory that paying people a living wage makes them more incentivized to work. Secondary to that theory is my theory that happier employees are more productive and actually show up to work.

[Brisketexan 107063]

I have a crazy theory that paying people a living wage makes them more incentivized to work. Secondary to that theory is my theory that happier employees are more productive and actually show up to work.

No, see, the only way for capitalism to succeed is to treat employees as shittily as possible, and then treat them even shittier. Anything other than that makes you a woke commie. Why are you a commie who hates truth, justice, and the American way?

I have a crazy theory that paying people a living wage makes them more incentivized to work. Secondary to that theory is my theory that happier employees are more productive and actually show up to work.

No, see, the only way for capitalism to succeed is to treat employees as shittily as possible, and then treat them even shittier. Anything other than that makes you a woke commie. Why are you a commie who hates truth, justice, and the American way?

[RDCanecutter 26968]

1 hour ago, royiv said:

I have a crazy theory that paying people a living wage makes them more incentivized to work. Secondary to that theory is my theory that happier employees are more productive and actually show up to work.

Troof. As a lazy 20-something I coasted in a job that paid the equivalent of $22/hour 2024 money. I caught some double-pay freelance and started staying way late to finish it. Then a year later I had a printing gig where I was paid piece-work (dude thought I'd work alone at a slow hippy pace) for silkscreen art prints of his paintings. I found three hot chicks at the comic book store, hired them all at 50 cents over what they'd been making, and put them to work as rackers so we could blast out prints like a belt-fed M-60. I'm talking going in at dawn, working til dark, goin out drankin, and getting a fine son off one of them as a bonus. Put dude out of business paying for all the work we produced so I ran off to join the Army. Maxed the ASVAB, joined the Cav Scouts anyway because once you're a baller, who gives a fuck about career training.

[TwiceHorn 32132]

1 hour ago, royiv said:

I have a crazy theory that paying people a living wage makes them more incentivized to work. Secondary to that theory is my theory that happier employees are more productive and actually show up to work.

Probably accurate.  But doesn't perhaps account or the addition of jobs.

[royiv 9916]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Probably accurate.  But doesn't perhaps account or the addition of jobs.

Owners can expand grow by opening new stores and adding new jobs when it is easier to hire labor.

[RDCanecutter 26968]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Probably accurate.  But doesn't perhaps account or the addition of jobs.

People making more money are willing to spend it, support new businesses and/or start them?

[bernorange 8388]

Quote

...
After California's $20 minimum wage for fast-food workers went into effect in April, some economists expected affected restaurants to cut jobs. So what actually happened? They not only added workers but did so at a faster pace than fast-food restaurants in the nation as a whole—or at least that was the claim of a research paper by two labor economists at the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of California, Davis.

If you actually read it, you'll find that the results celebrated in the press release and echoed by the media aren't in the paper. In fact, it barely addresses the effect of the minimum wage increase on fast-food employment in California. It offers no numbers and no models. There's no evidence that fast-food jobs increased after the law was implemented.

The paper's findings were trumpeted as evidence that government-mandated wage increases have no adverse effect and that we should be raising the minimum wage higher and in more places.

Only toward the end of the 25-page study is employment shown. There you'll find a graph that represents the closest thing to an argument in the paper. It shows full-service and fast-food restaurant employment in California, represented by the red line, and in the U.S., represented by the blue line, from 2023 to 2024.

The authors state that the data are prone to sampling errors, and make an inconclusive finding that "we do not detect evidence of an adverse employment effect." But the paper's abstract neglected the fine print caution, boldly asserting, "We find that the policy…did not reduce employment." The accompanying press release, which is likely all that journalists bothered to read, states that "contrary to fears expressed by restaurant groups, the wage increase did not lead to job cuts."

But the solid red line on the chart clearly shows California fast-food employment increasing more slowly than the solid blue line showing national fast-food employment, which is the opposite of the authors' claim. If they suggest anything, these data show that the minimum wage increase reduced California fast-food jobs.
...

https://www.yahoo.com/news/no-californias-20-minimum-wage-164518759.html

[bernorange 8388]

Sorry for the yahoo link.  This is the original source:

https://reason.com/video/2024/12/19/no-californias-20-minimum-wage-for-fast-food-workers-did-not-create-jobs/

[Bozo_Casanova 26951]

Hey @Ag with kids you’re running out of options. 

[Ag with kids 584]

12 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Hey @Ag with kids you’re running out of options. 

For what?

[Bozo_Casanova 26951]

3 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

For what?

I seem to recall that you indicated you would have to think twice about not tipping or avoiding restaurants that paid more than minimum wage. 
 

17 hours ago, bernorange said:

Sorry for the yahoo link.  This is the original source:

https://reason.com/video/2024/12/19/no-californias-20-minimum-wage-for-fast-food-workers-did-not-create-jobs/

Is there a more ironically named periodical than “Reason?” It should be called “Strawman,” or “Question Begging,” or “In Theory.”

[Ag with kids 584]

8 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I seem to recall that you indicated you would have to think twice about not tipping or avoiding restaurants that paid more than minimum wage. 
 

Is there a more ironically named periodical than “Reason?” It should be called “Strawman,” or “Question Begging,” or “In Theory.”

What about this has anything to do with my position on tipping?

[Hermanator 7718]

On 12/23/2024 at 8:20 PM, RDCanecutter said:

 I found three hot chicks at the comic book store

[Nivek 17443]

But Tahoe assured us a hamburger would be too expensive and places would go out of business! Are you saying he was….a fucking idiot?

[Brisketexan 107063]

But Tahoe assured us a hamburger would be too expensive and places would go out of business! Are you saying he was….a fucking idiot?

See, “trickle down” and “letting people have/keep more money” ONLY works - and 100% of the time, it works every time - if those people are rich.
So, massive tax cuts for the rich, corporate bailouts, and corporate welfare? Those are good, right, and Americans patriotism at work.
Paying functional wage-slaves $4 per hour more? That will be the end of America.
Did you not get the memo from Freedomeaglegunflagjesus monthly? Coulda sworn you were on the mailing list.

[ChickenSandwich 10000]

The law took effect in April, and in a 10-month period since the mandate kicked in, the Golden State shed more than 6,000 jobs. That’s roughly a 1.1% drop in fast-food employment, according to an analysis of federal labor data.

 

https://epionline.org/app/uploads/2024/12/QCEW-Analysis-Dec-2024.pdf

[The Original Greaser Bob 2903]

Give a man a Filet-O-Fish (TM), and you feed him for a day.  Raise his wages and he'll buy his own damn Filet-O-Fishes and Royals with Cheeses and profits will rise (trickle up). 

[Fastbreak 4057]

The law took effect in April, and in a 10-month period since the mandate kicked in, the Golden State shed more than 6,000 jobs. That’s roughly a 1.1% drop in fast-food employment, according to an analysis of federal labor data.
 
https://epionline.org/app/uploads/2024/12/QCEW-Analysis-Dec-2024.pdf

Most fast food places have kiosks now. Eliminating much of the counter sales staff.

[ChickenSandwich 10000]

"We can't move fast enough on this," Harsh Ghai told Business Insider in an interview in early April.

"We have kiosks in probably about 25% of our restaurants today," he said. "However, the other 75% are going to have kiosks in the next probably 30 to 60 days."

Ghai said he owns 180 fast-food restaurants in California, including about 140 Burger King locations and numerous Taco Bell and Popeyes restaurants. Ghai said that he was the largest Burger King franchisee on the West Coast, though BI was unable to independently verify this.

"We are installing kiosks in every single restaurant," he said.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/california-fast-food-minimum-wage-order-kiosks-burger-king-popeyes-2024-4

 

 

[Underdog 29257]

Karen: I want to speak to Robbie The Robot about my order! 

[Captainant 28620]

2 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

"We can't move fast enough on this," Harsh Ghai told Business Insider in an interview in early April.

"We have kiosks in probably about 25% of our restaurants today," he said. "However, the other 75% are going to have kiosks in the next probably 30 to 60 days."

Ghai said he owns 180 fast-food restaurants in California, including about 140 Burger King locations and numerous Taco Bell and Popeyes restaurants. Ghai said that he was the largest Burger King franchisee on the West Coast, though BI was unable to independently verify this.

"We are installing kiosks in every single restaurant," he said.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/california-fast-food-minimum-wage-order-kiosks-burger-king-popeyes-2024-4

 

 

You act like they wouldn't be doing this even if they were still paying minimum wage lol

[YChang 3578]

15 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You act like they wouldn't be doing this even if they were still paying minimum wage lol

So, that franchise owner is gonna take the efficiency gains and cost savings from kiosks and invest some to take care of the rest of the staff righhhhht?

[pyrohornIII 4853]

1 minute ago, YChang said:

So, that franchise owner is gonna take the efficiency gains and cost savings from kiosks and invest some to take care of the rest of the staff righhhhht?

Well, why not?  He's also getting the benefit of writing off the expense of installing that labor reducing equipment and taking depreciation on it for years to go, right? 

[Biff Tannen 46250]

27 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You act like they wouldn't be doing this even if they were still paying minimum wage lol

This. To act like the reason for automation is a higher minimum wage is disingenuous as fuck. So par for the course. 

[ChiTownDoc 21363]

9 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

See, “trickle down” and “letting people have/keep more money” ONLY works - and 100% of the time, it works every time - if those people are rich.
So, massive tax cuts for the rich, corporate bailouts, and corporate welfare? Those are good, right, and Americans patriotism at work.
Paying functional wage-slaves $4 per hour more? That will be the end of America.
Did you not get the memo from Freedomeaglegunflagjesus monthly? Coulda sworn you were on the mailing list.

Trickle down is dumb as fuck.  Trickle up is where it's at.  How many people making minimum wage save anything?  Those are the people you should pay.  They stimulate the fuck out of the economy. 

[ChiTownDoc 21363]

4 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

"We can't move fast enough on this," Harsh Ghai told Business Insider in an interview in early April.

"We have kiosks in probably about 25% of our restaurants today," he said. "However, the other 75% are going to have kiosks in the next probably 30 to 60 days."

Ghai said he owns 180 fast-food restaurants in California, including about 140 Burger King locations and numerous Taco Bell and Popeyes restaurants. Ghai said that he was the largest Burger King franchisee on the West Coast, though BI was unable to independently verify this.

"We are installing kiosks in every single restaurant," he said.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/california-fast-food-minimum-wage-order-kiosks-burger-king-popeyes-2024-4

 

 

Who cares?  Look at unemployment.  People who want jobs are still finding them.  

Edit: reminds me of when the auto industry started to automate large chunks of auto production.  We were supposed to have 20% unemployment.  Here we are... no matter what clown is running shit, we're still under 5%, except when we get a shock to the system once a decade or so...

Edited yesterday at 01:05 AM by ChiTownDoc

[RDCanecutter 26968]

11 hours ago, Hermanator said:

You got me. One cute funny chick in a comic book store (yeah it's a stretch but I'm totally telling the truth this time,) one 19 going on 38 jaded chick who was couchsurfing 5 Points South, as one did, then Tall chick who was running buddies with first one, and eventually started working at the Post Office but diverted into skripping and small sex parties, so I heard.

[Incredulity 11886]

3 hours ago, pyrohornIII said:

He's also getting the benefit of writing off the expense of installing that labor reducing equipment and taking depreciation on it for years to go, right? 

Tell me you know fuck all about business and accounting without telling me you know fuck all about business and accounting.

[UT_OB1 2270]

7 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Tell me you know fuck all about business and accounting without telling me you know fuck all about business and accounting.

[Incredulity 11886]

Obligatory 

[StassneyHorn 6791]

Fast food workers in California now earn $20 per hour. How does Texas compare?

The Lone Star State has a ways to go to win that battle.

By Andrea Guzmán,Texas Brands Reporter April 12, 2024

 

 

About half a million fast food workers in California started making at least $20 an hour this month, a rate that’s $4 higher than the state’s minimum wage and $12.75 more than the minimum wage in Texas. 

The current rate is a new wage requirement that went into effect for fast food workers in California this month as part of a bill that California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed last fall. It specifically applies to restaurants with larger operations; restaurant chains with more than 60 locations across the country must abide by it. But as other states move to make minimum wages closer to what many call "a living wage," Texas has stuck with the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour that hasn’t increased since 2009 despite efforts from some democratic state representatives to boost the wage. 

So while fans of Whataburger and In-N-Out Burger fight over which restaurant chain has better food, the latter appears to win in the battle of wages. 

Even in Texas, where In-N-Out is not required to pay the $20 an hour wage, the popular burger joint boasts wages at or near the California pay.

For example, a posting for a night sanitation technician in Lancaster, Texas has the pay range listed at $20.50 to $24 an hour. Another for quality control technician has a similar range with a cap at $24.88 an hour. Store associates are lower, however, with postings in Texas listing a pay of $17.50 an hour on Indeed. The job search portal still notes that almost 90 percent of workers reported that they’re satisfied with the pay at In-N-Out Burger. 

“We start all of our new associates at a competitive wage for one simple reason...you are important to us!” the company’s employment page says. “And our commitment to a higher starting wage is just one of the ways in which we show it.”

Along with the wage increases, California’s new fast food industry standards also established a fast food council made up of both restaurant industry representatives and workers. The council has the power to make the $20/hour rate just a starting point since they can increase wages for the rest of the decade to keep pace with inflation or up to 3.5 percent.

At Whataburger, meanwhile, about half of respondents on Indeed said they agreed that they are paid fairly. The pay reported from dozens of workers for a cashier position lists an $11.11 per hour pay. A customer service representative lists $13.21 an hour and a slightly higher rate of $15.14 an hour is the reported pay for a unit leader. 

Still, Whataburger has to follow some wage requirements as the fast food chain expands into states across the country, an effort that has led the company to reach 1,000 locations earlier this year. In states such as Colorado where the minimum wage is higher than in Texas, at $14.42 an hour, Whataburger charges slightly more for items such as cheese, bacon and patty melts. 

But the wage boosts are a necessary task, Newsom and his supporters say. When signing the bill in September, Newsom pushed back against the idea that fast food jobs are for teenagers just joining the workforce, calling it “a romanticized version of a world that doesn’t exist.” 

“We have the opportunity to reward that contribution, reward that sacrifice and stabilize an industry,” Newsom said.

 

Conclusion: Tell your kids in Texas to work at In N Out instead of Whataburger. In n out costs less, taste better, and pays more.

Edited yesterday at 03:12 AM by StassneyHorn

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13645]

Another horrendous fail, and predictable goalpost moving, for income suppression champions. 

 

[Bullneck 19611]

It's widely know that Chicken Sandwich is the CEO of Chick-fil-A and Ag with Kids is the CEO of Burger King.  Incredulity is the CEO of Jack in the Box.  

So between these three men, we have all the facts we need.  Facts are stubborn things and they have the most stubborn of facts.  Downright immovable objects.  They are all knowing, and all seeing, like AI enabled punchclocks with the insight of that eyeball in the top of the pyramid on a dollabill. Where was I?  Oh, let me drink this  .  . . .

Anyway, if they say the poor shall always be with ye, fuck it, believe 'em.  The richest men matter.  Their opinions matter.  And the poor shall be smited.  That last part I made up (or Captain Morgan made it up- hard to tell who has more control of my keyboard) but it sounds Biblical).  

Edited 15 hours ago by Bullneck

[Iceman 2993]

I was 16 the last time I made minimum wage, and THAT pay rate was for 45 days before a raise. 
 

Sorry I don’t empathise withe the ‘We just can’t make it’ crowd. My employer has been hiring for jobs starting in the high $50k per year, plus competitive benefits for basically 5 years straight. Yes, you have to show up to work and maintain a clean driving record.  Oh the horror!!!

[aggie08 21854]

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13645]

26 minutes ago, Iceman said:

I was 16 the last time I made minimum wage, and THAT pay rate was for 45 days before a raise. 
 

Sorry I don’t empathise withe the ‘We just can’t make it’ crowd. My employer has been hiring for jobs starting in the high $50k per year, plus competitive benefits for basically 5 years straight. Yes, you have to show up to work and maintain a clean driving record.  Oh the horror!!!

Based on a 59,000 yearly income at 40 hours a week, that's roughly an anecdotal outlier of 28.50 per hour entry level, which can be rendered irrelevant when your life savings can be trap door-ed cuz your "competitive benefits" are denied. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13645]

Try 4am, Joe.

 

[Captainant 28620]

7 hours ago, Iceman said:

Sorry I don’t empathise

Yeah, we know slorch.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11863]

13 hours ago, YChang said:

So, that franchise owner is gonna take the efficiency gains and cost savings from kiosks and invest some to take care of the rest of the staff righhhhht?

Nope, because he’s a really Harsh Ghai.

[Bozo_Casanova 26951]

On 12/24/2024 at 10:57 PM, Ag with kids said:

What about this has anything to do with my position on tipping?

You seemed to indicate that tipping had some relationship for you to how much the server made, and said that if restaurants in Texas paid more than the minimum wage, you would think about not tipping or eating out less, presumably because you inferred you would have to be overpaying. 
At this point virtually all restaurants in large and most medium Texas cities are paying way above the minimum wage just to keep staff. You still tipping and eating out or did you cut back, as you said?

13 hours ago, pyrohornIII said:

Well, why not?  He's also getting the benefit of writing off the expense of installing that labor reducing equipment and taking depreciation on it for years to go, right? 

Why not? Because the cost of labor is a function of the demand for labor. Just like the cost of burgers is set by the demand for burgers. If the cost of the labor required to make burgers goes up, burger places can’t raise past what the market will support.

13 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

This. To act like the reason for automation is a higher minimum wage is disingenuous as fuck. So par for the course. 

Of course it is. Automation of routine work is universal and pervasive. And in our economy the low hanging fruit isn’t minimum wage workers, but middle management and operational roles.

[bernorange 8388]

12 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

... People who want jobs are still finding them.  ...

 

[Iceman 2993]

8 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Based on a 59,000 yearly income at 40 hours a week, that's roughly an anecdotal outlier of 28.50 per hour entry level, which can be rendered irrelevant when your life savings can be trap door-ed cuz your "competitive benefits" are denied. 

So you deny that solutions already exist?

 

Of course you do. Reality beats the shit out of the narrative  and victimology. For crisesakes we are some helpless motherfuckers. 
 

We are entirled to a 14 hour work week, a living wage( lolz,) and full healthcare…and price controls. 
 

It defies every economic law ever studied, but by-gawd it sounds fantastic!

Edited 20 hours ago by Iceman

[Iceman 2993]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

Yeah, we know slorch.

I am so exceptional, right? Borderline miraculous even. 

Edited 20 hours ago by Iceman

[ChiTownDoc 21363]

37 minutes ago, bernorange said:

 

Revise away.  It’s still under 5%.  The labor markets strength is a fiction?  Yes maybe it’s not AS strong but it’s definitely strong.  
Also inflation is still running hot, there’s measures in play that slow job growth etc.  Also when unemployment is so low there’s only so many damn jobs to add.  

[Bozo_Casanova 26951]

30 minutes ago, Iceman said:

full healthcare

 

31 minutes ago, Iceman said:

It defies every economic law ever studied

A reminder that every country in the world that has “full healthcare” pays less per capita for healthcare than we do and almost all western countries have better outcomes,  but go off, king.

[HornOnTheBayou 9076]

9 hours ago, Iceman said:

I was 16 the last time I made minimum wage, and THAT pay rate was for 45 days before a raise. 
 

Sorry I don’t empathise withe the ‘We just can’t make it’ crowd. My employer has been hiring for jobs starting in the high $50k per year, plus competitive benefits for basically 5 years straight. Yes, you have to show up to work and maintain a clean driving record.  Oh the horror!!!

We're not suggesting that fast-food workers should make six figures. We just trying to give someone working 40 hours a week a small break so they can hopefully save some money and flourish.

Let me make an analogy that might help: imagine if rep was money and a poster was struggling with getting rep (or money, in this case). It would be like a user creating a sock account just to give themselves more rep. It wouldn't be enough for them to become the highest repped poster, but it would keep them out of the red. But what am I saying? My analogy is a little silly, because no one would ever do something like that. RIght?