not so golden arches

[Danzig]

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/low-wage-...n-mcdonalds-hq

I can't help but think McDonalds is having sales issues due to all the bad publicity regarding worker pay and other practices.

[dellinger63]

On Tuesday, the Los Angeles City Council raised the city’s minimum wage to $15 per hour via an ordinance that slowly “cranks-up wages for the next five years.”

As a result, a notable 59 percent of employers in the Los Angeles area now plan to make investments in automation technology, which would eliminate the need for them to hire a bunch of overly paid hourly workers.

Even McDonalds, which currently employs millions of Americans, is going down the path of automation by testing out an automated order machine that could conceivably one day replace most of its cashiers.

Guess no job is better than working for under $15 especially when a machine can do the job better. Although what a bonanza for skilled workers who will develop, manufacture and service the machines. Amazing how the government f'k's up virtually everything and anything it gets involved in when it pertains to private business but at least there's somewhat of a happy ending to this move, for everyone but minimum wage earners.

http://conservativetribune.com/la-ra...ge/#more-78965

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Guess no job is better than working for under $15 especially when a machine can do the job better. Although what a bonanza for skilled workers who will develop, manufacture and service the machines. Amazing how the government f'k's up virtually everything and anything it gets involved in when it pertains to private business but at least there's somewhat of a happy ending to this move, for everyone but minimum wage earners.

http://conservativetribune.com/la-ra...ge/#more-78965

Except of course that none of the states who have raised the minimum wage so far have seen their economies come crashing down and it's unlikely LA will, either.

http://www.thenation.com/article/181...age-kill-jobs#

As this article points out, the answer to "does raising minimum wage kill jobs" is pretty clearly, "no." It actually has little effect on job growth. Doesn't hurt, doesn't help. But low-wage workers with more money in their pockets is a good thing, as they'll have more money to put back into the economy as consumers.

[Danzig]

risk...a question i asked elsewhere that i'll put to you-and whoever else wants to answer that i can actually see their response...

how come it used to be you held a job in the u.s., you could survive. now, that's no longer the case. we've had these 'lower rung' jobs for decades, it used to be enough. now, it's not--and somehow that's the workers fault?
what has changed that what once meant being above poverty no longer does--and how did we decide that it's the employees fault, rather than the employers?
i would LOVE to know how that sea change occurred.

i already know the answer, it really is a rhetorical question.
the amount of payroll is the same, but more now goes the very top.
we have more than ever before graduating from college-the best educated populace in the history of the u.s. but wages are stagnant, or worse.
we have made change after change to our tax policies, to supposedly get the job creators to make more jobs...yet, that doesn't happen.

my son came home and said 'but, if walmart paid more, they'd sell more'. nope.
like i told him, it used to be the employer paid a living wage, and reaped the benefits by selling to their workers. but now, we, the taxpayer make up the difference between the **** wage those companies pay and what it takes to survive.
so, if walmart and the rest boosted their pay, it would take their employees off the dole...but wouldn't mean one more red cent to those businesses, because the peoples' overall income would remain the same.
and the banks and stores like walmart sure make money off those ebt cards, don't they?
the banks and corporations pay for the regulations, or lack thereof...and they pay to keep the min. wage from going up, and they laugh all the way to the vault.

and then when i bring up the bizarro world--i'm crazy? only in 'murica

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Danzig

risk...a question i asked elsewhere that i'll put to you-and whoever else wants to answer that i can actually see their response...

how come it used to be you held a job in the u.s., you could survive. now, that's no longer the case. we've had these 'lower rung' jobs for decades, it used to be enough. now, it's not--and somehow that's the workers fault?
what has changed that what once meant being above poverty no longer does--and how did we decide that it's the employees fault, rather than the employers?
i would LOVE to know how that sea change occurred.

i already know the answer, it really is a rhetorical question.
the amount of payroll is the same, but more now goes the very top.
we have more than ever before graduating from college-the best educated populace in the history of the u.s. but wages are stagnant, or worse.
we have made change after change to our tax policies, to supposedly get the job creators to make more jobs...yet, that doesn't happen.

my son came home and said 'but, if walmart paid more, they'd sell more'. nope.
like i told him, it used to be the employer paid a living wage, and reaped the benefits by selling to their workers. but now, we, the taxpayer make up the difference between the **** wage those companies pay and what it takes to survive.
so, if walmart and the rest boosted their pay, it would take their employees off the dole...but wouldn't mean one more red cent to those businesses, because the peoples' overall income would remain the same.
and the banks and stores like walmart sure make money off those ebt cards, don't they?
the banks and corporations pay for the regulations, or lack thereof...and they pay to keep the min. wage from going up, and they laugh all the way to the vault.

and then when i bring up the bizarro world--i'm crazy? only in 'murica

We have 7.4 million less manufacturing jobs than we did in 1979. Contrary to the philosophy of the Dell's of the world, Everybody can't be a captain of industry, rise from the ashes, and change the world.

Sometimes, folks just need a job that puts a roof over their head, offers them rudimentary healthcare, and at the very least affords them the mirage of hope- that when it's all said and done, they raised a family, put their kids through school in the hopes that their kids might have a better way, and didn't need to worry about dying in the streets in the process.

Those jobs are gone - unless you want to move to Bangalore, India, China, Bangladesh, etc...

I grew up in DC, not far from Baltimore, in fact spent a great deal of time there, back then. I remember Bethlehem Steel, General Motors (all the Chevy Astro vans were assembled there), GAF, all the cannery's along the harbor, along with a million other places that offered a decent (not great, but livable) wage and benefits (that wouldn't bankrupt you if you ever dared to use them) if you were willing to work for them. And the majority of folks did.

That's all gone. Walmart, McD's, etc - these jobs are their replacement - like it or not. The sad fact of the matter is that there is a majority of the population that is either not mentally, physically, financially adept enough to excel in the current climate (similarly to the way they were back then) - the difference - Back then, they could work an assembly line, operate plant machinery, etc... Now they are Cashiers and Greeters - if they can even get those jobs.

At the end of the day, the more they earn, the more they pay in taxes and the less of a burden overall the lower class is on the system. That is a positive for all of us (unless you're the corporation).

[Danzig]

Didn't know we used to be neighbors!

[GenuineRisk]

It's a ton of factors, and frankly, we can't discount that after WW2, we were the only major nation that hadn't had the sh*t bombed out of it, so a lot of our enormous economic growth post WW2 has to be attributed to the fact that we had an incredibly big advantage on everyone else because we still had infrastructure. Also having the majority of the population old enough to have lived through the Great Depression helped, as it was considered uncouth to display extravagant wealth, and so that helped keep executive salaries, while not low, at least not what they are today.

http://www.businessinsider.com/fortu...ker-pay-2014-6

Compare 1983 to now.

But, as Danzig said, the major thing is inequality, because the economy has grown (though not at the crazy rate it did post WW2) and yet worker salaries peaked in the early 1970s. The wealthy suck up most of the economic growth and "trickle down" is exactly what GHW Bush said it was before he drank the Reagan Kool Aid- voodoo economics.

And somehow, returns to shareholders became more important than lives of average people. I think of Hershey, moving a portion of their production to Mexico in order to keep share price high- why? If the company is not losing money, why isn't keeping a city running important and valuable enough on its own? Three thousand people here, including 900 in Hershey, lost their jobs as a result- all for a ten percent cut in production costs, in order to return money to... shareholders.

Cutting taxes on the wealthy just makes them hoard more money- they don't put it into the economy. Raising minimum wage puts more money into the economy because your average working class person has to spend everything they make on rent, food, gas, etc. That's good for the economy as a whole.

I don't think it'll affect employment rates, but it will do good things for the local economies, which is where the working class spend their money.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

We have 7.4 million less manufacturing jobs than we did in 1979. Contrary to the philosophy of the Dell's of the world, Everybody can't be a captain of industry, rise from the ashes, and change the world.

Sometimes, folks just need a job that puts a roof over their head, offers them rudimentary healthcare, and at the very least affords them the mirage of hope- that when it's all said and done, they raised a family, put their kids through school in the hopes that their kids might have a better way, and didn't need to worry about dying in the streets in the process.

Those jobs are gone - unless you want to move to Bangalore, India, China, Bangladesh, etc...

I grew up in DC, not far from Baltimore, in fact spent a great deal of time there, back then. I remember Bethlehem Steel, General Motors (all the Chevy Astro vans were assembled there), GAF, all the cannery's along the harbor, along with a million other places that offered a decent (not great, but livable) wage and benefits (that wouldn't bankrupt you if you ever dared to use them) if you were willing to work for them. And the majority of folks did.

That's all gone. Walmart, McD's, etc - these jobs are their replacement - like it or not. The sad fact of the matter is that there is a majority of the population that is either not mentally, physically, financially adept enough to excel in the current climate (similarly to the way they were back then) - the difference - Back then, they could work an assembly line, operate plant machinery, etc... Now they are Cashiers and Greeters - if they can even get those jobs.

At the end of the day, the more they earn, the more they pay in taxes and the less of a burden overall the lower class is on the system. That is a positive for all of us (unless you're the corporation).

Well said just 2 points. Moving to India, China or whatever won't get you a job as those countries will not issue you papers to work there as they protect their citizens.

Secondly being highly educated means virtually nothing unless you are at the top tier within an organization as we are moving towards entire businesses operations being contracted out and managed by the handful at the top tier. Question is how does one get to that top tier out of college if no jobs are their for them to show their skills and move up the ranks. Sorry for the gloom and doom as it doesn't reflect my circumstances but unlike some around here I care about the future generations and not just keeping the ball in the air long enough until I check out.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

We have 7.4 million less manufacturing jobs than we did in 1979. Contrary to the philosophy of the Dell's of the world, Everybody can't be a captain of industry, rise from the ashes, and change the world.

In my world we also now have more than 10 million illegals who contrary to public and congress's opinions are now more or less legal thanks to executive action taken by Barak Obama. You know the same guy who campaigned he wouldn't use executive action.

Only he took it a bit further not only ignoring the public and congress but also the courts.

But in the world outside of Dell's all is well as long as the Little Sisters of the Poor are forced to provide birth control and abortions, the religious florist and pizza maker are forced to partake in gay weddings and Bruce Jenner is now a woman despite still having a Y chromosome.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

In my world we also now have more than 10 million illegals who contrary to public and congress's opinions are now more or less legal thanks to executive action taken by Barak Obama. You know the same guy who campaigned he wouldn't use executive action.

Only he took it a bit further not only ignoring the public and congress but also the courts.

But in the world outside of Dell's all is well as long as the Little Sisters of the Poor are forced to provide birth control and abortions, the religious florist and pizza maker are forced to partake in gay weddings and Bruce Jenner is now a woman despite still having a Y chromosome.

I know you hate Obama for just being however

http://www.businessinsider.com/reaga...orders-2014-11

[Danzig]

and i know that jobs have changed or moved....but that doesn't explain why the wage that used to mean above poverty no longer does. this needs to be fixed.
why are we subsidizing businesses so as to allow them to do all that they do?
why do we hear complaints about people welfare, but not corporate welfare that's twice the spending? why are we sending hundreds of thousands of dollars to millionaires?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by jms62

I know you hate Obama for just being however

http://www.businessinsider.com/reaga...orders-2014-11

Apples to Oranges as it wasn't decided unilaterally by either and involved congress thus making court decisions/opinions moot.

If you want to bash Reagan I'd suggest the NAFTA agreement he signed that benefitted Mexico, Canada AND U.S. corporations that moved jobs to Mexico far more than it did for the U.S.

BTW I don't hate Obama just as I don't hate Danzig, just think they're consistently wrong and many times way wrong.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

why do we hear complaints about people welfare, but not corporate welfare that's twice the spending? why are we sending hundreds of thousands of dollars to millionaires?

I suppose for similar reasons we don't hear about

Illegal immigrants residing in the U.S. send $50 billion in remittances to their home countries each year, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The World Bank estimates that number is even higher, closer to $120 billion.

Or the fact why we don't hear about the top 1% paying 37% of personal income taxes or the top 20% paying 80% of the personal income taxes.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I suppose for similar reasons we don't hear about

Or the fact why we don't hear about the top 1% paying 37% of personal income taxes or the top 20% paying 80% of the personal income taxes.

I suspect the average person would not complain about paying income tax if they were among the top 1% of earners....oh me, I have to pay such a high rate of taxes that it's gonna take me forever to make my next billion! Really Dell, those poor rick cats!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

I suspect the average person would not complain about paying income tax if they were among the top 1% of earners....oh me, I have to pay such a high rate of taxes that it's gonna take me forever to make my next billion! Really Dell, those poor rick cats!

yes. poor little rich people, we really should stop picking on them....

i remember when they said romney paid what...11-12% tax? i paid 25% effective rate.
yeah, that makes sense.
people clamor for a flat tax (probably because they haven't thought about it much or looked at what it meant) but those same people gripe at me when i say why should i pay a higher percentage? they invariably say 'but he paid a larger dollar amount'. yes, and ......? if a flat tax says romney should pay 25%, why do i get grief when i mention i pay that, and he pays half that?
ah, inconsistencies, gotta love them. i actually had that conversation most recently at the wellness center. ah, um, uh, you're just jealous of rich people is no explanation for why this is.
why this is, is that people who have money pay to get rules set to keep their money. i can't do that.

and just think, if the wages were corrected for everyone, how much more money would flow from all the non-rich who game the system...

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Apples to Oranges as it wasn't decided unilaterally by either and involved congress thus making court decisions/opinions moot.

If you want to bash Reagan I'd suggest the NAFTA agreement he signed that benefitted Mexico, Canada AND U.S. corporations that moved jobs to Mexico far more than it did for the U.S.

BTW I don't hate Obama just as I don't hate Danzig, just think they're consistently wrong and many times way wrong.

[Danzig]

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/why-were-marching-mcdonalds

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yes. poor little rich people, we really should stop picking on them....

i remember when they said romney paid what...11-12% tax? i paid 25% effective rate.
yeah, that makes sense.
people clamor for a flat tax (probably because they haven't thought about it much or looked at what it meant) but those same people gripe at me when i say why should i pay a higher percentage? they invariably say 'but he paid a larger dollar amount'. yes, and ......? if a flat tax says romney should pay 25%, why do i get grief when i mention i pay that, and he pays half that?
ah, inconsistencies, gotta love them...

Mitt Romney made $13.7 million last year (2011) and paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes, giving him an effective tax rate of 14.1%, his campaign said Friday.

He paid an effective rate of 14.1% because the vast majority of income made is investment income on money he has already been taxed on. He also was able to take a significant deduction for money he donated to charity ($4 million) or 29% of total income. So when you add taxes paid and money donated, it comes to a combined effective rate of 43.2% or 18.29% more than you paid.

BTW a person with an effective tax rate of 25% on a yearly income of $50K w/o any deductions including the personal exemption would pay $12,500 and would have to file over 155 years or three lifetimes of taxes to equal what Romney paid in a single year.

Hope that makes everyone crying 'unfair' feel a little bit better going into this Memorial Day weekend.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

He paid an effective rate of 14.1% because the vast majority of income made is investment income on money he has already been taxed on. He also was able to take a significant deduction for money he donated to charity ($4 million) or 29% of total income. So when you add taxes paid and money donated, it comes to a combined effective rate of 43.2% or 18.29% more than you paid.

BTW a person with an effective tax rate of 25% on a yearly income of $50K w/o any deductions including the personal exemption would pay $12,500 and would have to file over 155 years or three lifetimes of taxes to equal what Romney paid in a single year.

Hope that makes everyone crying 'unfair' feel a little bit better going into this Memorial Day weekend.

You realize these people you have such a raging boner for have made their money by breaking down businesses and cutting jobs and shipping jobs out of the country. The money lost from our economy in the way of purchasing power is in the trillions. The ball is being kept in the air by artificially low interest rates. Not much the fed can do if we hit another bad patch. Keep rooting for the scum that put us in this position cause this is America and you can be one of them. The fact that you are not one of them after 50 years notwithstanding.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by jms62

You realize these people you have such a raging boner for have made their money by breaking down businesses and cutting jobs and shipping jobs out of the country. The money lost from our economy in the way of purchasing power is in the trillions. The ball is being kept in the air by artificially low interest rates. Not much the fed can do if we hit another bad patch. Keep rooting for the scum that put us in this position cause this is America and you can be one of them. The fact that you are not one of them after 50 years notwithstanding.

it's the same mentality that had dirt poor southerners fighting a war for their rich neighbors to be able to keep slaves...while the plantation owners sat on their verandahs watching their world crumble.