Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

[lektrode]

some interesting (and/or thought or maybe even discussion-provoking) headlines today:

from over at rupert's place:
New Flash of Optimism for Small-Business Owners

but not necessarily in burger land, where we learn over at yaaHOOOey that:

Fast-Food Chains Aren’t as Rich as Protesters Think

esp considering that, well... maybe some are getting a bit too carried-away (in thinking that dumping bags o fries into a basket of a fryolator and burger flippin is worth, HOW MUCH???)

POLL

Fast food workers are going on strike today, calling for $15-an-hour minimum wage. The federal rate is $7.25.

What's your take?

I agree, it should be more than doubled (13554)

14%

It should be increased slightly (38075)

41%

It should stay the same (16951)

18%

Minimum wage should be [/PHP]abolished (25408)

27%

and meanwhile - over at bloomyville:

Republican Health-Care Attack Shifts From Defund to Delay

which will then likely result in even more part timers, most of whom WONT be getting 15bux/hour??

but things might be starting to pick up down in the mines...
Alamos Thriving in Gold’s Rout Ready for Value Buys

(workin on a 'gold' mine, goin down down down WHOOPs... workin down down down...)




and after a pop UP yest, the nervous money must be thinking the energy biz/market isnt looking so hot all of a sudden ??

Energy stocks fall, a day after rallying on oil

[c1ue]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

No doubt the striker's actions were at least in part motivated by the HuffPo piece which noted that Big Mac prices would only increase 17% if worker wages were doubled to $15/hr.

The Empire Strikes Back commentary is that this is wrong - it is actually 24%. Wow! Big difference! Not.

The core point is still the same - labor is but a fraction of the overall McDonald's price. The rationale for paying people less isn't about keeping burger prices down - it is about how little you can pay and get away with it.

This isn't evil, but it is hardly good either.

It is simply the traditional capital vs. labor game.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

The rationale for paying people less isn't about keeping burger prices down - it is about how little you can pay and get away with it.

Somehow the family that owns In N' Out manages to make money, grow the company, pay decent wages and serve up delicious burgers and fries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-N-Out_Burger

The company's business practices have been noted for employee-centered personnel policies. For example, In-N-Out is one of the few fast food chains in the United States to pay its employees significantly more than state and federally mandated minimum wage guidelines – starting at US$10.50 per hour in California, as of April 2013.<sup>[8]


http://www.forbes.com/sites/calebmel...llionaire-yet/

In-N-Out produced estimated revenues of $625 million last year, according to Privco. Using price-to-sales ratios of comparable companies Jack in the Box, Red Robin Burgers and Sonic Corp, Forbes places a rough valuation on the company of about $800 million. While others might be tempted to compare the chain to larger restauranteurs like McDonald’s, Wendy’s or Yum, we don’t think these larger, more efficient chains with perkier multiples are truly comparable to smaller-scaled and regionally-focused In-N-Out. Among other strategic decisions, In-N-Out pays employees a wage significantly higher than the minimum, and eschews frozen meat, microwaves and heat lamps in the name of freshness — choices that undoubtedly dent profit margins.</sup>

[charliebrown]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

Pretty soon, I can quit my high tech job and flip burgers. :-) The pay keeps getting closer every year. And for all those 50K a year median income families, raising prices on low cost stables such as fast food, big box retail etc is a big difference. There is not to many discretionary dollars left.

If McDonald's is forced to raise minimum wages, will uniforms still be part of the package? employee meals? any other perks an employe might receive?

Having .gov set an artificial price for labor is not the answer.

[BadJuju]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

Having gov controlled by big business certainly isn't the answer either.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

Having .gov set an artificial price for labor is not the answer.

Isnt' labor price always artificial, though? It's not like it's an emergent natural phenomenon. If we get rid of the minimum wage, should we also get rid of the 40-hour workweek? Overtime? Occupational health and safety? Child labor laws? The 13th amendment barring slavery?

It's an honest question. It's not meant to be hyperbolic. If "natural" means no government, then "natural" doesn't exist in nature.

And if government laws and rule means "artificial," then the "artificial" is the only thing that exists in nature.

And if some laws regulating labor markets are good, then why is there such a knee-jerk reaction saying all are bad?

There are actual reasons one might be against the minimum wage.

I suppose I'm just picking a semantical argument with you.

But I don't see what's so "artificial" about a minimum wage at all.

We live in a society of law.

Laws establish the foundational rules for the labor market.

Nothing's artificial about that.

[verdo]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

Generally I'm fairly pro higher wages. If you try to make the U.S./Canada and other advanced western countries into giant low wage sweatshop factories, you'll be competing with the Chinese, and even the Chinese are now being undercut where cheap labor is concerned by the Vietnamese. So it makes no sense for the U.S. to join this race to the bottom. You will always loose

[kriden]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

First step in bypassing the issue of underpaying their employees?

http://news.cnet.com/mcdonalds-hires-7000-touch-screen-cashiers/8301-17938_105-20063732-1.html
McDonald's hires 7,000 touch-screen cashiers

Would you like some microchips with that burger? McDonald's Europe strikes another blow against human interaction by installing 7,000 touch-screen computers to take your order and money.

[c1ue]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

Pretty soon, I can quit my high tech job and flip burgers.

Well, tech jobs have the same job stability and retirement options as McDonald's workers...

[Woodsman]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

And similar status !

[charliebrown]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

Well there you go again DC, making me think ...

As a tech worker in company that employs minimum wage workers we are always looking for ways to employ less of them.
I can tell you if their wages were raised to $15.00 an hour certain initiatives that we have tried and are not cost effective would be rolled out. Hence less people would be employed.

You are right we are a nation of laws. Its just that at what level do we set the wage? The people in power are so
detached from the real world I just don't think they can set the wage correctly. Should a minimum wage be set unilaterally for all labor?

What about jobs that are a path to better jobs, or jobs that have danger or harsh working conditions?

I would say we have a surplus of talent in this country that is not being used because people cannot afford to pay them. If our cost structure were taken down, then the wages could be lowered or stay the same and these people
would be earning a living wage.

Debt jubilee? No more fire. The current money/credit/debt thing is causing major distortions in the economy.

[aaron]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

Raising the minimum wage is a good idea. Frankly, if you cannot afford to pay somebody a decent wage, your business sucks. It does not deserve to continue on. Perhaps it would be a good business plan in a different country.

With many people getting a raise, our economy would get a great jolt... and not this "all the money to the top 1%" jolt, but money to the people. All we have gotten is the bad type of inflation for 15 years straight.

All our salaries would increase over time. If there is anything the middle class and lower class needs is it is a bit of wage inflation.

Poorer people spend all the money they make into the real economy. The money multiplier effect would be quite large. A lot of businesses will sprout up to serve these new consumers.

It should be phased in over a period of 6 years, 25 cents the first year, 50 cents the next, 1 dollar per year going forward. It will be a known expense that the mega-corps can plan for. It will be slow enough that businesses that deserve to survive will do so. There will be more customers for newer businesses that sprout up. Prices can be raised, dividends lowered.

Entrenched interests will not like this. Their stash of paper will not fair well. Small businesses will have only 3 years to see if they can make the cut.

The results will likely be a lot more family businesses and business partnerships. Owners are not required to be paid.

I do not see this affecting foreign investment in new businesses. Who wants to spend a bunch of money to open a company where workers get paid so little? The profit margin must be very thin. People want to invest here for the more expensive workers available who can make high margin goods and services.

Or, we can increase the earned income credit thing and be done with it all.

Anyway, something must be done about the large (and growing) poor in the U.S. There is so much wealth in this country. It is incredible how shitty we treat our fellow citizens.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

Well there you go again DC, making me think ...

As a tech worker in company that employs minimum wage workers we are always looking for ways to employ less of them.
I can tell you if their wages were raised to $15.00 an hour certain initiatives that we have tried and are not cost effective would be rolled out. Hence less people would be employed.

You are right we are a nation of laws. Its just that at what level do we set the wage? The people in power are so
detached from the real world I just don't think they can set the wage correctly. Should a minimum wage be set unilaterally for all labor?

What about jobs that are a path to better jobs, or jobs that have danger or harsh working conditions?

I would say we have a surplus of talent in this country that is not being used because people cannot afford to pay them. If our cost structure were taken down, then the wages could be lowered or stay the same and these people
would be earning a living wage.

Debt jubilee? No more fire. The current money/credit/debt thing is causing major distortions in the economy.

You're not wrong. What the wage should be is debatable. Other anglo countries often set different minimums by age. Germanic countries set minimums by occupation. There are many paths to accomplish setting the wage floor in a labor market. $15 might be too much. Canada and the UK are around $10-$11 (varies). Even Galbraith was only arguing for $12. I think somewhere in that range is workable. I don't mind that it varies by state, actually. Cheaper states can handle cheaper wages. Of course, some states have wide ranges within them. It's impossible to do anything with $7.25 in NYC. I can't even go there for a day trip and not spend $70 doing nothing - all of the stores mark everything up due to rent prices. Yet go out to the Southern Tier, and things are cheaper than anywhere else in the Northeast, short of rural PA.

Up here in New England, it's damn near impossible to do anything with minimum wage. So VT is $8.60, but with its population base so close to QC, that's a lot less than someone can make just up the road. WA is the highest with $9.19. Again, I think proximity to Canada matters here. But New York is the bottom of the barrel at $7.25. That's not going to cut it in the city. It's guaranteed welfare even for full time work.

So the way I figure it, if you raise it by a couple of bucks and it gets half of the working-welfare folks off the welfare rolls, then it's probably a good thing. There's no reason Wal*Mart policy should be to hand out food stamp applications with a job. Especially when it's America's largest employer by a factor of 4 and 4 of the top 10 richest people in the country are heirs to the fortune that company makes. There has to be a way to solve this. Food stamp eligibility sits at 130% FPL. That's $7.56 per hour at 40 hours per week right now for someone single. I figure the minimum should at least clear that hurdle. It will save the taxpayers money.

I think there's a double-edged sword here. There's an overabundance of talent because people can't afford to pay them. And there's also people looking to pay them so little that they can't afford to do the jobs. My guess is that if it hit $9 per hour, it wouldn't be the end of the world, there would be little to no effect on overall employment, and the work-full-time-and-get-food-stamps gig would be over.

A plurality of economists surveyed agree. $15 may be too much. $9 probably is not. $7.25 just doesn't align well with federal welfare policy that set the limit and adjusted for inflation since '82. I think Romney was right on this one. Tag the damn minimum wage to inflation, and keep it above 130% of FPL. Then you don't get so many people exempt from taxes and on food stamps. Even $8.50 at 37 hours per week will get you over the welfare hump. The 10 years of zero minimum wage increases from 1998 to 2008 really messed up the inflation-adjusted value.

[shiny!]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

I think Romney was right on this one. Tag the damn minimum wage to inflation, and keep it above 130% of FPL. Then you don't get so many people exempt from taxes and on food stamps. Even $8.50 at 37 hours per week will get you over the welfare hump. The 10 years of zero minimum wage increases from 1998 to 2008 really messed up the inflation-adjusted value.

This seems like a good idea, but the government needs to be honest about how they measure inflation. Since the 1980's, things like food and fuel that have gone up drastically in price are no longer included in the inflation calculations, are they? We're experiencing "inflation in the things we need, deflation in the things we want". The government has conveniently omitted the "things we need" from their inflation calculations to show that inflation is low, when it isn't.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Survey Sez: optimism does not = $15/hour

This seems like a good idea, but the government needs to be honest about how they measure inflation. Since the 1980's, things like food and fuel that have gone up drastically in price are no longer included in the inflation calculations, are they? We're experiencing "inflation in the things we need, deflation in the things we want". The government has conveniently omitted the "things we need" from their inflation calculations to show that inflation is low, when it isn't.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

You're right. And they keep changing the definition every year. But at least going up by the CPI is better than not going up at all for a decade, then a sudden, jarring bump when/if the political pressure builds. Things were a lot easier before August 2005 when gas and oil were half price. That's for sure.