They are not allowed to accept tips :2 cents:

Yeah, and who is doing the outsourcing? The "job creators".

Well said. I listened to NPR last night, I didn't know bank tellers are paid shit. In NY alone it costs the state 120 million dollars in gov programs they need to survive.
Again how Minte approves of the gov subsidizing a businesses expenses is acceptable is beyond me. I guess like most conservatives if it benefits him then its ok.

One word Costco, in Australia min wage is $15 an hour and unemployment is 5 %. Whats that magic? And they aint paying $20 for a big mac.
Also if the company cant survive without gov handouts for the workers then its not a viable business model.

While government leaders don't make CEO pay in office they do make it after they get out of office. When Bush jr tanked the medicaid program in 2003 all of those who helped got jobs in the private sector that paid millions a year for sham titles they weren't qualified for.

As for the economy being driven by the poor. This is very true. Right now the economy worldwide is in a bubble again and when it bursts it will be bad. It is propped up by overspending. Things seem okay right now. Just like they did before housing tanked.

Not viable? How long has Walmart been in business? How did they manage to become the worlds largest retailer?

And Australia? who knows..the population of the entire country is not much more than Southern California. They probably don't have anywhere near as many people sucking off the system. It's a balanced economy, like it used to be here in the US.

Fast-Food Worker Strikes: 100+ Cities Where Fast-Food Workers Demand $15.00/hour

Define poor. I've seen people earning a million a year living paycheck to paycheck. I've known people making under 30K a year provide for a family of four. High Income doesn't make you a 'job creator', low income doesn't make you a 'blight on society'

A generation ago, people in power used race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation and religion as wedge issues. As long as blacks and Jews and women and 'foreigners' couldn't get along or were willing to blame their problems on each other - nobody noticed the man behind the curtain pulling the strings. Now those labels are being obviated so the man behind the curtain needs a new wedge to distract the masses. They have made it a game of the 'barely rich', 'almost barely rich', 'not rich', and 'poor'

What surprises me, is that while I expect uneducated dim witted poor people to be blind as to the game being played, I would have expected barely rich people and almost barely rich people to be more savvy than they now seem to be. Someone earning a few million a year has infinitely more in common with a person earning 30K than they do with a person earning 300M in almost every case. Chase Bank, AIG, Goldman Sachs, Exxon and the like take more from you every month than all the poor people combined.

No poor person or barely rich is blowing the tops off mountains and making drinking water flammable. Poor people aren't turning capital markets into rigged casinos via high frequency trading, almost barely rich people aren't genetically modifying your food or restricting varieties of food to the point where we had to create a seed bank as a matter of national security. Hobos didn't crash the economy with derivative trading schemes or raise the cost of education to nonsensical levels.

Stop whining about the poor or the barely rich, we are all in the same boat.
It's the people in that other boat, smiling at you while they laugh behind your back, who are the actual problem.

This TBH.. I'm not some anti big business or anti rich guy. Hell I would even support limiting welfare and social services to try and kick those whom are on it off that abuse it..

The problem with that, is if you do have subsidized housing or other benefits, you probably need to make at least 10/hr to come out ahead and really who the fuck would even want to work for $10/hr?

The issue here is not so much lazy people, but yes they do share the blame. However the bigger blame goes to corporations whom have a business model which subsidizes their payroll by abusing social services a. They do this by paying them so low they are on welfare. Essentially these companies are leeching off the govt tit to make up the difference in what they don't pay out.

Want to get people off welfare? Then fucking raise minimum wage high enough, so someone working 35/hrs a week makes enough to not qualify to receive it. I say 35/hrs because most of the people whom work at jobs like Walmart are never given full 40/hr weeks..

Actually I think a reasonable solution to this, would be charge to corporation a much higher tax percentage if more that 30% of its workforce is on welfare.

If they are successful all the fast food industry will do is raise their prices.

People love Walmart because they are cheaper than everyone else. How is it that they are cheaper? Their cost of goods wasn't less than K-mart when Walmart got going. They competed on a level playing field. What they did was start a price war with everyone else. The masses liked that and supported it. Once Walmart started to win the battles, they got leverage over their vendor base. So now they do pay less for the COG than everyone else. And then to make sure they would crush whoever came at them, they lowered prices again.

And the masses benefit.

But you also probably know that if every WalMart employee got a 20% bump in salary, the owners of the company would be only marginally less rich. I'm not a major employer -- I'm a one man business, but there's a concept I definitely understand -- or maybe its more of a philosophy.

If you make your employees happy by giving them a wage that's livable in an economy where the cost of everything is rising, then they'll be happy to show up for work and do their best job to make your company thrive -- which means long term riches.

No one is going to profit in the long run if the people who work for them aren't satisfied with the pay their getting. Of course, there are limits that need to be set -- but those rich bastards at Walmart are pretty cheap. Like I said before, it's great that they built something and got rich from it, but at least have the attitude of taking care of the people who helped get you there -- instead of having employee based food drives.

In theory giving the Walmart employees an extra bump will make them happy...for about 3 weeks. Raises and bonuses don't have much of a long term effect. People that are prone to living week to week quickly find something new to waste that raise on and in a very short time it's business as usual. Push it to far, the company has no alternative but to raise prices.

Don't forget about those shareholders. That's the key part of this situation. 401k's are built on dividends. Growth in every facet of the economy depends of keeping those shareholders enthusiastic.

My own opinion is Walmart and McDonalds should raise their prices. However, if they do that a lot of customers will be unhappy. McDonalds isn't like Exxon. People don't require cheeseburgers and fries. And look at how much we all love Exxon & BP..

edit:check your math on that 20%. If Walmart eliminated all of the owners bonuses it wouldn't add up to anywhere near a 20% pay increase for the employee base. The only way for that to happen is to raise consumer prices.

Profit is a word that is made to sound evil so that others can steal it from you.

"greed" is pretty popular too... for some reason the rich have been tagged with that word... but actually everyone (including the poor) is "greedy", everyone wants more $$, everyone wants more in life, etc...

the poor are just as greedy as the rich, but at least the rich understand the fact that to get more they have to create more "value"... unsuccessful on the other hand tend to want more without any additional effort...

"Lets go on strike so I can get paid 50% more for doing the job in same half-assed way I've been doing my whole life"

vs

"hmm, how can I improve my business? How can I add more features to my product? How can I improve my customer support? what skills can I learn to earn more? etc"

actually not true but its fun to keep with the same false belief.
http://hbr.org/2006/12/the-high-cost-of-low-wages/ar/1

"Costco?s practices are clearly more expensive, but they have an offsetting cost-containment effect: Turnover is unusually low, at 17% overall and just 6% after one year?s employment. In contrast, turnover at Wal-Mart is 44% a year, close to the industry average. In skilled and semi-skilled jobs, the fully loaded cost of replacing a worker who leaves (excluding lost productivity) is typically 1.5 to 2.5 times the worker?s annual salary. To be conservative, let?s assume that the total cost of replacing an hourly employee at Costco or Sam?s Club is only 60% of his or her annual salary. If a Costco employee quits, the cost of replacing him or her is therefore $21,216. If a Sam?s Club employee leaves, the cost is $12,617. At first glance, it may seem that the low-wage approach at Sam?s Club would result in lower turnover costs. But if its turnover rate is the same as Wal-Mart?s, Sam?s Club loses more than twice as many people as Costco does: 44% versus 17%. By this calculation, the total annual cost to Costco of employee churn is $244 million, whereas the total annual cost to Sam?s Club is $612 million. That?s $5,274 per Sam?s Club employee, versus $3,628 per Costco employee."

Then the question has to asked.

Why isn't Costco kicking Walmarts butt?

No one is anti rich guy but that has to be said as an excuse. If the rich are hated why are rappers, Steve Jobs , Mark Zuckerberg ,Mark Cuban, Bill Gates and others considered celebrities. Paris Hilton became a star for nothing but being rich.

Because Costco workers arent being subsidized by the government.If you have someone else covering one of your expenses you have alot more profit. I thought you would know that as a CEO of a company? It costs you the tax payer 900k for every walmart store in WI in gov programs for workers living in poverty.
You are ok with that? If you are, then you really arent a conservative, free market guy.

He only knows and understands these sort of things, if they support his political views.. Otherwise there is always and excuse or the subject is changed.

for someone that claims to run a decent size company Minte sure does seem to find quite a bit of time to spend in here every day. I run a company with only 5 employees and barely find time to take a crap. How does this 12Clicks wannabe do it?

Thats right folks, don't pay your employees more than you have to. They will only be happy for a few weeks and blow that raise and stuff like food for their kids cause they're all losers. Fucking douche.

Minte, there is a reason why most wealthy people try to keep a low profile.

a better approach should be to give tax stimulus for people who really do create REAL jobs not the wallmart wellfare + chicken feed model...also if you are going to have minimum wage you better have minimum price...make the giants compete in quality and service not in outsourcing and tax loopholes...you end up with one monopolist in the end that destroys everybody else and makes its own workers slave for pennies just so that these same workers can buy for less...

Sure you run a company... You constantly impress me with your business acumen..

I have provided proof on more than one occasion that I don't need to bullshit anyone.
I have as much time as I want when I am in my office. I run my businesses properly, with solid planning and an amazing well paid staff.


Now let's see if you can prove your claims.

It's difficult to impossible for me to learn how people in all walks of life think. No one from the plant has ever walked into my office and called me a douche. And I doubt that they ever will. And the kinds of conversations that are a regular feature here are never discussed in my peer group.

No problem..I have been in a walmart once in my life. I didn't buy anything, only wanted to see what it was. And if walmart raises their prices it won't make any difference at all to me.
But it obviously will to you and many others.

You can't have it both ways.. Higher wages for a few or higher prices for the many?
What's it going to be?

Since I only come on here once every few weeks I doubt I "constantly" do anything, nice try though.

Hmmm... Maybe I should post pics of an overpriced fountain, guitars I want, put a retarded avator that a 15 year old would have as a poster, and spend hours every day in here spewing ignorance that I shouldnt pay people shit out of one side of my mouth then claiming how I help the starving out of the other side, would that be proof enough?

Whether you have what you say or not means nothing to me. Its obvious to anyone that has an IQ above room temp that you have some serious insecurity issues that run so deep you need to seek constant approval on a message board by bragging about your life through YOUR STUFF. Are you seriously that much of an empty shell that that's how you define yourself?

As i thought..another big talker with nothing. Franck was right with his advice to ignore you.
I will now take his advice.

I will agree, that a raise most likely will not increase a employees productivity long term nor will it result in long term happiness to someone with bad spending habits. Yet as you should know, a raise is not really about either of those. The reality is raises are useful in terms of keeping people with the same company long term. Having long term employees that understand the job is what increases your productivity.

I realize that for my company. We have had two across the board raises in the last 14 months and are working on the employee evaluations now for another upgrade in January.

But I'm not a walmart. The people we need must have skills that are not easy to learn and are not easy to replace. The fact that I observe how other business does things, doesn't mean I agree with it. But it doesn't change the facts as they exist.

Big talker? Find one post where I mention anything about my lifestyle or my stuff. Take a look in the mirror, or in your case the fountain. :1orglaugh

And yet another lie. Seriously, I have yet to find an ounce of truth in any of your posts.

https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/...87677981_n.jpg

https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/...51052538_n.jpg

After millions of years of evolution, hominids (as with most other biological systems organized into large groups) have successfully and continually solved the Free Rider Problem and thrived - weeding them not only from the groups, but usually from the gene pool.

Seems only in the last 50 years or so, those Free Riders are now celebrated more than shunned.... presenting a fairly obvious problem to the future.

What's the point? This thread was about how the less fortunate in society provide employment. Now you've wasted someone elses graphic.

The Republicans have one argument against raising the minimum wage, which is that young people starting out, and having to work part-time, should have to work their way up from the bottom. Okay, fine.

The counter-argument should simply be the suggestion of 2 baseline minimum wages - one for kids who are 21 yrs old or younger, and the other, for adults.

For example, the minimum wage for part-time kids who are 21 or younger is maybe $9.00 p/hour, but the minimum wage for workers who are 22 years or older, becomes $11.00 an hour.

Details would obviously need to be worked out, but at least it's a place to start, and it immediately eliminates the GOP's argument.

Well that's because your company is likely not high turn over, keeping them paid decent makes it harder for them to walk across the street and get a dollar more.

The problem with Wallmart, fast food chains and others like them, is they have built high turn over rates into their business plan. It's cheaper for them to have someone quit and hire a new person, than it is to give them livable wages.

Now on one side I'm willing to say, hey if people will work for that, then that's their problem.. Yet the other side of the coin shows that due to this business plan, their workers end up being subsidized by tax dollars. This not something I can go along with.. Specially when it's been many of these very companies whom have fought to keep the minimum wage that they pay stagnate for years.

So both the people that accept work at those pay level and the employers whom business model is keeps the pay that low share much of the blame. Overall it's the corrupt politicians in DC whom only work for lobbyist fault. It's them, whom have failed to raise the minimum wage enough to keep up with inflation.