reality check: your value is determined by your effort. the constitution doesn't guarantee a big screen TV .... yes there are some adjustment needed however punishing those that work hard to reward those that, don't probably isn't a long term solution :2 cents:

If fewer than 1:1000 minimum wage employees were capable of running a massive, multinational corporation, leading the culture, planning for the future, actively battling it out with competitive companies, keeping stockholders happy and charting a course through the future adressing contingencies which haven't even happened yet, actively hiring and shuffling executives around, overseeing product development and testing and global marketing efforts etc etc etc then his value is greater than 1000 minimum wage employees.

You're not worth a whole lot if you can be replaced by the next pimply faced, socially retarded 16 yr old that walks in the door. If you are worth more, due to your leadership, responsibility and work ethic then you're not working for minimum wage anyway.

All owners of McDonalds restaurants started at the bottom in a McDonalda restaurant. Seems they managed to grow and find success where everyone else does nothing but bitch and whine and hold their hand out.

The short answer: yes. Have you ever looked at your local burger flipper or fries cooker in an airport? Now let's shine a CEO with tens of thousands of locations worldwide and hundreds of thousands of employees...

Skill wise, I think it's over 1000-1, probably more. You're talking being fully responsible for billions of business worldwide every year across the globe, vs a guy who throws meat on a grill.

I think I saw a figure of 40% of franchise owners started as workers so there is def room for those who care to move up :2 cents:

god they got you brain washed. Paying someone $15 an hour is punishing someone. You must like paying for gov programs for under paid workers.

That number will quickly shrink IF the minimum wage is raised up so high. A lot of incentive will be stripped as guys who already worked part of the way up the ladder will suddenly be reduced to making the same wage as the pimple faced kid who just got hired yesterday. :(

Tony said a few posts back that living on $15 an hour would be hard to do. WHAT?

If you're a single guy...$15 an hour is damn good money. If you're a single girl it's good. If you are part of a couple, you're other half has a job too.

The thought process on this is astounding to me. Especially since our industry CAN'T raise our prices because people get everything for free.

So as I watch the prices of everything going up...I can't raise my prices to match.

And now you want to raise the minimum wage, which will further speed up inflationary prices?

Our country's "leaders" need to be creating a business FRIENDLY environment. Not forcing new costs down their throat (obamacare, minimum wage hikes, etc.)

We should see that source then. But keep in mind there are hundreds of right wing organizations funded by the Kochs and others which put out statistics like that in order to fool people like yourself.

1. How many of them were working for their parents who owned the franchise and they merely inherited it? (there is a huge difference between being a normal fast food worker who rises to the top and inheriting a franchise from your dad when you worked in it 20 years ago in the summer as a teen)

2. How long on average did these people work as normal workers before owning a franchise? Just a couple days or weeks as part of a training program or longer?

Details like this make a big difference.

Yes.
A business owner is a special breed, a burger flipper is nothing more than a lemming.

what a silly lie.

hate YOUR OWN parents for that, not responsible intelligent parents giving their kids a leg up.

becoming a franchise owner of a mcdonalds is very tough because you have to know ALL aspects of the business and ave managed one before you can get one.

it's illuminati and lizard people, same cats doing the chemtrails and hiding the return of Jesus :2 cents:

So share the source then and let's find out where it really came from.

For example the Heritage Foundation is a big one which often is the direct or indirect source of some of these "statistics".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politi..._Koch_brothers


http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conten...age-foundation

You'd probably be surprised at how many of the "facts" and "statistics" you hear on Fox News are actually coming from organizations funded by the Kochs and other billionaires or vested interests. There are hundreds if not thousands of these groups. Usually if you examine the claims in more detail you will find the truth is far different than what was presented (IOW it's propaganda). For example the "only 1.1% of people make minimum wage" stat being presented to imply that a minimum wage increase to $10 an hour would only affect 1.1% of the population when in reality it's closer to 20-25% as that stat only includes those who make EXACTLY minimum wage and not one penny more.

actually I heard the CEO of mcy's d say that in an interview on Netflix I believe BUT I could have misquoted and 84% of the facts on the internet are made up :2 cents:

IMHO you are trying to justify your intellect and decision making process as well as your insight by stubbornly adhering to a polarized view... here just for you: all action is the result of motive and opportunity, all conversation are rationalities

No, it's just that I believe people should tell the truth. And I know it's not only the right wing which is guilty of this. I think if someone uses a statistic they should show the source of it and make at least an honest effort to put it in proper context and not use it for propaganda purposes to mislead people. The truth should speak for itself. There is no need to deceive.

If only we could get around all the bullshit lies and halftruths maybe then we could really understand and solve our problems.

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-plan-rejected

A couple days ago - the Swiss rejected a proposal for the world's highest minimum wage in a public referendum.

I remember shitty minimum wage jobs, it was in 1984, did it for about 6 months, said fuck this shit, and found a better place to work, started at 2 1/2 times the minimum wage and got raises every 6 months.

Elevating the minimum wage will do 2 things. Cause companies to downsize and shovel more work on those they keep (and if they don't like it, fuck you, there are 10 people waiting to take your job), and elevate the cost of living so those making the new minimum wage are still around the real poverty level (not the bullshit numbers the government posts.

they said the same thing about ending child labor, starting min wage, when truman almost doubled min wage and it didnt happen.

yes ,HOWEVER you decide what is true, I'll decide what is true for me, not you :2 cents:

and car seat belts...

It appears to me that "they" were right about all of that. It DID happen in case you didn't notice that the nations poverty level has increased over the last 50 years, our money is almost worthless, and our so-called "economy" apparently hinges on people having government jobs and/or being in the military.

In my opinion it's a house of cards all the way.

One step of getting back to sanity is to pay people what a job is really WORTH. Not just pay them to try and feel "good" about it.

:thumbsup I know you guys at XBiz follow business news across the board and not just the sliver which is adult.

I find the autotune thingies they put on those lines and tech support ones to be kinda creepy. They don't quite make Indian tech support sound MidWestern, but it has an uncanny valley aspect. I'd personally prefer something like an Eat24 app to a human order taker I have to speak with, in person or an ocean away. I'm not the core demo though.

the nations poverty was the result of minimum wage increases, and not wholesale export of every major american industry to china?

who, btw, seems to be doing quite well..

No Richard...the "War On Poverty" was started by the Johnson administration long before we ever did any business with China.

You are completely not understanding what I am saying and jumping off into another whole topic...which by the way the REASON that companies move jobs to China is because of stupid shit like raising the minimum wage over and over and over to keep up with "inflation"...which in turn is caused by higher costs of production (such as wages being raised)
If I own a company and can do business elsewhere and make more money...that is what I'm going to do. So would you.

My point, that you missed...is that the United States has spent TRILLIONS of dollars on the "War On Poverty" started by Pres. Johnson.
The result, after 50 years and all that money spent? More people are in poverty than ever before.

And my solution? Instead of the govt. (which is made up of a bunch of bureaucrats and career politicians without any real business background) making it harder for business to thrive...how about they do things that would cause a business to WANT to be here and WANT to hire Americans for good wages?

It's worked in several states here. When you give businesses tax breaks and ease up on fees and regulations...the local economy blooms (I saw it first hand in upstate South Carolina when BMW built a plant there in the late 1990's)

When you tax them hard, have unions demanding unrealistic wages and benefits, and have govt riding their ass? You end up with: Detroit.

My solution is to be more like the upstate of South Carolina and less like Detroit.

Having business grow and hire people will solve a lot of problems.

Forcing businesses to take on MORE expense (obamacare, taxes, unjustified higher wages) is only going to make things worse.

Here is an abstract thought. McDonald's (and other low paying jobs) are actually punishing the rich by paying a low wage.

Here is the idea:

If a person works at one of these jobs and doesn't make enough money to put them above the poverty level they can qualify for various welfare programs. Companies like McDonald's and Walmart actually have info in their employee handbooks and they have people employed by them that help their workers to sign up for various government aid programs. They actually encourage them to do so.

These government aid programs are expensive and cost tax dollars.Who pays most of the taxes in this country? The wealthy. So, in a way by paying a smaller wage these companies are helping to drive people to social programs that cost the government billions (if not trillions) which in turn leads them to then tax the rich in order to pay for it.

If they paid a little more (I'm not talking about $20 per hour, but enough to push people above the poverty like to a place where they no longer qualify for government aid) it may lower their profits slightly, but it could help to lift millions off of various welfare programs and could lead to lowered government spending and less taxes.

Just a thought.

kane, why do people keep saying that McDonalds workers are all on welfare?

Go to McDonalds. Ask the guy behind the counter if he has a cellphone. Ask him if he owns a car. Ask him if he has a girlfriend or wife that he lives with that also has a job.

Are there some people working jobs at McDonalds who might be gaming the system to get govt. checks? I'm sure of it.

Do they really need it?

Well...I've traveled a LOT in the U.S. since the late 1970's. Hell, I toured 7 nights a week in different towns with my bands all over the country up until the mid 1990's.

I've seen McDonald's restaurants in every town from Key West to Flint Michigan to Jackson Mississippi to Los Angeles and everywhere in between.

Most times the people working at McDonalds had more money at the end of the week than we did in our traveling band after expenses.
If I had $200 a week it was a GOOD week.

And I have NEVER taken a govt. check.

How did we do that? And now it can't be done?

This is bullshit.

Wow! We went from "hundreds" to "3" when pushed for facts. Hahaha, typical of the rabble

I've been saying this forever, low min wage just allows for jobs subsidized by tax payers for huge multi nationals - more corporate welfare.

This has nothing to do with anything. This is just people following laws and using government programs - just like people working at hedge funds only getting taxed at 15%.

Just because a person has a cell phone doesn't mean they aren't on some kind of welfare. These days having a cellphone is like having a regular phone 20 years ago. Everyone has one. The same with a car. It may not be a nice car, but many people have cars. I live about a mile away from a McDonald's (and actually a row of fast food places that include Taco Bell and Dairy Queen) and I drive by them on a pretty regular basis. Just about every time I drive by I see people in uniforms for these places walking from the nearby bus stop to work (or from work to the the bus stop).

I personally have not stepped foot inside a McDonald's in years, but the few times in the last handful of years I have gone through the drive through it seems like it is a mix of older people and younger people.

Here are some numbers:

According to Forbes last year alone the employees of Walmart cost the tax payers $6.2 billion in various social aid programs like food stamps and medicaid. That same article goes on to say that McDonald's cost the taxpayers $1.2 billion and the fast food industry as a whole cost $7 billion. When you look at the full US budget that goes to these kinds of programs Walmart and fast food employees make up about 3.5% of the total payouts. It may seem small, but it is still a pretty big number.

The poverty line in the US is $11,670 and it is $15,730 if you have a dependent. So if you make minimum wage and you work an average of 30 hours per week (many of these places don't allow people to work full time because they don't want to give them health insurance) you make an average of $10,875 per year. You are under the poverty line and likely qualify for food stamps, medicaid, and if you have a kid potentially free daycare, housing assistance and more.

Are the 17-19 year old kids that are working at these places on welfare? Most of them are likely not. For many of them this is a first job or a part time job while they are in school and they will be moving on. But for others it is where they are right now. Can they move up? Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that low wages are costing the tax payers roughly $14 billion per year in assistance programs.

Just because someone has a cell phone in their pocket and a car in the parking lot does not also mean that they don't have a food stamp card in their wallet right next to their free medicaid card. Everyday millions of people work these jobs and work hard at them while bettering themselves then they eventually move on to bigger and better things. Part of the difference is that when we were kids there was a stigma about being on welfare. It was bad and you wanted to avoid it and work hard to not be on it. Now, that is not the case and companies are even encouraging their employees to get on it.

kane, I personally know a couple of dozen people who game the system for govt. checks.

I don't think ANYBODY working a job should be getting welfare...period.

I'm sorry, but not you, the govt., the media, or Warren Buffet himself will ever convince me that an able bodied person needs to get a check from the govt.

I've seen too much in my life and I personally know better.

If you have a phone, a car, a job, and a significant other whom you live with that has those same things? You don't NEED welfare. You might be getting it. But you certainly don't need it.

And I'm not going to blame Walmart or McDonalds for paying people what the job is actually worth.

If a person wants more out of life...then bust your ass and get it.

People used to take a second job on if they needed more money. I guess now, they just stick their hands out for welfare.

I was raised that it was shameful to take welfare.
This whole discussion sickens me.

While I agree with you and personally would rather work two jobs to better myself them sit on assistance, the point I am trying to make is that wealthy companies, in the pursuit of profit, are paying employees less and giving them fewer benefits. These people aren't demanding more because they are able to subsidize their income with government assistance which in turn costs tax dollars and which thereby increases those business owners' taxes.It is a cycle that never ends and the business owners are helping to perpetrate.

If a company is not going to offer full time employment and health benefits and they are going to encourage their employees to get on government assistance they can't then complain when their employees do just that and cause their taxes to increase.

If welfare was done away with, or at least it was changed so that it was very difficult to get, people would either work more, get second jobs, or in many cases I think we would see protests and demands for higher pay that may or may not work. But these days it is easier to just get on the government teat than it is to get a second job or work to improve your situation and both parties, the lazy worker and the business owner are helping feed into this system.

I don't either. That's why I like the idea of raising the minimum wage. 42-58% of food stamp recipients who are expected to work (i.e. not children, disabled, or elderly) are working. Source: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...od-assistance/

So let us say someone works 30 hours a week at Walmart for $8 an hour currently and they receive the average SNAP/food stamp benefit of $133.85 for themselves. (source: http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fig...realities.aspx)

$8.00 * 30 * 4.2 weeks = $1008.00 per month

Now let us say the minimum wage was raised to $10.

$10.00 * 30 * 4.2 = $1260.00

Wow! Look at that! A $252 raise a month

And their food stamp benefit was only about $133 so that means we can probably eliminate the food stamp benefit (get them off welfare) and they will still have a little bit left over. Win-win, right? :)

yep and the unions would come back.