Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Danish McDonalds Workers Earn $20 An Hour - Big Mac Costs... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter cstu
- Start date
msommer
Footballguy
cstu
Footballguy
Anecdotal evidence here...
Neighbor of mine owns a bunch of (soon to be 34) Papa John's stores in the Los Angeles area so I asked him what he thought about the minimum wage law ($10.50 in July 2016 and going up to $15 in 2020). He told me that it was going to be tough - cut into profitability and have to raise prices a little - but that he'd be fine. He couldn't say how it will affect hiring/layoffs but he is overall in favor of it because they deserve it (high cost of living here) and will hopefully make his employees happier (i.e. glad to show up to work, work hard).
Neighbor of mine owns a bunch of (soon to be 34) Papa John's stores in the Los Angeles area so I asked him what he thought about the minimum wage law ($10.50 in July 2016 and going up to $15 in 2020). He told me that it was going to be tough - cut into profitability and have to raise prices a little - but that he'd be fine. He couldn't say how it will affect hiring/layoffs but he is overall in favor of it because they deserve it (high cost of living here) and will hopefully make his employees happier (i.e. glad to show up to work, work hard).
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
cstu
Footballguy
Dr Oadi
Footballguy
He is aware he could have increased his employees wages at anytime without a government mandate correct?
Last edited by a moderator:
bagger
Footballguy
So here is how statistics work, it takes numbers beyond someone's small statistically insignificant sample size and makes a better, non biased analysis that may skew differently than one's own perceptions.You can throw out all the median age numbers you want, you know what they say about statistics. The eyeball test tells me every fast food place I go into is staffed by teenagers, with maybe two adults who are not a manager on shift. Maybe I just live in a unique part of America
the reason for this field is to make sure that our own preconceived biases and/or experiences on a small scale are (or are not) representative of the population as a whole.
but I like the whole, yeah sure statistics don't mean much but the one McDonald's that I go to has more teenagers so clearly this is how it is shtick.
Higgs
Footballguy
McDonald's is barely staying afloat as a viable company these days. You think jacking up the price of a product nobody is buying by 7% is going to help those workers when they are unemployed in a year because McDonald's has to close thousands of stores?
Higgs
Footballguy
Go ahead and buy some stock dude. Should work out well for you, especially when the workers start getting paid $20 an hour.
But hey, why argue with graduates from the Bernie Sanders School of Business. Worked out well for his first wife didn't it?
#NeverDirtFloors
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Streak still intact.Go ahead and buy some stock dude. Should work out well for you, especially when the workers start getting paid $20 an hour.
But hey, why argue with graduates from the Bernie Sanders School of Business. Worked out well for his first wife didn't it?
#NeverDirtFloors
Higgs
Footballguy
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I think if I weren't absolutely certain that the minimum wage workers at McDonald's stick their genitals in my food and drinks because they have a ####ty job that pays virtually nothing I'd stop by McDonald's occasionally for a mcmuffin or a sweet tea.
Chadstroma
Footballguy
I am not against higher min wage in general as it has not been adjusted well. But there are a couple of things to consider on this.
First, the national min wage ought to be the lowest possible as what makes sense for California does not make sense for Tennessee. A small adjustment in the Federal min wage is due but it needs to be measured.
Second, we all know that an increase in min wage has an inherent cost to it. If we didn't know that, then why stop at $15 an hour? Why not $25 an hour or more? We all know this and the cost is not just about a costlier Big Mac but in things like less jobs available and those jobs tend to be the ones that advocates of higher min wage are trying to help.
First, the national min wage ought to be the lowest possible as what makes sense for California does not make sense for Tennessee. A small adjustment in the Federal min wage is due but it needs to be measured.
Second, we all know that an increase in min wage has an inherent cost to it. If we didn't know that, then why stop at $15 an hour? Why not $25 an hour or more? We all know this and the cost is not just about a costlier Big Mac but in things like less jobs available and those jobs tend to be the ones that advocates of higher min wage are trying to help.
cstu
Footballguy
I absolutely agree that the minimum wage should be cost of living-based. I'm not even entirely sold on $15 an hour for all of California since there are lower cost places to live outside of the major metropolitan areas.
What I'm looking for with a minimum wage is a wage that allows someone working full-time to afford the necessities they need to survive (food, shelter, clothes, transportation to work) without getting a second job. In Los Angeles for example $30,000 ($15/hr) before taxes is barely enough to do that even sharing an apartment with somebody.
In the big picture I'm looking for families to improve so that both parents are working, gaining some self-respect, and not too tired/frustrated at the end of the day to be good parents.
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Another thing that should be considered- unions are not pushing for these min wage increases out of the kindness of their hearts. They do it because often times their contracts have a trigger for automatic pay increases or pay negotiations to commence again.
So, what does that mean? Well, we have seen very little inflation over the number of years. Mostly due to an anemic economy but there are also other deflationary pressures or at least inflationary pressures that have been in check- such as the weakness in wage inflation. It should be noted that another unintended consequence of increasing min wage is that it does allow for that inflationary pressure to move. What happens? Well, in a place like L.A. when more people are making more money then demand increases for things like housing. In a place like L.A. for an apartment that is considered low rent- more people will be able to pay for that rent which means the rent goes up. All in all, the help that a bump in min wage like what is being considered now in California ends up being evaporated fairly quickly as low income individuals vying for the same needs and wants increases the costs of those needs and wants.
Again, I am not automatically against increasing min wage but I think that people who favor min wage increases seem to over simplify it to the point of "duh, increase it!" As with most things in life, it is not as clear cut and simple as that. You have to realize what is actually being done when you change things like this. Now, in California, cost is crazy. I forgot how much it is costlier to live there. Of course, I remembered that my house in a similar neighborhood in California would cost nearly 3 times as much as it did in Illinois but even groceries and gas were significantly higher too (something I forgot over the years apparently). There is no way for anyone to live off of min wage in any major metro area of California. Then again, min wage is not meant to be lived off of, but that is a whole different story.
So, what does that mean? Well, we have seen very little inflation over the number of years. Mostly due to an anemic economy but there are also other deflationary pressures or at least inflationary pressures that have been in check- such as the weakness in wage inflation. It should be noted that another unintended consequence of increasing min wage is that it does allow for that inflationary pressure to move. What happens? Well, in a place like L.A. when more people are making more money then demand increases for things like housing. In a place like L.A. for an apartment that is considered low rent- more people will be able to pay for that rent which means the rent goes up. All in all, the help that a bump in min wage like what is being considered now in California ends up being evaporated fairly quickly as low income individuals vying for the same needs and wants increases the costs of those needs and wants.
Again, I am not automatically against increasing min wage but I think that people who favor min wage increases seem to over simplify it to the point of "duh, increase it!" As with most things in life, it is not as clear cut and simple as that. You have to realize what is actually being done when you change things like this. Now, in California, cost is crazy. I forgot how much it is costlier to live there. Of course, I remembered that my house in a similar neighborhood in California would cost nearly 3 times as much as it did in Illinois but even groceries and gas were significantly higher too (something I forgot over the years apparently). There is no way for anyone to live off of min wage in any major metro area of California. Then again, min wage is not meant to be lived off of, but that is a whole different story.
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Yeah, but raising the minimum wage rewards them for all their years of **** dunking so they'll just do it more now.Henry Ford said:
GroveDiesel
Footballguy
Sure, but how many people really are there that typically work at McDonalds and are trying to live off of it? Traditionally, those types of jobs are worked by teens, college students, older folks looking to supplement income or a spouse looking to supplement household income.
Wouldn't everyone be better off if, instead of artificially boosting income of jobs like these, we used the money to train the small percentage that need to make a living so that they can get better jobs?
Henry Ford
Footballguy
There's some really interesting, contradictory data about that, actually.
For instance, the minimum wage was frozen from 1981-1990 at $3.35 per hour. The cumulative inflationary rate for that decade was 64.4%, compared to the 1990s at 33.47% (wages changed in 1991 and 1997), and the 2000s at 28.31% (wages changed in 2007, 8, and 9).
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Of course, because it is just a part of the equation inasmuch as inflation goes. Increasing min wage is an inflationary pressure though- I am not sure if anyone would disagree with that. The real question is how much of an inflationary pressure (which I would argue largely is determined by how much of an increase in wages we are talking about) it becomes.
I would also say that if we are talking about specific geographical impact- the inflationary pressures would likely impact low income workers more so than higher income workers and more so in metro areas. So, in the example I gave above, rent in the L.A. area would likely go up for low income rentals but maybe not as much in a place like Modesto. Simply, the differences in demand would really impact it. I had a conversation with a good friend who is looking to move out of their neighborhood in a middle to upper class suburb of L.A. because their house is in an older part of the city and is dominated by rentals. One of the complaints was that these rentals often have 2 or 3 or more families sharing the house which was intended for 1. That kind of pent up demand would erode a min wage increase quickly in a place like L.A. where as if you live in a smaller city in a rural area where rent is not in as much demand (I assume Modesto has a low demand for rent, by comparison to L.A., it certainly does) would not erode the increase in wages as much. So, in a fairly short amount of time, you end up back where you started with low income families still struggling to make ends meet on min wage. Then, you actually make it harder on those low income earners because there are now less min wage jobs available than there were before. How much? I don't know- but there will be less with an increased wage.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
I would argue that it's not a certainty that increasing minimum wage is an inflationary pressure in the U.S. The reason is this:
An increase in the minimum wage indicates that people earning minimum wage are living below the poverty line. That's the only reason we increase the minimum wage in this country. As a result, if we increase the minimum wage, there will be a corresponding decrease in spending for government welfare programs, which is deflationary.
Increasing middle class wages should be inflationary. Increasing less-than-poverty wages shouldn't be.
Chadstroma
Footballguy
I wonder if you are taking into account in your argument the lost (cut) hours and decrease in jobs available from these min wage jobs in an increase in your thinking that there would be a decrease in government assistance.
Also, I think you are not realizing the increase cost in basics like housing, where supply would not significantly change but demand would increase in areas like L.A.- impacting the very people this is meant to help.
Finally, remember, a number of unions would see large percentage increases in their pay. This would put further pressure on a state like California that is struggling with a huge unfunded pension liability and large union workforce. Now, you would have to look at the specifics of each contract but it is very common that these collective bargaining agreements have automatic pay increases or at least trigger new pay negotiations outside the normal contract expiration.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Those are not a certainty, those are a possible reaction. Besides, if their hours are reduced to keep income totals the same, there's no net gain in income, and therefore no chance of inflationary pressure, right?
Increased cost in basics is inflation. What I'm saying is that minimum wage does not necessarily cause that. Primarily because a poverty-level-wage worker does not necessarily have more purchasing power as a result of an increased wage. On the contrary, the poverty-level worker has more discretion as to the same purchasing power. If he no longer qualifies for Section 8 housing, the government spends less money in that area, which means that rents go to the prevailing market rate rather than the Section 8 rate, and so on. Might be higher, might be lower. But it's certainly not per se inflationary.
The issue with unfunded pensions and unions is not the same issue we have been discussing. There are a number of potential pros and potential cons to discuss regarding raising the minimum wage; inflation is not as clear cut as you were claiming, that's all.
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
My 15 year old daughter just started at McD in Denmark. Since she is under 18 her base salary is about $ 11 per hour. When she works after 1800 hrs she gets another $ 2 per hour and weekends $3 extra an hour. (weekends after 1800 hrs obviously $5). Holidays give double salary. There are regulations (from the state) how much and when she is allowed to work per week (and rules about which jobs she is allowed to do prior to finishing mandatory schhol)
Over 18 withthe current exchange rate the base salary is slightly under $20, subject to also addtls after 1800, weekends etc.
Somehow McD manages to not go bankrupt in Denmark.
Over 18 withthe current exchange rate the base salary is slightly under $20, subject to also addtls after 1800, weekends etc.
Somehow McD manages to not go bankrupt in Denmark.
Johnny Rock
Footballguy
Of course it's inflationary. The price of goods and services will go up as a direct result of government increasing the minimum wage. Haven't you noticed that a $6.00 lunch combo just a few years ago is now $8.00-$10.00+?
Jobs will be cut. Some businesses will close. That is a fact. We have closed many stores as a direct result. And fewer new businesses will open.
You're living in a different world if you think Section 8 housing and welfare outlays will decrease as a result. We already have employees turning down hours because the extra pay will push them over a threshold that will cut their benefits. They know the system better and they will continue to game it. I'd bet that in response to the minimum wage hike, that government raises the amount of income you can earn and still qualify for benefits.
You know how people complain that kids are spoiled nowadays and they have it so easy compared to past generations? Parents may have always said that. But crazy high increases like this on top of the last few years' annual $1.00 mandated increases does one thing for sure. It increases their sense of entitlement. Fewer and fewer want to work hard and strive to do a good job. Why bust your ### when you're getting a 10% raise no matter what anyway? And every year thereafter another $1.00. For nothing. NOT EARNED. No sense of accomplishment. There's no risk for the worker but it adds astronomical risk to the entrepreneurs.
Jobs will be cut. Some businesses will close. That is a fact. We have closed many stores as a direct result. And fewer new businesses will open.
You're living in a different world if you think Section 8 housing and welfare outlays will decrease as a result. We already have employees turning down hours because the extra pay will push them over a threshold that will cut their benefits. They know the system better and they will continue to game it. I'd bet that in response to the minimum wage hike, that government raises the amount of income you can earn and still qualify for benefits.
You know how people complain that kids are spoiled nowadays and they have it so easy compared to past generations? Parents may have always said that. But crazy high increases like this on top of the last few years' annual $1.00 mandated increases does one thing for sure. It increases their sense of entitlement. Fewer and fewer want to work hard and strive to do a good job. Why bust your ### when you're getting a 10% raise no matter what anyway? And every year thereafter another $1.00. For nothing. NOT EARNED. No sense of accomplishment. There's no risk for the worker but it adds astronomical risk to the entrepreneurs.
ArbyMelt
Footballguy
I'm curious what the minimum age workforce is like in Denmark. I'm guessing they are better educated and more responsible than the same workforce here in the US. That makes a big difference when you are paying them $20+/hr.
A friend owned a franchised pizza joint. Mostly high school/college kids. I couldn't believe the stories he would tell me. On a rare occasion every one would show up for work on a given day. He had to stop giving drug tests to delivery drivers (mandated by the franchise/insurance) because they would all fail them. He has never seen so many excuses why they couldn't come to work. He caught multiple people stealing money, caught multiple people having sex on the job in the restaurant or out back. Oh he lost everything too. Restaurant went under.
A friend owned a franchised pizza joint. Mostly high school/college kids. I couldn't believe the stories he would tell me. On a rare occasion every one would show up for work on a given day. He had to stop giving drug tests to delivery drivers (mandated by the franchise/insurance) because they would all fail them. He has never seen so many excuses why they couldn't come to work. He caught multiple people stealing money, caught multiple people having sex on the job in the restaurant or out back. Oh he lost everything too. Restaurant went under.
jonessed
Footballguy
Then LA should implement it.
$15/hr for a basic skill set in Clovis is too much.
The cities can manage on their own.
Last edited by a moderator:
cstu
Footballguy
Then why are they working for you instead of someone who wants to work full-time?
Johnny Rock
Footballguy
These aren't full-time positions. We're not offering FT. In fact, it's the opposite. We need more part-time workers who can work < 30 hours per week so we don't have to pay for their insurance under ACA ObamaCare.
I wasn't saying these people who refuse extra shifts need to be fired or replaced. They can be decent workers. The point is they know their limits to get the best results from the "system."
Coincidentally, I just read an article about Mississippi that is encouraging. Welfare reform is very much on the table right now, bringing back many reforms that were implemented under Clinton but were waived under Obama. There are many solid changes proposed, but the most notable is a requirement that SNAP recipients must work 20 hours per week OR volunteer 20 hours per week.
It will increase the workforce and hopefully remove some of the disincentive to not seek work. Kudos there. Kansas has apparently seen great results on a similar plan. And it puts more money in people's pockets.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Why is anyone surprised that businesses trend towards cutting costs. If a law says you must do THIS for full time employees and THIS costs more, then they will hire part time and keep hours under whatever is defined as full time.johnnyrock62000 said:
Likewise, if you incent people to work less and have X benefits but if you work more and take those benefits away.... why would they work more?
St. Louis Bob
Footballguy
Just read this article yesterday.
Some people will make more money, some people will be unemployed.
Plus they are working on robots to make the food. It won't be long until you only need a couple of people per restaurant.
Some people will make more money, some people will be unemployed.
Plus they are working on robots to make the food. It won't be long until you only need a couple of people per restaurant.
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
Johnny Rock
Footballguy
Enlighten me. I posted in there too a while back but I'm not going to search for GM's posts.
msommer
Footballguy
Nah, too much work for a Friday. Sorry, I'm sure the search function is your friend
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Now we know nothing you say can be trusted.Nah, too much work for a Friday. Sorry, I'm sure the search function is your friend
msommer
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Sand
Footballguy
And this is what the drive for a $15 an hour minimum wage results in - McDonalds restaurant to use Kiosks. This will only get more prevalent.
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Chadstroma
Footballguy
Of course, the higher wages will result in higher investment in technology to cut expenses (aka wages) which means less jobs. You can't really expect your average person working at McDonald's to understand that they may be pushing to get their job eliminated. And the unions pushing this don't care because when they get the min wage increased most of their contracts have written in wage increases or trigger new negotiations. The unions see this as a win/win.... if they get the fast food industry organized then they gain membership. If they don't, f'em who cares? And their membership get higher wages.
msommer
Footballguy
Chadstroma
Footballguy
That's it... I take back the big search brain part.Except it was Maurile Tremblay, not GM.....
cstu
Footballguy
Chadstroma
Footballguy
You really think that these kiosks won't be used to cut employees? Really?
Similar threads
