$15 fast-food wage?

[Bro. Curtis]

From the first link….
As for receiving public assistance, Maher is referencing a university report funded by a group that supports increasing the minimum wage. The report concluded that 52 percent of the families of fast-food workers are receiving some type of public assistance.

This is dishonest, as Maher's (hardly a consistent libertarian) claim is the individual is getting assistance, not the household.

The second link goes to great lengths to conclude that a job at at fast-food joint will put you under the poverty line if you are a single parent, or support a non-working household member.

In other words….duh.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I still hold to the belief people should be paid a livable wage no matter what their age.

Explain to me, please, how a 19-year-old college freshman working at McDonald's 20 hours a week for $8 an hour and going to the local community college, living at home where her dad brings home a six-figure paycheck, isn't making a "livable wage"?

 

[Kevin M]

Explain to me, please, how a 19-year-old college freshman working at McDonald's 20 hours a week for $8 an hour and going to the local community college, living at home where her dad brings home a six-figure paycheck, isn't making a "livable wage"?

No, His parents are making a livable wage,he's not.
If he made 2 cents per hour would you consider that a livable wage.

 

[Kevin M]

From the first link….
As for receiving public assistance, Maher is referencing a university report funded by a group that supports increasing the minimum wage. The report concluded that 52 percent of the families of fast-food workers are receiving some type of public assistance.

This is dishonest, as Maher's (hardly a consistent libertarian) claim is the individual is getting assistance, not the household.

The second link goes to great lengths to conclude that a job at at fast-food joint will put you under the poverty line if you are a single parent, or support a non-working household member.

In other words….duh.

Bro. Curtis I was linking these sites because a poster wanted proof that
50% of fast food workers were 24+ years old.

Quote from first site. "On the age point, 2012 Current Population Survey data from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics show the median age of front-line (the people who take orders or cook food) workers, including those at fast-food restaurants and excluding managers, is 29.2. A BLS spokesman said this would be the most reliable category to use."

Second sight has a Pie chart which shows age demographics.

Although, the number probably is not 50% it is pretty close.

 

[Revmitchell]

Thank you all very much for your replies, It gives me some things to think about.

I still hold to the belief people should be paid a livable wage no matter what
their age. I would hate to see a return to the late 19th century where people
worked very hard jobs, lived in sewage to make a few people rich.

There is no slippery slope here. If people want a living wage then go get one soemwhere else that is actually offering a living wage. McDonalds owes no one anything.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Bro. Curtis I was linking these sites because a poster wanted proof that
50% of fast food workers were 24+ years old.

The reason I answered as I did is the tittle of the piece you linked to contains a twisting of stats. I can't get a sentence in to the actual content without being lied to.

Second sight has a Pie chart which shows age demographics.

Although, the number probably is not 50% it is pretty close.

The reason I wanted to look at the studies was to go through the demographics, methods, and findings of the studies. The statement you made may have been about the age of the workers but the spirit of your posts is people who work in that industry need to be paid more. The links you provided twist facts to get a political slant across. I don't think it violates any code of conduct to read through them and sound off what I think of them. OK, the age is 29. That's not the info I was after, or the reason I asked for the studies. I was more interested in how many single, un-diploma'd people with dependents worked in the industry.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

No, His parents are making a livable wage,he's not.
If he made 2 cents per hour would you consider that a livable wage.

She is under the roof of her parents who have agreed to continue to take care of her needs while she gets a degree. What she considers her "living wage" is one that will pay for extra expenses associated with school that grants and loans don't cover. She is, in fact, making a living wage.

Bro. Curtis I was linking these sites because a poster wanted proof that
50% of fast food workers were 24+ years old.

They aren't. Look at the graph in post # 38. It shows quite clearly -- from Census Bureau data -- that more than 50% of minimum wage workers are between 16 and 24. Your source is wrong, probably deliberately so.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Double post

 

[Don]

I don't know how accurate all the statistics are going around out there, but
according to the research in the link provided.

$3.35 in 1981 would be equal to $8.77 in 2013.

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42973.pdf

The question is, why did we have to keep raising the minimum wage?

If we had to raise the minimum wage from $3.35 up to $7, why did we have to do that? Because it wasn't considered a livable wage.

If we have to raise it from $7 to $15, why? Because it's not a livable wage.

Since both questions have the same answer, then the question really is: why isn't it a livable wage?

Answer that one, and you'll have the start--but only the start--of the answer to the minimum wage problem.

 

[Kevin M]

The reason I answered as I did is the tittle of the piece you linked to contains a twisting of stats. I can't get a sentence in to the actual content without being lied to.

The reason I wanted to look at the studies was to go through the demographics, methods, and findings of the studies. The statement you made may have been about the age of the workers but the spirit of your posts is people who work in that industry need to be paid more. The links you provided twist facts to get a political slant across. I don't think it violates any code of conduct to read through them and sound off what I think of them. OK, the age is 29. That's not the info I was after, or the reason I asked for the studies. I was more interested in how many single, un-diploma'd people with dependents worked in the industry.

Yes, my choice of sites was horrible.
Here is a link to the stats by the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics if you want to wade through all the info.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzR_9M-1WtJTTF9qcG5zY1B5NXM/edit?pli=1

 

[Salty]

An employee should be paid what the job is worth.

If you hire a teen to shovel your driveway, would you pay him $15 + benefits ? And don't forget, you must match his SS and pay workman's comp. If he is an independent contractor - then you would have to pay him about $20 an hour to make up for that.

And Kevin - if that lady has mental problems - that prevent her from being promoted - well that's what public assistance is for.

Bottom line - she is either lazy or has no ambition. Actually those are the same thing.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Ok, right off the bat, I see the largest age group is 45-54 years.

Most of the food preparers fell into your age group.

This link indicates there are many, many more managers than food preparers. There are as many training, and library support people as there are preparers. I think the fast food industry does offer a chance at advancement.

 

[Kevin M]

An employee should be paid what the job is worth.

If you hire a teen to shovel your driveway, would you pay him $15 + benefits ? And don't forget, you must match his SS and pay workman's comp. If he is an independent contractor - then you would have to pay him about $20 an hour to make up for that.

And Kevin - if that lady has mental problems - that prevent her from being promoted - well that's what public assistance is for.

Bottom line - she is either lazy or has no ambition. Actually those are the same thing.

Well, if it took the teen an hour to shovel my drive way I would not have a
problem paying him $20.00.

Why would you want to pay a person to do nothing when she is perfectly capable of serving food.

The way I see it the government is subsidizing many companies so they
can have cheap labor.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Kevin M. ...

Are you going to deal with the proofs before you that your statistics on all your links are just flat wrong? Or are you going to ignore those?

 

[Salty]

Well, if it took the teen an hour to shovel my drive way I would not have a problem paying him $20.00..

there you have it - Capitalism at work. If you offer to pay $20- and I offer $12.
A)
(1) Who do you think he will work for (initially)
(2) After a month - @ 3x per week - you decide $20 is too much - so you offer to only pay $10 - What do you think he will do?
B) You have a 100 ft drive way. You hire teens Andy and Bill to shovel. Both boys shovel 1/2 ( 50 ft each). Andy does it in 30 minutes and Bill takes 2 hours. (conditions are identical) How much will you pay the boys?
(1) Each gets $10 based on the faster boys work
(2) Each gets $40 based on the slower boys work
(3) Each gets $25 based on the average of the two
(4) Pay each boy at the rate of $20/hr?

Why would you want to pay a person to do nothing when she is perfectly capable of serving food.

I never suggested you provide a give-a-way to someone for doing nothing - if they can serve food.
Now, if she is not capable of advancement - then that is the reason for public assistance.
Me thinks she does NOT want the extra responsibilities of management.

The way I see it the government is subsidizing many companies so they
can have cheap labor.

1) Please provide links for how the govt is subsiding companies
2) I don't have a problem with a short term tax break to start a new business- especially if it provides new jobs.

Kevin, just curious - have you ever been an employer? if so how many employees

 

[Kevin M]

Kevin M. ...

Are you going to deal with the proofs before you that your statistics on all your links are just flat wrong? Or are you going to ignore those?

O.K, you win. I stated 50% percent of fast food workers are 24+ years old,
I was wrrr.. wro... WRONG! Excuse me. So what is the actual number,
40% of fast food workers are 25+ years old?:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Salty]

O.K, you win. I stated 50% percent of fast food workers are 24+ years old,
I was wrrr.. wro... WRONG! Excuse me. So what is the actual number,
40% of fast food workers are 25+ years old?:smilewinkgrin:

I found the answer

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

O.K, you win. I stated 50% percent of fast food workers are 24+ years old,
I was wrrr.. wro... WRONG! Excuse me. So what is the actual number,
40% of fast food workers are 25+ years old?:smilewinkgrin:

That's not even half the point, though. The median income for the families of the 16-24 minimum wage worker is $53,000. Had you gone back to post # 38 and actually read it, you'd know that.

The median income for the families of the adults 24+ working minimum wage jobs is $42,500. The poverty level for families of four is $22,350. Increasing the minimum wage will not lift a significant number out of poverty. It won't lift even two million out of poverty, but the resulting damage to the economy would far outweight the advantage for those two million. Your math, your president's math, is "fuzzy" as President Bush told Al Gore in the 2000 debates.

I found the answer

Yes, it's in post # 38. Has been all day. :laugh:

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Double post. What's goin' on with that today, anyway? Did Obama get ahold of the board's checks and balances? :laugh:

 

[Salty]

Double post. What's goin' on with that today, anyway? Did Obama get ahold of the board's checks and balances? :laugh:

Where have you been - Poncho heard Obama made an executive order for BB, well at least...