California's War on Fast Food Jobs
Higher prices created by a $20 minimum wage for burger joints will lead to fewer customers, reduced profits, fewer restaurants, and a loss of jobs.
During a recent meal at a family-run restaurant in a small town, I noticed that the owners included in the menu an apology note to customers for the high prices they were charging. We all understand the owners' predicament, as inflation has driven up the costs of pretty much everything, especially groceries. Nevertheless, customers who try to live within their budgets have little choice but to pare back their unnecessary restaurant trips.
I'm not the only one doing so. "Rising labor and food costs, ballooning interest rates, and corporate brand owners' demands for upgrades and operational improvements have strained profitability for a number of fast-food chain operators," according to a recent Bloomberg Law article focusing on increasing numbers of restaurant franchise bankruptcies. Inflation is hitting every industry, but those reliant on discretionary spending will suffer the most.
One would have expected the California Legislature to have recognized this industry's ongoing, post-COVID problems before adding to their burden. Lawmakers need only wander around the Capitol and notice the large number of long-time eating establishments that have shuttered. And yet one of their signature legislative accomplishments this year will only hasten restaurant closures and job losses.
No matter what happens in broader society, we can always count on the California Legislature to do the bidding of the state's powerful unions, which are committed to little else beyond boosting their membership rolls—whatever that might mean for the broader economy. And so the state recently agreed to a deal that will dramatically increase fast-food wages and make it more difficult for private companies to set their own operating policies.
In 2021, the Legislature introduced the Fast Food Accountability and Standards (FAST) Act, which echoed the European sectoral-bargaining model whereby a government commission sets the wages and working conditions in an industry. This radical idea would have essentially given unions control over the industry—saving them the difficulty of actually organizing workers.
Although that effort failed, the Legislature in 2022 passed two nearly as significant laws, per the pro-union OnLabor website: First, Assembly Bill 102 revived the moribund Industrial Welfare Commission and gave it the powers of a sectoral-bargaining commission. Second, Assembly Bill 1228 would have raised fast-food minimum wages to $22 an hour with an annual upward ratchet.
It also "would have made franchisors jointly liable for labor violations—a long sought-after provision that was taken out of the final version of the FAST Act," On Labor added. The wage hike was problematic, but making national fast-food companies liable for labor violations at independently owned franchises would have destroyed the franchise model in California.
These laws posed existential threats to the restaurant industry, which then qualified a referendum on AB 1228 for the 2024 general election. In September, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a "truce." The industry pulled its ballot measure and agreed to a $20 minimum wage. In return, Newsom and unions limited the power of the Fast Food Council and removed joint-liability provisions.
The restaurants spared themselves a multimillion-dollar ballot fight, gained a lower wage, and preserved franchising, but the net result will be the same. A government agency will grab many management powers. Wages will go up early and often. Labor costs account for one-third of fast-food costs, so prices will rise. McDonald's and Chipotle already have announced higher prices for next year.
The unions are claiming a victory for workers, but it's not hard to guess the result. Higher prices will mean fewer customers and reduced profits. That means fewer restaurants and fewer jobs. Although the legislation only applies to fast-food chains with more than 60 outlets, it will drive up costs for mom-and-pop restaurants. They will have to compete for workers with chains that must pay a much-higher wage.
That's not the only bad news. "Making it illegal to pay less than a given amount does not make a worker's productivity worth that amount—and, if it is not, that worker is unlikely to be employed," wrote famed economist Thomas Sowell. In other words, restaurants will not hire people who aren't productive enough to justify the wage.
It will be tougher for young workers who lack job skills and for disabled people to get these jobs. I'm already noticing a higher percentage of older workers at fast-food establishments. I'm also noticing far more kiosks. Let's be blunt: Fast-food work isn't meant to be career work for most people. These are great ways to earn quick cash and learn basic skills, which can then be leveraged into better jobs as people build better lives for themselves. Unions and progressives want to take this approach to other industries.
For most of us, the higher prices will mean a little less pocket cash and a lot more home-cooked meals. But think about the lost opportunities for people who need them the most. Unfortunately, the Legislature and governor won't be providing any apology notes.
This column was first published in The Orange County Register.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply.
Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome9.com
The Democratic party in California is actively seeking to create a poorer society and they are succeeding. We libertarian types are sometimes wrong when we say the government isn’t very good at actually getting stuff done. The Dems think the world should be poorer and consume less for the good of the planet and it looks like they will accomplish it. Whether it does the planet any good is another matter. They’ve also long hated the franchise business model, so if many close and few are opened, that is another goal accomplished.
I agree that on the extreme left there are those who oppose material abundance and want to create a more equal society by lowering the common denominator.
However most politicians who support higher minimum wages are just economic ignoramuses who actually think price floors force employers to pay workers more than they produce.
You are echoing what someone once said: “ don’t attribute to malfeasance that which can be explained by stupidity”. However, they’ve been doing this a long time with predictable results. At some point you have to assume it is deliberate.
Ask the average “man on the street” and they’ll tell you that hiking the minimum wage gives a raise to poor people. Same goes with politicians.
the average man on the street doesnt come up with the policy nor does he amplify the specious justifications for it in the media, the schools, the govt spokesmen and the oligarchy of the web.
He is merely reflecting the messaging he is both bombarded with and soaking in.
Unfortunately we are living in an age [the age of tribal hatreds] when that old maxim of not attributing malice is, at best, almost criminally naive. Everything is done to own the other side, to spite the other side or to hurt the other side.
Just ask the average man in the street how much more he is willing to pay for something, and tell how much increment of wages raises the costs of goods.
It is a tax on poor people since the folks most affected by an increase in the price if essential goods and services are the poor.
I suspect there is more. Said poor likely over consume said “unhealthy” food. This leads to long term health issues and impact on associated health care costs. Reducing their consumption is a win-win for progressive policy. Actually a win-win-win-win if you include sticking it to wealthy franchisees and large corporations.
Dietary decision that obviously must be guided by progressive leaders. Oh sure, Comrade Newsome could let you make your own decisions, but you might make the ring choices. Then were would be be?
"They have good intentions"
Unlike you, most people do.
Ideas!
One of these days you'll have one.
Man. Wicked hangover for sarc this morning.
Still on the wagon. Sorry to disappoint. I know you're chomping at the bit to gloat because you're a mean person with bad intentions, but it's not going to happen.
We disagree on some things, but I am rooting for your sobriety.
🙂
Me too.
anyone fighting personal demons need to know he has support in his fight
add me as well
[thinking i know you well enough by now I wont offer 'thoughts and prayers'.... just ...thoughts, i guess]
You’re such a whining little pussy.
Which will be two more than you'll ever have.
Question for you. If everyone is mean just to you, do you think you’re the cause or that they are mean to everyone?
It looks like the latter. Maybe have some introspection and realize you’re the issue.
The vast majority of people are nice to me. You and your idiot friends are the exception.
Do you have a list of those “idiot friends” you could post?
Just his coworkers he shows all his amazing posts to and they all tell him how intelligent he is.
He actually said this once.
Coworkers? Is he talking about the other residents of his homeless shelter?
Watching you two groups from the sidelines, ya’ll seem like the proverbial odd couple. What would you do without each other?
We would breathe a sigh of relief. Sarc would drink himself to death.
Cite?
"Nice guy? I don't give a shit. Good father? Fuck you -- go home and play with your kids!!"
I don't give a shit about the 'intentions' of complete strangers - only their actions.
And their actions are making everything worse for everyone.
On the attack from the outset. You could have discussed the ideas, as you famously claim, but instead, you went for the attack.
Cynically, I doubt that the intentions are actually "good". When the predictable outcomes are all negative, and policy is still pursued, "good intentions" are not at the forefront. One merely needs to see where the money will go, to unions and government bureaucrats powerbase, to see what the real intentions are. Entry-level workers, teens needing some money for school, etc. will be removed from the labor force at these places. That's a feature, somehow, not a bug.
The intentions are control. The public statements defend it with good intentions. Yet they all vote themselves control and benefits each time.
Even here the politicians are evicting who to effect with their choices, often based on where their funding comes from for campaigns.
I don't know if that's true of most politicians, but it could be true of most of their constituents. They could be like Daddy, who told me there were no adverse consequences of raising the minimum wage, because, "What are they going to do? They can't go out of business." Or Mario Biaggi, who told me, "Employers are sharks." Meaning they have a vast pool of excess profit they can draw on, and don't pay more unless made to by law.
In other words - all those one the Left, not just the extreme ones.
Stop trying to gaslight. You're not very good at it.
Here comes sarc to defend the democrats.
You think they even intend it to be for the good of the planet? I think they're just building voting blocs. Like the anti-gentrification legislators who want to keep neighborhoods poor and hence cheap, because the rentiers are their constituency.
You’re over-thinking this. (Don’t worry–it’s just a phrase.)
I know it’s the current fashion to assume anyone who disagrees with you is pure evil, and everything they do is carefully designed to bring about the destruction of everything good in the world, but in my experience Hanlon’s Razor is correct: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by neglect, ignorance or incompetence”. Or at least more correct than your assumption.
The Dems in California effectively run a one-party state. Accordingly, as politics is still a competitive game, the Dem politicians compete with each other, and because they have no outside competition, they can only compete by "out-extreming" each other. Unintended consequences naturally follow.
I’m pretty sure they care a lot more about getting re-elected than about reducing the size of society to somehow save the planet.
That really just sounds like malice though - they are deliberately becoming more extreme in order to compete. That's not incompetence, ignorance, nor neglect.
I agree. We're frankly far too reluctant to call out obvious malice.
The Democrats depend on low income, low information voters to elect them. More poor people equals more voters who want free stuff. Hard to win on soaking the taxpayers unless the indigent outnumber the productive.
The low information part is by design. Leaked DNC emails form 2016 prove that. Much easier to control the collective without educated people who engage in independent thinking.
Elite democrats, and those who see themselves that way (like Tony) don’t consider themselves equals with the average person. Remember John Kerry, and his gathering of ‘almost extra terrestrial’ elites earlier this year at Davos?
"Let's be blunt: Fast-food work isn't meant to be career work for most people. These are great ways to earn quick cash and learn basic skills, which can then be leveraged into better jobs as people build better lives for themselves. Unions and progressives want to take this approach to other industries."
Let's be even more blunt: someone has to work undesirable jobs. The messaging and optics on this issue has been awful and paints the libertarian position as inhumane, unsympathetic, and completely out of touch. It has the same connotations as "learn to code." You can't expect a perpetual supply of 16 year olds to fill these jobs.
These workers have little bargaining power and they're using what means they have to increase wages. I know we don't like when the government directs markets, but the endless back and forth isn't going anywhere. Just think of it like an experiment. We're challenging the idea of necessity. Do we really need fast food, or is it merely a sign of abundance?
You can’t expect a perpetual supply of 16 year olds to fill these jobs.
Some deep thinking right here.
You can't keep creating potential 16-year-olds given where Californians like to stick it.
And then there’s all the babies they want to kill. Or neuter……
They even market CA as a destination for all of that. Infanticidal tourism.
The transitioning teens can still work. Last weekend, had one check me out at a large department store. All the folded clothes were unfolded by her/him/ze whatever the fuck. If the clothes were for me, I wouldn’t have cared. But they were for a family whose kids I adopted to buy Xmas gifts and needed clothing for. The factory folding beats my folding, it takes me time to fold a second time, and it was completely unnecessary of her/him/ze to fuck up the folding to scan and put in a bag.
Can they? I assume such a darling class in CA is given free money based on their plight.
I’m not in CA so perhaps the west coast trannies are more snowflaky.
Most likely.
Just look at demographic trends. More and more, these jobs need to be filled by older people. Some of them have been retired from their career jobs but can't afford to actually retire.
That's a different problem though.
They didn't just stop making 16 year olds.
Democrats like to kill a lot of them long before that, and raise the rest to be lazy and entitled.
As minimum wage increases push higher, employers are less willing to put up with the shit that hiring teens often brings. At a certain level of labor costs, an employer is going to do better hiring proven workers, people with a demonstrated work ethic, who show up for their shifts, and can learn the minimal skills needed in a day or two. Why put up with the crap from younger workers who don't want to work, who tell you they don't want to work, who will be on their phones their entire shift, who will flake out and not show up...
You think Cali is soon going to mandate late term abortions to lower the future availability of sixteen year olds?
These jobs introduce many youth into the supply side of the economy. The average McDonalds worker has little bargaining power because the skills to work there have little value as determined by the customers. Fast food establishments can pay $1,000/hour to new, unskilled labor but they will need to charge exorbitant prices to be able do so. Customers will take their money elsewhere.
Manipulating the market to pressure these places to close is an experiment forged of smug ignorance. The places will pivot to automation. In deep blue locations, when the locals vandalize the automation as evidenced by robot package deliveries, the fast food establishments will close resulting in fewer entry level jobs, fewer people working, and less income and tax revenue.
If you personally don’t like Mickey Ds, then don’t patronize them.
"The average McDonalds worker has little bargaining power because the skills to work there have little value as determined by the customers."
That's what I think a lot of people aren't stopping to think about. There are certain jobs like this where it doesn't matter how good you are at them, you can contribute only so much value to the product or service. And I don't see what "basic skills" are transferable from such jobs to other employment.
What's going to be left of the business is the more-or-less captive trade: people on their lunch break from nearby workplaces. After spending decades trying to build up their dinner-time business, McDonald's will sell their parking lots and rely on a clientele that walks there during lunch time. They may close one day a week too. They'll also have certain other captive circumstances like on the turnpikes that will justify 24-hour service.
And I don’t see what “basic skills” are transferable from such jobs to other employment.
Showing up on time.
Performing the duties assigned to you.
Occasional problem solving.
Interacting with the public and coworkers in a professional manner.
Making change. Well, theoretically.
Nope. Had a rare stop at a fast food restaurant and paid with exact change. The middle aged manager, the freaking manager, asked if it was all there. The woman couldn’t count money. A reminder why I cook most of what I consume- if they can’t count money I’m not sure I should trust them with food prep.
Most of their food prep is automated. They aren’t even fry cooks.
The times I get a burger, I patronize Five Guys. You haven’t lived until the flavorful juices of Five Guys explode in your mouth.
And their nuts are super salty, yum.
I pass the ex-McDonalds (thanks Covid!) where I once worked as a 16 year old, on my way to the large scale Unix sysadmin job I have now.
I certainly would not wish to have continued working there until the pandemic shut them down.
I think blue state covid lockdowns may have resulted in a McFlurry of closures.
You can’t expect a perpetual supply of 16 year olds to fill these jobs.
It's called high school. Duh.
When I was but a wee lad, fast food restaurants were staffed mostly with teenagers and early twenty-somethings who worked there as teenagers. Today the average age of a fast food worker is much higher than those bygone days, thanks to an ever-increasing minimum wage that discourages hiring people without experience. No experience, no job. No job, no experience.
No, it's not just that. A lot of cashier jobs are filled by people who learned too late that their career was not in a job that was going to stay around long enough for them to retire on.
It is sad someone potentially close to you ended up in a low-paying job due to their aptitudes and skillset. It isn’t for government to “right that wrong.” Anyone paid less than the market says they are worth should switch jobs to that better position.
This state has a relatively high minimum wage that has helped transition retailers to self-checkout. As an example, the largest grocery store within 25 miles does not have cashiers on weeknights. Someone really needing that such as for alcohol purchases or buying stamps must get a manager.
"The messaging and optics on this issue has been awful and paints the libertarian position as inhumane"
Concern troll is bad at concern trolling.
There is nothing inhumane about pointing out that high prices will hurt exactly the people you ostensibly care about. It isn't the messaging and optics that is at fault, it is persons like yourself who believe it is cruel that their fantasies are not realistic.
Keep calling everything you disagree with concern trolling. We've never had good messaging. You're telling these people, who have almost nothing, that asking for more will leave them with even less. How tone deaf can you be?
Reality being cruel doesn't mean you get to be a dick when explaining it.
"I know we don’t like when the government directs markets,..."
No need for the "but".
"We’re challenging the idea of necessity."
Who is the "we"? I'm pretty sure it isn't libertarians. Necessity isn't something that should be directed by government.
The reason for the "but" is because this isn't exclusively government direction, nor is any government direction for that matter. This is people direction.
I think everyone misunderstood the question of necessity that I raised. I'm saying let these workers make the foolish decision of mandating higher wages. Then we can observe how consumers react to prices.
The moral argument modern leftists make is that income should be disconnected from productivity. All I'm saying is let's give those leftists a chance to prove their moral superiority.
"...You can’t expect a perpetual supply of 16 year olds to fill these jobs..."
After reading the rest of this lefty shit's rant, it isn't sarc, it is, simply abysmal stupidity.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
I've been here for years, one misunderstood post and now you think I'm a lefty? lmao
You can’t expect a perpetual supply of 16 year olds to fill these jobs.
Actually you can as it happened for decades outside manager positions.
Sure, when the population was young.
You don't need everyone to work at McDonald's. There are still plenty of young people.
How many fast food jobs do you think there are exactly? What percent of the working population?
If you don't like the abundance of food you can move to Cuba, Venseuala, or north Korea.
Worker’s paradises!
If you think we can't expect a perpetual supply of 16 year olds, then you/we have much bigger problems than a minimum wage, dude.
Surely you can see the folly of the statement, right?
Let’s be even more blunt: someone has to work undesirable jobs.
If that's true, the market will determine how much they deserve to be paid, not the government. If a store can't find enough people to work the undesirable job at a wage that makes the store profitable, the store will close. If the people who would work there are willing to do undesirable but necessary jobs, they can find places to work.
There's a major employer near where I live. They offer a wage that's over $20 an hour for the most entry level work that requires no pre-existing skills or education. They're constantly hiring, there's zero shortage of positions. It's a chicken processing plant. It's work a ton of people simply WILL NOT do, except, if you're desperate enough for a job, it's good money that almost anyone CAN do.
And if they can't find enough workers? They're absolutely going to raise their wages. There does exist some ceiling at which they can't maintain operations, but it's work that needs doing and yet is a very undesirable job.
Point went way over your head.
"If that’s true, the market will determine how much they deserve to be paid, not the government."
Why do you think unions exist in the first place? Because markets don't determine wages. Markets determine the level of wages the market can bear, but markets don't set rates. Rates are set by employers. When employees can't negotiate a rate they want, they use collective bargaining and use government force to compel employers.
The reason I focused on "undesirable" jobs and viewed this wage increase as an experiment is to challenge the neo-Marxist idea of decoupling wages from productivity. The new left is pushing this theory via the concept of living wages and UBI. The markets pay for productivity, but the government action taken by leftists compels a "moral" argument that human worth requires a base level of pay.
Must "undesirable" jobs be filled? We just assume McDonalds is necessary. Is it really? Says who and based on what?
We already know that these wage increases will price employees out of the market and reduce availability of McDonalds. All I was trying to say is let it happen and make it a teachable lesson.
I propose we lengthen the year so that young people stay 16 longer.
Or going forward, we stop the aging process at 16.
I thought Carousel was at age 30.
21 in the book.
Renew!
"You can’t expect a perpetual supply of 16 year olds to fill these jobs."
True, Gen Z doesn't want to work anyway.
And haven’t got the social skills to get laid.
You can’t expect a perpetual supply of 16 year olds to fill these jobs.
That's how it used to work. And the 16-year-old workers tended to be more enthusiastic and more efficient.
Abolishing minimum wage laws is the humane and caring thing to do. It allows more young people to get hired and start building work skills and earning income.
There should be no minimum wage. Political campaigns enjoy that free market consideration using volunteers and unpaid interns.
Back when minimum wage was created, the politicians doing so knew economics. The stated purpose of a price floor on wages was to prevent undesirables from getting jobs, forcing them to starve to death. And that’s exactly what happened.
Fast forward a century or so and we get politicians that are so economically illiterate that they think employers will intentionally lose money by paying unskilled workers more than they produce.
The result is the same: unemployment for those who can’t earn a wage above the floor. The difference is that now there’s a social safety net, so the people who are forced into unemployment go on Welfare instead of starving to death.
I don't think they are economically illiterate, they are simply literate to the economies of our time. As you say people won't get paid more than they produce, and people on welfare are expected to produce votes to continually expand the scope of the government.
Then why do they get all excited and claim they’re giving poor people a raise whenever they hike the minimum wage?
You really think these guys are thinking "This will make more people permanently unemployed and on welfare, and that means more votes for us!"?
I don't. I think they have good intentions based upon economic ignorance.
"I think they have good intentions based upon economic ignorance."
Are you certain? I would like to think that, but I also think that maybe they understand these things and don’t care.
If you up the minimum wage you deliver a seen benefit to some guy who already has a job. You just bought yourself a voter. The person who bares that cost doesn’t even necessarily know it. Raise the minimum wage and some person decides not to invest in more jobs (new restaurant, expanding hours or production, etc). The teenager who won’t get hired doesn’t actually see that happen…they just find it hard to get a job later, or maybe decide the requirements of a Min Wage job are so onerous now that they don’t want the position.
People like AOC may use bad studies to justify their positions, but fundamentally, I think they know that their decisions have these unseen costs. But they also know they will never be held to account for them, because unseen costs are, well, hard to see. But they will be given credit for their payout to that job owner.
I think all these politicians understand that you can get away with taxing 100 people a penny and giving another person a dollar. The people who were taxed don't notice as much pain, and so it is just a matter of who you give the dollar to that ultimately says whether you are good or bad.
If you up the minimum wage you deliver a seen benefit to some guy who already has a job. You just bought yourself a voter.
I was responding to the argument that using minimum wage to put people on welfare buys votes.
The teenager who won’t get hired doesn’t actually see that happen…
That's what Bastiat calls "the unseen."
http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html
People like AOC may use bad studies to justify their positions, but fundamentally, I think they know that their decisions have these unseen costs.
Again I disagree. I believe they are so blinded by their good intentions that they blame bad results on something else, but never themselves.
"Good intentions"
" I believe they are so blinded by their good intentions that they blame bad results on something else, but never themselves."
While I haven't talked to AOC, I have talked to enough Union Workers and Democratic boosters to know that they understand these costs. And the way they behave indicates they are deliberately foisting costs on people with less political power. Unions regularly vote benefits for themselves, and require new employees to pay the higher costs (for example, upping their pensions while forcing new employees onto 401ks, while still contributing to the pension). And the ACA was full of little counter punches designed to push around unseen costs.
When I have specifically talked about the economic cost of minimum wage increases, I have never, ever had a person say to me, "Oh wow, I never knew that increasing the cost of labor means less labor will be bought." Not once. Every person I discuss this with merely believes it is better to give a raise to the person WITH THE JOB, and if some abstract "people" pay the cost, well that's all abstract. They are aware of the cost, they just feel that abstract costs are outweighed by the direct benefit.
I mean part of their platform is wage equality, not based on skill, but on genetics.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/democrats-demand-corporate-wage-data-to-ensure-equal-pay-for-women
It is even in their campaign policies.
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/abetterdeal/higher-wages-and-better-jobs
They constantly scream about CEO wages versus menial labor wages. They don't have good intentions. They want to utilize the state to push equity. They campaign loudly on equity. No longer is it equal opportunity but equal outcome.
Because they think equity is good, dumbass. Read the C. S. Lewis quote you posted you fucking idiot.
Which is a war on capitalism you retarded fuck. I dont care their intentions. I dont care their words. I dont use those things to defend their actions like you do. I care about how their actions effect me. You would gladly submit to a benevolent dictator because they mean well. Try reading the Lewis quote again. Mouth the words buddy.
Drinking harms his reading comprehension.
Actually, pretty much everyone understands that minimum wage increases cause some job loss. If they didn’t they would be advocating for $100 per hour or even $1 million per hour. What they assume is that more people will be helped than hurt, and they’ll deal with those that are hurt later: one of these days, maybe someday - perhaps give them a tent. At any rate, it’s a search for that pain point where the job losses cause too much outrage. That is often the point where white youths start losing their jobs and not just black youths, and then the blacks might move away, and often down to Dixie land. That suits a lot of white liberals just fine who can then shake their fists and yell to the southern states that “you’d better treat them right”. (How’s that for a touch of sarcasm???)
Actually, pretty much everyone understands that minimum wage increases cause some job loss.
I wish you were right, but the way most people talk I don't believe that's the case.
"As long as someone lies to me publicly, I'll claim they have good intentions and ignore their actions. "
yasafi (you are such a fucking idiot)
How is the hangover buddy?
Sarc is all about ideas!
Pussy, crawl back into you piss soaked garbage can. Where you belong.
You may be right about most politicians, but don’t underestimate Newsom. He was in the restaurant business. He knows he will put some franchises out of businesses and fewer new ones will open. He is a believer in bringing living standards down. When he looks out on tent cities he wonders how to get them out of synthetic tents and into canvas ones.
Are you suggesting there aren't people who continue to "believe" falsehoods, despite all the evidence against them?
Who won the 2020 election?
These are the same people who discount the existence of the Laffer Curve, which is this exact argument made in the tax domain.
Do you think they'd still get the votes if they actually said "we're subjugating you into a permanent underclass that has no choice but to continue voting us more and more power because we've removed any other way for you to survive"
Ordinarily I go with Hanlon's Razor, but the more time goes on and people see the real outcomes of their policies, ignorance is becoming less and less and adequate explanation.
"Then why do they get all excited and claim they’re giving poor people a raise whenever they hike the minimum wage?"
Because they feel like maybe they can't just come out and say "We're trying to increase the number of people on welfare so that they will keep voting for us."
"I think they have good intentions"
I don't.
Economist Walter Williams has called the minimum wage “one of the most effective tools in the arsenal of racists everywhere in the world.”
As documented in this Cato Institute research paper, the first minimum wage law, the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931, had racist origins. According to researcher David E. Bernstein, the story begins in 1927 when a contractor from Alabama “won a bid to build a Veteran’s Bureau hospital in Long Island, New York. He brought a crew of black construction workers from Alabama to work on the project. Appalled that blacks from the South were working on a federal project in his district, Representative Robert Bacon of Long Island submitted H.R. 17069.”
This bill was the precursor to the legislation known as the Davis-Bacon Act that was eventually passed into law. The act mandated a minimum wage to any workers on construction projects part of a contract with the U.S. or District of Columbia governments that exceeded $2,000.
As Walter Williams has further noted about the Act, “Among the widespread racist sentiment was that of American Federation of Labor President William Green, who complained, ‘Colored labor is being sought to demoralize wage rates.’”
In practice, the mandated minimum wage in Davis-Bacon “was almost universally determined to be the same as the union wage,” wrote then-Harvard law student John Frantz in this 1994 article for the Foundation of Economic Education.
“Most major union construction unions excluded blacks. This was an effective tool to fight against what some legislators openly complained about, cheap black laborers from the south,” Frantz continued.
Representative John Cochran from Missouri laid bare the motivation behind the act when he stated, “I have received numerous complaints in recent months about southern contractors employing low-paid colored mechanics getting work and bringing the employees from the South.”
https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/the-racist-roots-behind-the-minimum-wage/
A Big Mac Meal is now included in the Cheesy-Poof Price Index - which has replaced GDP and UE as the most important Leading Economic Indicators for Fox News.
Also included:
Mountain Dew
fryin' grease
beef jerky
Marlboros
Bud Light (under review for replacement)
NASCAR tickets
turd lies. That's not a surprise to anyone who reads his constant stream of bullshit.
But it's becoming obvious that as Misek is too stupid to understand the concepts of "evidence" or "relevance", the concept of "honesty" is simply beyond turd's ken.
turd is a TDS addled lying pile of lefty shit.
Buttplug is Jim Cramer. It all makes sense.
Jim Cramer has said that the economy is headed for a soft landing, per CNBC.
Shit. Time to move investments to blue chips.
I hear the anti Cramer fund is doing pretty good. Maybe that explains the soft landing.
So-so. Not gaining, not losing much for the last 6 months since I started owning/tracking,
Ronald McFondled, why is there a 2 after your name?
Shreek really makes a good case for no knock warrants and overzealous, hyper aggressive SWAT reams.
Your Nazi blood is all hot, little dude.
The TDS-addled assclown turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
Oh I’m generally against those things, but am willing to make an exception in you case, Kiddie Raper. You deserve to be killed by the cops. Actually, that is better than you deserve.
Ideally you would be held somewhere and slowly tortured to death by your older victims and families of your victims. THAT is what a Marxist pedo like you deserves.
People complaining fast food is too expensive may be the greatest indictment agianst the current economy.
"Only 24% of *** Democrats *** say they are better off financially under Biden, poll says"
Not only are you an embarrassing partisan hack, you defend Dementia Joe in ways that even most Democrats won't.
Anyway, at least year 3 of #Bidenomics hasn't been as brutal as year 2: Stocks fall to end Wall Street’s worst year since 2008, S&P 500 finishes 2022 down nearly 20%
Worst since 2008. Meaning worse than every year under President Game Show Host, even the pandemic / lockdown year.
Legend.
Bentley driver who hit Rainbow Bridge border checkpoint at 100 mph in fiery crash was heading to Kiss concert in Canada after visiting NY casino
Fox News ran with the "terrorist attack" lead for hours and Republicans joined in the pants-shitting until the truth was reported that it was just an older couple headed to that Kiss concert.
A libertarian outlet on Telegram got the cctv footage showing the Dukes of Hazard cosplay shortly after it occurred.
Wouldn’t be surprised if some pedo prog make a post about Fox news.
That Bentley sure lived up to it's name, "Flying Spur".
What a way to go though. Big win at the casino and then fly off in a fiery flying meteor of a Bentley on the way to hear your favorite childhood band rock out. And the leaders of two countries notified immediately.
Absolute banger.
This actually needs to become a KISS song.
It can be a sequel to "Detroit Rock City".
I'm really curious as to the chain of events that wound up with the Bentley flying through the air into the customs plaza.
turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.
"Fox News ran with the “terrorist attack” lead for hours"
So did CNN and MSDNC but it's funny how you didn't mention that. Maybe Fox and the others were reporting it that way because Border Patrol was saying it was and because both Prime Minister Trudeau and President Biden said they had been briefed and were following the developments.
You're so shitty at shilling, Shrike. This is why Open Society canned you.
Well, turd lies.
I feel uptight on a Saturday night
Nine o' clock, the radio's the only light
I hear my song and it pulls me through
Comes on strong, tells me what I got to do
I got to
Get up!
Everybody's gonna move their feet
Get down!
Everybody's gonna leave their seat
You gotta lose your mind in Detroit Rock City
Twelve o'clock, I gotta rock
There's a truck ahead, lights staring at my eyes
Oh my God, no time to turn
I got to laugh 'cause I know I'm gonna die
Why?
I thought we were told that cars only explode like that in the movies.
At least it wasn't a classic Bentley.
He should have been a stunt driver.
Ooops, wrong place.
Its not a war on fast food. It is a war on capitalism. This isn't the only industry they are after.
Just because you are malevolent doesn't mean everyone else is.
“Democrats have good intentions.”
What the fuck is wrong with you? California has been doing this for years retard. This is what WEF and other globalist groups want. They are very public about it dumbass.
Wonder why people say you defend democrats.
Most people have good intentions. Malevolent people like you are a small minority of the population, no matter how much you project it onto others.
"Democrats mean well, don't criticize them"
Also
"Stop calling me a Democrat defender"
Criticize their policies. Show them why what they believe is wrong.
Assuming they have bad intentions because you are full of hate doesn't get anything done.
I literally did criticize their policies dumbass.
You criticize them as people by claiming they're malevolent like yourself. Again, just because you like to cause harm and hurt people doesn't mean everyone else is mean spirited like you.
Where did I do so sarc? I said they were waging a war on capitalism which is what their own platform dictates. Min wage laws, benefit requirements, regulatory state.
I did not state their intentions or ca them malevolent. Only you have said that dumbass.
I'm sorry you're not smart. But you created a strawman yet again. Lol.
You're responding to yet one more steaming pile of lefty shit to whom the concept of "honesty" represents a vague and distant vision.
Fair.
"Republicans mean well, don't criticize them! Well okay, you can criticize a few of them, but only the few that I say you can criticize. But the rest of them, you can't criticize. Overall they have good intentions. And don't you dare call me a Republican." --Jesse
Poor little jeffy thinks everyone is a dumb NPC just like him.
Poor Creamjeff.
He absolutely hates the fact that Jesse ruins his all narratives by consistently shitting on the GOPe and the neocons.
Another bullshit Pedo Jeffy strawman.
For you buddy.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals."
-- C.S. Lewis, God In The Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics (1948)
That’s exactly what I’m saying, dumbass.
They believe they’re doing good. They have good intentions. They do not connect bad outcomes with their own actions because it’s not what they intended, so they find something or someone else to blame.
That is not what you are saying. Read it again.
yasafi
Mouth the words buddy. Slowly.
Reminds me of the time I had to read the entire fucking "Chronicles of Narnia" to my kid.
He loves his precious democrats.
sarcasmic 6 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Have you ever considered telling someone you disagree with why what they say is wrong, as opposed to telling them that they as a person are wrong? You don’t change minds by attacking people. That just puts them on the defensive.
I don't ever expect to change JesseAz's mind. He'll stick to his guns when he knows he's wrong because he'd rather poke his eyes out with a fork than admit that I'm right about something.
You are such a pleasant person.
You’ll never change my mind because you don’t argue from an intellectual position. It is all rage typing and bald assertions lol.
What are you right about? Everyone has disagree death you this morning. Can you cite a time you were right?
This is projection buddy. Like when you started screaming facts changed and people were conspiracy theorists for being right.
I can’t recall a single time you were on the right side of an issue.
I can't recall a single time you backed your assertions with actual evidence.
Thank you for proving my point.
I'm curious. What point did you think you made?
No, he proved HIS point. You’re a thread shitting, lying, drunken, leftist, democrat loving rageaholic pussythat won’t go away.
The only way to fight hate is to respond with love!
Or with overwhelming firepower.
I don't care if they're malevolent or not when their actions harm me.
We get that you want to believe they have good intentions (or at least that you say that, cannot be sure whether you believe what you say).
For my perspective, when minimum wage laws are discussed, there are reams of claims that enacting the price controls on labor (which is what they are) will be harmful. For politicians to continue to try to enact price controls on labor, they have to be so massively stupid that they simply never get exposed to these counterpoints. Or, more likely, they see the counterpoints, understand the logic and evidence contained therein, and intentionally (and hence, to me, with malice aforethought) chose to ignore it and pursue their harmful dogmatic position, because it gets them votes, and who cares if taxpayers end up on the hook for ever more costs.
You can claim they are "blinded" by their good intentions. The only people that blinded by their own purity are cultists.
The limited availability McRib should be replaced with the McCuban.
McDonald's would find a way to mess up ham.
Perhaps an employee would steal all of it. Primary suspect is the Ham Burglar.
Nah I would suspect grimmis
Grimace looks more like we expect another commenter here to look. He looks just like a giant buttplug.
Talk about an unhappy meal.
You had me at the "McRib should be replaced...."
They could call it the; McEve.
^^ Facts.
Even better, by making all these fascist "Public - Private" consortiums- as the FAST law attempted- makes it easy to blame any unwanted side effects on the businesses- aka capitalism. There are a thousand reasons you can give for why employers aren't hiring more, and countless marxist economists willing to use The Science! (tm) to distract from reality.
A number of mixed entities were formed, called instituti or enti nazionali, whose purpose it was to bring together representatives of the government and of the major businesses. These representatives discussed economic policy and manipulated prices and wages so as to satisfy both the wishes of the government and the wishes of business. The government considered this arrangement to be a success and Italian Fascists soon began to pride themselves on this outcome, saying they had survived the Great Depression without infringing on private property. In 1934, the Fascist Minister of Agriculture said: "While nearly everywhere else private property was bearing the major burdens and suffering from the hardest blows of the depression, in Italy, thanks to the actions of this Fascist government, private property not only has been saved, but has also been strengthened".[83]
This economic model based on a partnership between government and business was soon extended to the political sphere in what came to be known as corporatism.[dubious – discuss] From 1934 onwards, believing that Italy could have avoided the Great Depression if it had not been linked to international markets, Mussolini insisted that autarky should be one of the primary goals of his government's economic policy. To this end, the Fascists began to impose significant tariffs and other trade barriers.[84] In 1934, Mussolini boasted that three-quarters of Italian businesses "is in the hands of the state".[85][86]
Mussolini also adopted a Keynesian policy of government spending on public works to stimulate the economy. Between 1929 and 1934, public works spending tripled to overtake defense spending as the largest item of government expenditure.[89] At this time, Mussolini said about Keynes that "despite the latter's prominent position as a Liberal", his work may be considered a "useful introduction to fascist economics".[90]
During and after the Spanish Civil War, Franco and the Falange created a corporative system based on the Italian model. An economic system was implemented according to the wishes of the corporations, which also set prices and wages.
The Spanish corporative system was less successful than the Italian experience. At one point, the Spanish farmers' corporation created a massive bread shortage by setting the price too low. As a result, bread production was abandoned in favour of other, more profitable goods. Although the aim of this policy was to make bread accessible to the poorest among the population, the opposite occurred and a black market emerged.
As in Italy, wages were set by the state in negotiations between officially recognized workers' syndicates and employers' organizations, with the state as mediator.
“Fast-food work isn’t meant to be career work for most people. These are great ways to earn quick cash and learn basic skills, which can then be leveraged into better jobs as people build better lives for themselves."
I’ve been seeing such statements for a while. Can someone give me examples of these “basic skills” that can be learned? I suspect there’s not much learning invoachinglved, just demonstration and selection.
I coach children in football, including a lot of what we call basic skills (or fundamentals). Others accuse us of taking credit for teaching these skills, when really they might say we’re just selecting for them, and in some cases this criticism is correct. I don’t know what skills one might pick up working at an eatery that would be generally applicable to other kinds of employment. What I can believe is that it’s a way to weed out the generally incompetent or lazy, and in some cases the too overqualified. I think a lot of formal schooling is like that too, maybe the substantial majority of it.
Closing blockquote tag, she’s-a no work! I switch-a to plain quote.
Works just as well.
Showing up to work on time.
Learning a task and then completing the task satisfactorily without needing supervision.
How to work with others, including people you don’t like.
How to set boundaries with your employer.
How to manage your manager.
Keeping in mind that 'learning' does not mean 'others set me down with a lesson plan'. You can learn from watching others (even the worst person has something to teach you - even if its 'don't do that'), and by dealing with the consequences of your failures.
Showing up on time is not a skill.
Apparently it is as so many have to LEARN how to do it through incurred consequences.
It involves reasoning through choices, enforcing decisions and actions that support goals etc.
People learn to reason and have to develop habits. when you acquire traits you gain a skill. No-one does things well 'out of the box'. Late people fulfill the goal of getting to work. Reliable people have the skill of doing it on time every time very predictably.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FNerBxHdCmg
Then why can so few people manage it?
They can manage it. They choose not to.
Showing up to work on time is a condition most employers demand. A basic skill that young people can learn at low wage, “high school employment” type jobs along with the basic skills Agammamon and others have posted. Government enacting minimum wages then boosting them results in a loss of those low skill positions making it more difficult for folks just entering the labor market to learn said skills.
It's the most important skill of all.
You have an overbroad understanding of "skill".
You have a willful lack of appreciation of "skills".
Everything about a "real" job, working for a stranger, having to follow processes and procedures, having to be responsible for your own time no matter what, is important to a functioning adult. Just because these are things some people have long since learned, doesn't mean they're innate. They're learned, and valuable.
Though, obviously, their value on a resume seems limited and they're very, very basic skills, shit like time management IS a skill.
Yes it is. And one that is severely lacking in the workforce.
Perhaps skill is overbroad, but it is something one can learn the importance of in a low-skill job like fast food.
Show up late for your shift, and you're likely to be fired. And be told why you were fired. You can learn, then, that showing up on time is an important "skill" to have.
Except . . . it is. There's a whole slew of behaviors you have to learn and learn to appreciate in order to get to some place on time.
excellent (if obvious) reply...
and those skills appear to be rarer amongst the potential workforce as politicians and parents make it easier for them to avoid joining the real world.
Stay in school forever, stay on your parents insurance, live at home forever....
Pride at earning a paycheck and not collecting a handout.
That is trending towards toxic masculinity and racism. You owe it to the victims triggered by your statement to fund a safe space with tranny friendly restrooms.
At some point I decided that toxic masculinity is definitely a skill young men should learn.
I mean, if they ever want to get laid, at least.
Because letting a feminist tell you how to be a man is about as smart as letting a bunch of vegans tell McDonald's how to make french fries. No matter how much you kowtow to their demands, they aren't your demographic. You're not getting anything you want from them, and doing what they say makes you less attractive to your actual customer base.
No one wants to work in a factory...
Hilarious-
Argentina's Milei says shutting central bank 'non-negotiable'
Reuters
November 24, 20239:25 AM ESTUpdated 2 hours ago
Big talking pol does 180 turn on central bank stance like I called.
I just didn't think he would do so in a week.
He is just trying to mitigate the damage already done:
https://babylonbee.com/news/1-billion-argentinians-already-dead-after-libertarian-elected
I read the Reuters story and all it says is that Milei still insists that closing the central bank is "non-negotiable", which implies that he is still planning to close the central bank. Where's the "180"?
Buttplug lies a lot.
Bloomberg:
Markets Cheer as Milei Drops Dollarization for Macri Brass
Days after election win, Milei leaves behind loyal advisers
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.
You mad that Chuck E Cheese was closed on Thanksgiving?
Lol. Shrike isn't leaving links anymore because we read them to show him where he is wrong. Hilarious.
Visiting some of his links could result in felony charges against you.
Correct.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
It's true that useful specific "skills" are seldom acquired working at a fast food outlet. But what IS learned is far more valuable:
* Show up on time for work. This is the biggest single lesson.
* Work with people you might not like.
* Try to satisfy customer needs.
* Work efficiently.
* Don't spend much time screwing around.
* If you don't perform well, you can lose your job.
* The money you receive from the job are for YOUR labor -- so (hopefully) you're more interested in what you get when you spend.
* Take the initiative to solve problems as they arise. Don't always wait to be told. The boss WILL notice.
Yeah, fair point. We use this term "Entry level," as it either trains or vets people for their base employability. These are minimal requirements, but they are still requirements that not every individual will meet-some people can't show up on time, some people will be so belligerent they alienate their coworkers, and some people will engage in behaviors that harm a customer experience. They either learn to overcome these shortfalls or they learn about being unemployed.
"...* If you don’t perform well, you can lose your job..."
It's a shame this isn't true of politicians.
Or CEOs.
Given the number of CEOs and the fact that many firings are reported as 'pursuing new opportunities', well:
"19 CEOs who quit or were fired in 2019"
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/11/business/ceo-departures-2019/index.html
Those are not things that are learned, except by your boss about you. Those are all a matter of "How badly do you want it?" They could just as well be established by having you hop on one leg while patting your tummy.
What is the compensation for the hop on one leg/pat the tummy?
Not to mention seeing that first paycheck and learning what "FICA" means and wondering why the government gets a cut of your labor.
Who is fica and why is he getting all of my money
Name ends in a vowel—must be for "protection".
I should change my name to Fica and sue to get all that money.
Take the initiative to solve problems as they arise.
Over my decades in the work force, doing that has been the #1 thing that has gotten me in trouble with my supervisors.
Exactly. It's why as well as weeding out the incompetent and shiftless, it's also weeding out the overqualified.
No worries, if higher labor costs make fast food too expensive, the state can just raise the minimum wage again so people can afford it. They're already talking about 25 bucks an hour.
But you can use your EBT card at McDonalds, so there's that.
"The 'guns' (gov-guns) will save us!!!", says the armed-robbers.
..because of course; gov-'guns' makes everything for armed-robbers.
Higher prices created by a $20 minimum wage for burger joints will lead to fewer customers, reduced profits, fewer restaurants, and a loss of jobs.
What's not to like?
I'm always amazed at how nobody asks: "What if the value of the job isn't worth $20/hr." Because at that point, you're just creating artificial overhead.
But I guess it's kinda insensitive to point to a person and say, "You are not worth $20 ($10, $5, $1)/hr for the skills/ability you bring to the table." Gotta take their feeeeeewings into account, obviously.
That being said, absent truly above-and-beyond service, I'm 100% done tipping anyone in a state with a higher minimum wage than the $7 federal limit. When the cost of employing you pointlessly raises the cost for me, I no longer have any gratuity for you because you are not worth what I was there to buy.
Don't like it, take it up with your legislators.
Waitresses appreciate it when I give them a big tip; they don’t like getting the shaft.
I suppose you don’t have the decency to lube the tip for the waitress.
That isn’t needed. I either slap it on the table or put it in their hand.
Seems like everyone is getting screwed by this nonsense.
When they feel the tip is adequate, they thank me and say to come again.
She might be more appreciative if you weren’t always arriving before she does.
That was premature.
THATS WHAT SHE SAID!
My general heuristic is that government regulation of wages like this won't be a good idea. Thomas Sowell is right to wonder whether a $20/hour worker will generate $20+ of value (or rather, given additional employment costs already in place) whether they will generate value in excess of their costs.
However, Sowell hasn't produced actual numbers, TTBOMK, so we don't know whether it's true in this case. And I recall research from the EU a while back showing that a higher minimum wage relative to prior levels led to a stronger economy as more people now had money to spend - "trickle-up" economics if you like. I note, too, that Henry Ford thought that raising wages would help the economy overall - though when he did so, he was sued by the Dodge Brothers, and lost. It may well be the case that wage increases do not have a monotonic - adverse - effect on the economy, and I don't know when the curve changes direction.
So while in principle, absent direct evidence, I don't think the increase to $20 will be beneficial, I am quite prepared to see what the evidence actually tells us, and nor will I feel inclined to twist the evidence to support any prior principle.
Of course shrike is Keynesian and assumes the multiplier is always greater than 1. Lol.
Shrike maybe a Keynesian, but I'm not shrike.
I don't know whether the relevant multiplier is greater than 1 - as I make fucking clear: "So while in principle, absent direct evidence, I don’t think the increase to $20 will be beneficial, I am quite prepared to see what the evidence actually tells us".
To quote Keynes, when someone accused him of changing his mind on something, he responded, "I change my mind in the presence of new evidence. What do you do?" Clearly, the idea of changing one's mind thus is utterly alien to you.
Why do you feel the need to lie about what I said? Can't find an actual counter-argument to "I don't think it will work out but I am prepared to wait and see"?
Even you accept that economic responses are often non-linear - or perhaps the fact that I do is enough to reject that idea, given your sad and pathological need to disagree with anything I say. So being open to the idea the non-linearity may lead to non-classical or non-intuitive outcomes shouldn't be too much of a stretch, even to an intellectually dishonest and disabled POS such as yourself.
"...I don’t know whether the relevant multiplier is greater than 1 – as I make fucking clear: “So while in principle, absent direct evidence, I don’t think the increase to $20 will be beneficial, I am quite prepared to see what the evidence actually tells us”..."
Why bother to post such drivel? Looking for ata-boy points?
I suppose repairing broken windows stimulates the economy as well?
Depends on the circumstances.
No, it doesn't unless assholes like you make up some fantasy to justify your claims.
As long as the production of windows to replace the broken ones does not displace the production of windows for new construction.
"...And I recall research from the EU a while back showing that a higher minimum wage relative to prior levels led to a stronger economy as more people now had money to spend – “trickle-up” economics if you like..."
Guessing this was from the London School of Econ; hardly anyone else would try to pass off this bullshit.
Thomas Sowell is right to wonder whether a $20/hour worker will generate $20+ of value
I can guarantee you that a $20/hour worker will generate $20+ of value or they will get fired. Setting a minimum wage of $20 just will get all less productive workers get fired.
And I recall research from the EU a while back showing that a higher minimum wage relative to prior levels led to a stronger economy as more people now had money to spend
Given the economic basket case that is the EU, how would they possibly determine that?
And is that a "stronger economy" in Hitler's sense?
So while in principle, absent direct evidence, I don’t think the increase to $20 will be beneficial,
Beneficial for who? Not for the fast food workers who get fired, not for the restaurant owners, not for the customers, and not for the taxpayers who need to pay for the welfare of the people who are out of work. But I'm sure someone will benefit.
I wonder if the state's interest is in anticipated tax revenue. If businesses don't raise prices to cover the extra labor then the state collects something like 10-20% of that extra capital. If prices rise as well then they collect extra sales tax. Since they don't care about the survival of private industry and only care about their own power, why wouldn't the government vote itself short term gains both financially and electorally?
Given the economic basket case that is the EU, how would they possibly determine that?
1. It isn’t. 2. This was 20 or so years ago – but the point was whether an increase in the minimum wage was necessarily economically adverse 3. See 1, 2, and there is a discipline called “economics” where some people are trained to do things like this.
“And is that a “stronger economy” in Hitler’s sense?”
Trying for the stupidest demo of Godwin of the day? A stronger economy in the sense of growth in real GDP or real GDP per capita which is the usual definition, you pillock.
It might turn out to benefit workers and employers and people in other industries or business for the speculative possibility I mentioned.
But nowhere do I claim that this will or is likely to happen, despite your apparently attempting to imply that I am so claiming. What a fuckwit.
"...Trying for the stupidest demo of Godwin of the day?..."
Naah. He's just pointing out the end point of your claim, but you don't seem to be bright enough to understand.
"It might turn out to benefit workers and employers and people in other industries or business for the speculative possibility I mentioned.
But nowhere do I claim that this will or is likely to happen, despite your apparently attempting to imply that I am so claiming. What a fuckwit."
Speaking of fuckwits, it appears you win.
1. It isn’t. 2. This was 20 or so years ago
Yes, the EU is an economic basket case. The fact that this was 20 years ago suggests that the negative effects are long term.
A stronger economy in the sense of growth in real GDP or real GDP per capita which is the usual definition, you pillock.
Yes, and that is the progressive/fascist view of a "strong economy". It's the view that says that wars, massive government spending, alien invasions, and digging trenches and then filling them in amounts to a "strong economy". Thank you for demonstrating that you suffer from exactly this delusion.
If I start a fight for $100 movement - who is with me? FYI, this will be a parody movement.
Mcdonalds should just convert some struggling locations in CA to a Boba / ice cream shop. Or they can imitate Asian bakeries like 85 or Paris Baguette to satisfy the "serving of bread" requirement.
What they need to realize is that Boba is like drugs to Asians. A drug. I can tell them that most of it is powdered milk mixed in with nothing special tea, and it won't matter. They'll pay 6 bucks for it and pay another 2 bucks for boba, jelly, and other forms of sugar glob. But they won't pay 11 bucks for a big mac meal.
White people also apparently LOVE ramen. These places pop up everywhere in So Cal. When I go to Ramen places half the customers are white. Why they love ramen, I don't know.
The point is that these things take cost like 50 cents to make and you can charge customers 6 dollars. Automation makes more sense for drinks and ice cream than burgers. If Mcdonalds can't operate franchises in CA, then they really have to cut down on cost and maximize their profit.
Skin color is the most important thing in restaurants.
You mean meat color.
Why they love ramen, I don’t know.
1. Many people love carbs.
2. Many people love the umami flavour.
3. You get both with ramen.
Democrats love killing jobs and unborn babies.
Only $20 an hour? How is a part time worker (who has a full time position but only shows up when in the mood) going to support a variable household with a couple of adults, some kids with uncertain bloodlines, missing but occasional fathers, needy neighbors, "business associates", and pets? Social justice and equity demand at least $120 an hour, paid regardless of actual time worked.
But burger prices need to be capped at 29 cents.
Government mandated wages is fascism.
+10000000 Exactly.........
This fearmongering is idiotic when McDonalds has no issues operating restaurants or not raising prices to be unaffordable (moreso than they already have without this law) in cities in other countries where they're forced to pay comparably high wages.
You really think McDonalds is a charity? That out of the goodness of their heart, they're forgoing profits to help us out by keeping prices below the maximum they believe the market will bear in an optimized price/demand curve?
Never read McDonalds own data about how much laws like this actually add to their costs? If prices went up to reflect only the marginal cost of a wage increase like this, the price hike is tiny. A fraction of the price increases they've already made over the last few years. Fucking pennies.
Pants on head stupid article and theory to justify a tiny bit of extra corporate profit by underpaying workers.
I can tell you never ran a business.
^This +10000000. Funny how they can complain so much about a spot they asked to take when all along had the same opportunity to risk a business start-up as the owner did. It is exactly demanding money while enslaving someone else to risk their estate and be liable for it.
"...Pants on head stupid article and theory to justify a tiny bit of extra corporate profit by underpaying workers."
Fuck off and die, steaming pile of lefty shit.
There's no such thing as an "underpaid worker" in any society where slavery has been abolished. A wage is determined by the value of the job being performed and the skill of the person performing it.
Assuming a truly free market for labour. If there is an effective oligopsony for labour, that assumption fails.
Which there isn't.
Wrong-o. It depends on location and labour mobility.
How much does cherry picking pay, oh, arrogant asshole?
Name a few.
That's assuming the employer knows what the workers actually do, what level of skill is required, and what level of skill the workers actually have. I haven't worked anywhere where that was the case.
You really seem to be a victim no matter where you work. I'd quit and go back to mommy's basement.
This is primarily a war on fast food, not the franchises. There are a lot of California legislatures that would love to see fast food outlawed in California. They realize at this time trying to do that would be considered too extreme and not pass into law. So, they use the roundabout method of passing laws that they know will lead to the destruction of the fast-food industry in California.
...or maybe they're just all greedy, self-entitled armed-robbers ('guns' make sh*t) people who like to project/deflect everything they are/do onto anyone else around to cover for their own greed and criminal intention.
'Higher prices created by a $20 minimum wage for burger joints will lead to fewer customers, reduced profits, fewer restaurants, and a loss of jobs.'
I'm pretty sure that's the whole point.
Okay, maybe I figured out California's problem. It's not the only Blue state, yet it's so oddball compared to other Blue states like Michigan and Massachusetts. What makes it different?
My theory, which is mine, coming from living here, is that California had too many decades of affluence, so that the population west of I-5 are all... KARENS!
Not in the sense that they are all affluent white women wanting to talk to the manager, but that they all have that affluent white women wanting to talk to the manager ATTITUDE. They have an entitlement mentality that government must provide everything, and a cultural mentality that arising from upper middle class suburbia, and a superiority complex that demands that the world must conform to their whim.
And of course they don't eat at fast food restaurants, so neither should anyone else! Besides, those golden arches and spinning jack-n-box heads are an eyesore. Let's get rid of them along with all the billboards and signs. Think I'm exaggerating? We have municipalities here that regulate the height of your hedges! And how green your lawn must be! Imagine your HOA got in charge of your whole city. Yup, welcome to California.
So of course the middle class working class is leaving the state. The poor working class have to stay they can't afford to leave. So the concentration of Karens just increases. The only way out of a major depression, combined with the state going bankrupt for real. Which is not that far off if things keep going this way.
F California
This could turn to a bigger problem in the future agencia de marketing digital