It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Here’s How the Price of Your Favorite Fast Food Would Change With a $15 Minimum Wage

page: 21
27
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04 Thanks for your research. However....I believe that this is what WE predicted. That the lowest workers would have 100% increased buying power, and prices may go up 35%, leaving us with a substantial INCREASE in purchasing, security, stability, opportunity, and market consumption. And we predicted that it would decrease the income gap. So the other jobs get a smaller bump up....so what?

You compare to a nurse here, starting at 25/h. Yeah, ten years ago.....and maybe in select few places now. For the majority of the US now, RN's start closer to 19-20/h, so your guess that Australian nurses start at 25/h is still 10000 a year more than here. And so the medical secretary gets paid almost as much as the RN. I have done both, and I would rather nurse than medical secretary any day....they deserve much more then the 8-10/h they get here (the CNA's too), and the RN is a growth opportunity position, you can move into management or teaching, whereas the secretary is not.

Regardless, point being that raising minimum wage is not the catastrophic event many portray it as, businesses don't disappear as it happens, people don't drop out of school to flip burgers, its better for society as a whole, reducing the tax burden of the middle class to support those on minimum wage. To say that giving tax subsidies that become "bonuses" for CEO's of corporations and financial institutions is productive for society, but that giving them to the poor is a recipe for disaster.....sounds like so much drivel created by those self same elite to justify their massive transfer of wealth in our nation from the bottom up. They have been very successful at it over the last 40 years, and look what it has gotten us.




posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
Get rid of the McDonalds, Burger KIngs, etc and let small business feed people. People would make a decent living and the food would be reasonable. Corporation are just ripping off everyone. Why would anyone waste money on mcCrap...


If it were only that easy...I'm not on their side but the McDonalds and WalMarts have ingrained themselves so thoroughly in the economy and marketplace. These aren't just retail stores, they are warehouses, trucking companies, distribution chains, they are buyers, importers, fisheries, and so much more. The depth at which they have penetrated into the economy is staggering.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   
well, its not like they'll just vanish all at once leaving a vacuum. Most likely they will begin to contract soon regardless as prices on beef and cheap Chinese labor continue to inflate. Society did exist before them.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Aazadan

You forget I said COLA. And it is more like comparing red apples to green apples. Not perfect, but much better than comparing the US to other countries.


COLA is CPI. COLA is the difference in two different CPI's either from area to area or year to year.

Unfortunately these numbers are just wrong, and the further you get from 1982 the more wrong they are because it's a compounding error. Are you familiar with the LIBOR scandal? CPI calculates the official interest rate for the USD, banks then take that rate and use it to figure out their lending rates. Government jobs use it to figure out raises, and the private sector determines wages from there. We even index it to Social Security payouts and minimum wage. The problem with CPI is massive and one day it will cause a riot. What it means in the short term though is that it's an unreliable number. I realize this is a bit dismissive of your point but it's the truth, CPI isn't just imperfect it is flat out wrong, it's like throwing 2d6 and using it to determine the weather forecast.


originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
So basically the middle class is screwed and their wages are SIGNIFICANTLY LOWERED to offset the cost of an extremely high minimum wage.


It's a long post so I'm just going to quote part of it. I think you misinterpreted the statistics. To start with, we know that the minimum wage in Australia is $16.87 and in the US it is $7.25. So right off the bat Australians are making 133% more. Of course their prices are also higher. According to your statistics "Consumer Prices Including Rent in United States are 34.06% lower than in Australia". This can be rewritten to say "Consumer Prices including rent in Australia are 31.68% higher than in the United States".

So now we have a data point to compare with the wage, they are making 133% more but the cost of their goods are only 32% higher. That results in 76.5% (2.33/1.32) more purchasing power for those on the bottom. Now, that money does come from somewhere, I'll grant that. I'll even flat out state where it comes from. It comes from those at the top. When wages are higher and profit margins remain the same the end result is a smaller wealth gap, at some point those who are higher on the income scale start bringing in a bit less and it instead goes to those on the bottom.

Now, lets look at the nurse who makes 35/hour in Australia. That comes out to $63,700/year (they have a 35 hour work week). The same position in the US in a comparable city (Brisbane is moderately priced, high but not the highest) such as Las Vegas which I picked from this and grabbed a city between 105 and 110 is $54,000 according to indeed. In comparison the Australian is making 18% more. This means that they have 90% of the purchasing power. So we can say that yes, that posistion has less buying power in Australia. However we're close to the cutoff. Also worth noting, the median income in the us is about 50,000 so a nurse is slightly above. In Australia the median income is about $47,000 so a nurse there is making significantly above average.

So the end result of all this is basically that you can say with doubling the minimum wage those making below the median income have between 0% and 76.5% more purchasing power, those making above the median income have between 0% and 32% less purchasing power when compared to the United States.

So we get back to your original assertion and we can use Australia since a guide. In Australia is there a surplus of burger flippers and a shortage of RN's because people are choosing to support themselves by doing the most minimal job possible? It looks to me like the answer is no. People still work hard, they still have careers, and they still work to advance themselves. The difference is that people on the bottom of the income scale aren't living in absolute misery and have enough money to contribute to the economy.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   



A liberal group called The Other 98% posted an image that showed two people in McDonald’s uniforms looking utterly astonished. (The image is a screenshot from a Saturday Night Live skit.) In headline type were the words, "McDonald’s workers in Denmark have a union. Earn $45,000/year."

The text in the post itself was a bit more detailed. It said, "McDonald's employees in Denmark have a union, are paid $21/hour ($45,000/year), and enjoy 5 weeks paid vacation."

link

This is "Mostly True" According to politifact.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan
Woah. I have to point this out to you and others who posted similar. The us median is about 50000. Per HOUSEHOLD. IT'S actually more like 27000 per individual, meaning that, yes, nurses make close to TWICE the median per capita income. As does my fiance who is a teacher.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: Aazadan
Woah. I have to point this out to you and others who posted similar. The us median is about 50000. Per HOUSEHOLD. IT'S actually more like 27000 per individual, meaning that, yes, nurses make close to TWICE the median per capita income. As does my fiance who is a teacher.


The Australia number of $47,000 was also household. As long as the comparison is household to household the point remains the same.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: TDawgRex

Do you know what else will change?

The workforce will change. Instead of hiring the bottom of the barrel scum, the fast food places will hire much better people. Everybody will be more attractive, friendlier and more intelligent. The scum that currently holds the position will be eliminated. All those whiny losers will end up on the couch collecting gubmint checks.

Why would any manager hire low i.q. disgusting slobs when they could choose from a pool of much better applicants?

The only reason the fast food industry looks and behaves as it does is because the better people go elsewhere for jobs.

So you losers just keep complaining and blaming everybody else for your pathetic lives while you inch closer and closer to annihilation. You only have yourselves to blame.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: TDawgRex
dailysignal.com...






Wow, I had no idea how cheap it is for you folks to eat down there in the US...



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: XXX777

Ever notice how you never hear really beautiful successful and happy people trying to convince others there's something wrong with them? It's always some round old man or plastic surgery disaster or a guy who is working himself into an early grave for a good medical benefit package. I think there'd be a lot less hate in the world if we took the economy back to its roots of everyone getting more for their labor cooperatively than they possibly could individually, instead of keeping it as this perverse casino game that we all play with our livelihoods.

In a functional economy there would be very little need or room for a dole- that's a counter evolutionary trick that insures this broken system against the natural feedback of it's defects (placating the poor so they don't pursue their own survival strategies counter to the interests of the system).

The push for better more qualified workers will force people to keep moving until they find their niche instead of settling in any position they can cling to the minimum standards of, and the unfeasability of unproductive work (such as walmart greeting or keeping obsolete positions machines can do better, which are another form of dole where bare subsistence is traded for authority over the recipient rather than for production by the recipient) would ensure a diversity of productive jobs suitable for most combinations of strengths and weaknesses. Those who now must work as servants and are horrible at it would become available for other functions that they aren't challenged at- there's a hell of a lot of garbage to be picked up and sorted, fields to be checked for harmful pests, documents to be scanned into electronic format- we could make a lot of progress and have a lot more meaning if we weren't sustaining a huge unproductive underclass just in the name of making sure the rich maintain their authority and their ability to horde empty wealth for later.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan ok, just making sure. Because when you say a nurse is slightly above average, that can be construed a little misleading in both circumstances. As they are almost double the average.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: pexx421
You compare to a nurse here, starting at 25/h. Yeah, ten years ago.....and maybe in select few places now. For the majority of the US now, RN's start closer to 19-20/h, so your guess that Australian nurses start at 25/h is still 10000 a year more than here.

I work in one of the lowest paying states for nurses in the entire country. Starting pay, fresh out of school, no work experience, is about $25/hr. Most of the country is 20-30% higher than that. Mass general starting pay was I believe $28/hr when I left in 09.

As i said, the middle class would get SCREWED HARD in the Australian scenario. Nurses make LESS there, and have 30% less buying power.

So with a high minimum wage, Rich get richer, middle class loses HARD, and minimum wage jobs (most of which are NOT held by the poor) are better off. Tell you what, you can keep that I have no interest.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: The Vagabond
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Then manage your money better.

You mean like the fact I took a job making 1/3 what I would had I stayed in Massachusetts, still have absolutely no debt including never needing a single loan and finishing college debt free, bought a 3 bedroom house and paid for it without ever needing a room mate, and have a 0 balance on all my credit cards?

Thanks for the tip on money management.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
It's a long post so I'm just going to quote part of it. I think you misinterpreted the statistics.

No. I did not, and the rest of your post proves it.


Now, that money does come from somewhere, I'll grant that. I'll even flat out state where it comes from. It comes from those at the top.

No, it does not, and I proved it, and your post even admits it.


Now, lets look at the nurse who makes 35/hour in Australia. This means that they have 90% of the purchasing power. So we can say that yes, that posistion has less buying power in Australia.

Which is exactly what I said. It's not the RICH who lose out, it's the middle class.


So the end result of all this is basically that you can say with doubling the minimum wage those making below the median income have between 0% and 76.5% more purchasing power, those making above the median income have between 0% and 32% less purchasing power when compared to the United States.

Yes, 5% of the country gets a huge jump in wages, which everyone else has to pay for with LOWER wages. (at least lower in terms of buying power which is the same thing)


So we get back to your original assertion and we can use Australia since a guide. In Australia is there a surplus of burger flippers and a shortage of RN's because people are choosing to support themselves by doing the most minimal job possible? It looks to me like the answer is no. People still work hard, they still have careers, and they still work to advance themselves. The difference is that people on the bottom of the income scale aren't living in absolute misery and have enough money to contribute to the economy.

What you see is a reduction in buying power for the educated. What you see is the average every day worker has MORE struggles, what you see is 90% of the country having a MORE difficult time so that the bottom 5% who have no goals and ambitions can stay burger flippers.

No thanks.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

good for you but we are talking about your claim that things will get too tight if we stop exploiting the poor. You'll have to apply those impressive skills to cutting out fast food because you don't have a right to a cheap big mac that entitles you to be complicit in the exploitation of the poor, which is being subsidized by massive public debt. Would you like me to calculate your share of the debt for low income housing and foodstamps given to the working poor so you can have fries with that and free refills?



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
As i said, the middle class would get SCREWED HARD in the Australian scenario. Nurses make LESS there, and have 30% less buying power.

So with a high minimum wage, Rich get richer, middle class loses HARD, and minimum wage jobs (most of which are NOT held by the poor) are better off. Tell you what, you can keep that I have no interest.


But that's not what happens. As I pointed out at the median wage you come out about equal. Above the median wage you have a bit less, and that does suck for those people but they're not hurting. Those above the median wage have 32% less purchasing power but they're also paying less in tax for welfare programs which cancels some of that out. Furthermore that reduction in upper middle class purchasing power is made up for by those at the bottom who are able to participate in the economy.

To give an example here lets say there's $5,000,000 in expendable funds tied up in 1 customers. This 1 customers are going to buy the highest end things in the store. They will be serviced by only a small part of the labor, ignore the lesser product lines, and buy some objects that didn't have significantly different labor associated with them to produce them.

Now lets have another example. There's 1 person with $1,000,000, 20 people with 100,000 each, and 200 people with 1,000 each. The 1,000,000 customer still gets their premium item. The 20 middle class people are able to look at some other product lines and find the things they enjoy, with their money they have a budget but it's not exactly tight, and there are plenty of sales people and cashiers to help them. The 200 lower class people aren't shopping in the high end stores but with that $1000 each things are being bought. Restuarants, movie tickets, car repairs, household appliances, and so on. Many businesses need to exist to cater to these needs, which means many people need to be employed. When all of these people are spending money moves through the system.

In any functional economy money must have to flow through the system. When 90% of wealth is concentrated among 5% of people, they simply can't spend it all. That sucks money out of the system which makes everyone poorer. When everyone is poor, no one can afford to shop and trade goods. That spells an end to economic activity.

I see it every day in the town I live in, the median household income doesn't even amount to a full time job at minimum wage. No one has money (other than the college and hospital). This town entered it's decline decades past, it's a warning beacon to the rest of the country. It happened here and everything is in place for it to happen elsewhere.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: LDragonFire

Its doesn't matter how much you make what matters is the buying power and Denmark is 25.44% lower than in United States.

When the minimum wage goes up so does the cost of doing business than prices go up to reflect the change. Raising the minimum wage will not fix the issue with those making minimum wage and will heavily impact the people just above it and the middle class.



www.numbeo.com...

Consumer Prices in Denmark are 42.06% higher than in United States
Consumer Prices Including Rent in Denmark are 29.91% higher than in United States
Rent Prices in Denmark are 3.13% higher than in United States
Restaurant Prices in Denmark are 90.03% higher than in United States
Groceries Prices in Denmark are 16.87% higher than in United States
Local Purchasing Power in Denmark is 25.44% lower than in United States

edit on 53930America/ChicagoMon, 08 Sep 2014 22:53:14 -0500000000p3042 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04 um, no and no. Where I live (not sure where you live, but if nurses start at 25 there its definitely not lowest in country), baton rouge, capital of Louisiana, nurses start at 19 an hour, 18.50 at our largest hospital (lady of the lake). Im an ultrasound tech, and my first job here was 18 an hour....even though in most places ultrasound techs make more than nurses. Just FYI starting pay is lower for medical than it was 5 years ago. And sadly, you have to switch hospitals now every two years to get your appropriate pay increase. further, we are talking raising minimum wage to 15 an hour....im sure that vastly more than 5% of our population makes less than 15/hour. That is 30000 a year, and our median per capita is 27000 a year (13.50/hour), which means that about 50% of our population makes that or under. So it would increase the standard of living for 50% of our population.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 10:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: LDragonFire




www.numbeo.com...

Consumer Prices in Denmark are 42.06% higher than in United States
Consumer Prices Including Rent in Denmark are 29.91% higher than in United States
Rent Prices in Denmark are 3.13% higher than in United States
Restaurant Prices in Denmark are 90.03% higher than in United States
Groceries Prices in Denmark are 16.87% higher than in United States
Local Purchasing Power in Denmark is 25.44% lower than in United States


$0 for doctor visits
$0 for hospitals or surgeries
Very low crime rate
Very low incarceration rate
one of the happiest countries on the planet

Edit:
Best Countries for Business
#1 Denmark


This thoroughly modern market economy features a high-tech agricultural sector, state-of-the-art industry with world-leading firms in pharmaceuticals, maritime shipping and renewable energy, and a high dependence on foreign trade. The Danish economy is also characterized by extensive government welfare measures, an equitable distribution of income, and comfortable living standards. Denmark is a net exporter of food and energy and enjoys a comfortable balance of payments surplus. After a long consumption-driven upswing, Denmark's economy began slowing in early 2007 with the end of a housing boom. The global financial crisis has exacerbated this cyclical slowdown through increased borrowing costs and lower export demand, consumer confidence, and investment. The global financial crises cut Danish GDP by 0.9% in 2008 and 4.3% in 2009. Historically low levels of unemployment have risen sharply with the recession. Denmark is likely to make a slow and modest recovery, though unemployment is likely to rise through 2010. An impending decline in the ratio of workers to retirees will be a major long-term issue. Denmark maintained a healthy budget surplus for many years up to 2008, but the budget balance swung into deficit during 2009. Nonetheless, Denmark's fiscal position remains among the strongest in the EU. Despite previously meeting the criteria to join the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), so far Denmark has decided not to join, although the Danish krone remains pegged to the euro.

Forbes
edit on 8-9-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 11:00 PM
link   
My question would be-

WHY DO PEOPLE EAT FAST FOOD AT ALL, KNOWING HOW BAD IT IS ???



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join