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.

 

Fast Food in Denmark Serves Something Atypical: Living Wages

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spruce
a reply to: AlaskanDad

In the US it's all about profit and screwing the little guy. Yea capitalism.


The US has Corpalism run via Oligopolies .




posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: JimTSpock
a reply to: NavyDoc

All things considered I think I would rather be a minimum wage earner in Denmark than America. It seems very difficult to survive on minimum wage in the states but other countries it seems better. Such as Australia $640 per week you can pay rent and buy food. States what $7 an hr, depending on state, x 40 hours is only $280. Sounds tough to pay rent and live on only $280 per week.


If you show up on time and do your job, you will not make minimum wage for long. Every "minimum wage" job I had as a teenager rapidly went up above minimum wage after a few months because I showed up and was dependable. If an adult relies on minimum wage, he or she is doing something wrong.



posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

My first job minimum wage was $2.35 an hour, yet we got $1.50 as a training wage. I worked as a dish washer and even pulled many double shifts and I also learned to work the grill when needed. I earned $1.50 until I gave notice and went another job.



posted on Oct, 28 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   
some things to mention. First off, their combo meal is not likely twice the cost what ours is. I just got a value meal from Wendy's (ugh...guilty pleasure), and it was $10. Even if we were speaking of a lower cost item, I'd say its no more than 1.5 times what ours is, and as they have over twice the pay, I'd say that this is working out to more money in the workers pockets still. Next, as ive pointed out in many threads, labor is only part of the cost of a product. Most places run between 20-30(very high end)% labor. So if the salary was, say doubled, that provides the worker with double the spending power, while only increasing costs by another 20-30%, and that's assuming they pass the whole cost along (get it?). And finally to the "but they are taxed so much higher!" argument. Well, their minimum wage is over twice ours....but I doubt their taxes are. It seems they are about 50% right now....and last I checked americans spent almost 50% of their pay in taxation. So, there is that as well.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: pexx421

You're missing a lot of subtle points that negate your arguments, so let's get started:


First off, their combo meal is not likely twice the cost what ours is. I just got a value meal from Wendy's (ugh...guilty pleasure), and it was $10. Even if we were speaking of a lower cost item, I'd say its no more than 1.5 times what ours is, and as they have over twice the pay, I'd say that this is working out to more money in the workers pockets still.


Your assumption is wrong. You aren't comparing apples to apples--what I posted before was for a big-mac combo (or similar) and gave an average cost. So, where I live, the average cost for the $11 combo in Denmark is just slightly more than half as cheap. It varies widely in the U.S.--Seattle's combo price was around $8.00, but that's still a 38% increase in the price. The average between Seattle and Cincinnati (where I live) is $6.92, so Denmark's cost is basically a 60% increase. That's an average of 1.6x the cost, but for me, Denmark's is 1.89x the cost.

So, for 1.89x the cost for a big mac meal (or equivalent), it would make no sense to revel in the 2x paycheck for someone in Cincinnati when looking at it that way.

Also, comparing a city in America (Nashville) with a comparable population to Copenhagen's, you find that the cost of living is 35% CHEAPER than its Danish counterpart, so there's something to say about that, too.


...labor is only part of the cost of a product. Most places run between 20-30(very high end)% labor. So if the salary was, say doubled, that provides the worker with double the spending power, while only increasing costs by another 20-30%, and that's assuming they pass the whole cost along (get it?).


So, get this: Say a company makes $250,000/month. If they run an average profit of 3%, that's a $7,500/month profit. If payroll is, let's say, 25%, that's a $62,500/month payroll that needs to be met. To keep things simple, taking those two things away, that company is left with a remaining operating expense of $180,000.

Now, that $180,000 will remain constant for our purposes. If you were to double the payroll cost of doing business, that takes payroll expenditures to $125,000. Without even considering the profit part of the equation, you're now looking at a company that will be $55,000 in the red each month. The only way that company can recoup that $55,000 and then add enough monthly sales to get back to a 3% profit is to either (A) reduce the payroll-cost variable by cutting some employees, (B) reduce operating costs, which is already at about as low as could be to maintain the quality of food they're putting out, or (C) raise the price of the product.

Any buisiness person will tell you that options (A) and (C) are the most likely scenarios, and you can only do so much with option (A) before running on a skeleton crew, and only so much with option (C) before the general public will consider your product no longer a value and will quite buying it.

Get it? (yes, I know this is absolutely simplified beyond belief, but it's just to make a point)


And finally to the "but they are taxed so much higher!" argument. Well, their minimum wage is over twice ours....but I doubt their taxes are. It seems they are about 50% right now....and last I checked americans spent almost 50% of their pay in taxation. So, there is that as well.


First, they don't have a state-sponsored minimum wage, so while they choose to cave to the extortion of the unions, there truly is no "minimum wage" comparable to that in America.

Considering their taxes, you have to look at the the way the progressive rates are applied, not at the total taxation. For instance, income taxation starts at the equivalent of $7,600 worth of annual income in Denmark--here in the U.S. it's closer to $9,000. A $45,000/yr fast-food job in Denmark would have over $37,000 of that taxed at a 37.48% rate. So, that's $14,017.52 sent to the government. Also, there is a federally mandated property tax of 1.3%-3.6%, and then add onto that a federally mandated VAT (Value Added Tax) of 25%, and you're really starting to see that this taxation utopia you are referrencing isn't quite that great.

A $45,000/yr income here in the U.S. would have $6,284.75 taken out for taxes. Look, for the same salary, Denmark is taking 223% more money from the same individual, and that ONLY on income tax. Add that to the 35% higher cost of living (per my link above), and this notion that Danish fast-food workers have it so much better pretty much flies out the window.

Wow, I spent way too much time on this...but see what happens when you actually research and do the math?



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Nice job, been trying to convey this for sometime in other post on the same thing, just never did this simple to understand job. I like what Gov. Christie said the other day about minimum, Paraphrasing "I can't imagine every parent saying I can't wait until our kid gets a minimum wage job, even if it is 15.00 hr." He was very right, even though I think he is a arrogant bastard.

There has to be a reward for a business owner to take the risk of investing huge amounts of money to create a business, so many worried about the wage seem to neglect that fact. If your 3% example of profit is net net in your pocket 3% I would rather go to secure investment program for the 3% and the complainers can work it out for themselves.

What amazes me is the concept that government, a businesses silent partner, with a majority regulatory voice making the most money is acceptable to a minimum wage worker, and never considered in the cost of their wages. There is much more room to cut on the government side than the ownership side, and the government risk nothing in the equation just sticks out their hand to take their cut. Even the mob didn't get those percentages. I laugh at the gullibility of citizens when I hear the term big oil, when again the government makes much more on oil than an oil company, and they force oil and gas companies to pay monthly tithing with personnel hired at their own expense. What a country!



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace

You seem to have forgot the golden rule use other peoples money to start your business.

When you figure that in 3% going to you sounds much better!



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: MarlinGrace

You seem to have forgot the golden rule use other peoples money to start your business.

When you figure that in 3% going to you sounds much better!



Haven't forgot anything, OPM can't be had in a business loan for 3%, the wife is a CFO and a great financial person. Anytime you borrow money to start a business it isn't gratis, it has to be paid back. It's one of the reasons financing your receivables is bad business, it kills the profit you have calculated into your margin.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: MarlinGrace

It's one of the reasons financing your receivables is bad business, it kills the profit you have calculated into your margin.


That is the best path to get on the downward spiral to insolvency.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: MarlinGrace

It's one of the reasons financing your receivables is bad business, it kills the profit you have calculated into your margin.


That is the best path to get on the downward spiral to insolvency.


Yes sir, it's usually the last act before before the finish.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace

Looks like someone at micky D's is making some money!


April 12, 2013

McDonald's Corp.'s Don Thompson saw his total compensation triple to $13.75 million in the year when he became the restaurant chain's president and chief executive officer. Mr. Thompson, who took over the top role on July 1, received $979,167 in base pay, according to a document filed today with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


source



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace sorry, but I don't think anyone confuses the fact that the working poor are much better off in Denmark our any other European country than the us. Yes, they are taxed more of their livable income, and they also don't have to pay health insurance, our education costs, or worry about being poor the rest off their lives because of an unexpected appendectomy or such.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: MarlinGrace sorry, but I don't think anyone confuses the fact that the working poor are much better off in Denmark our any other European country than the us. Yes, they are taxed more of their livable income, and they also don't have to pay health insurance, our education costs, or worry about being poor the rest off their lives because of an unexpected appendectomy or such.



So just who do you think pays for their health plan and education cost their fairy godmother? Have you talked to anyone in the UK about the poor?From the Guardian

And did you read the source I put up about the OP's article?



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: MarlinGrace

Looks like someone at micky D's is making some money!


April 12, 2013

McDonald's Corp.'s Don Thompson saw his total compensation triple to $13.75 million in the year when he became the restaurant chain's president and chief executive officer. Mr. Thompson, who took over the top role on July 1, received $979,167 in base pay, according to a document filed today with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


source



wow only a million? He should be doing better. But their stock is down I think 30% or their sales in down 30 I don't remember which. So use a little OPM and open your own Mickey D's. If I am not mistaken the franchize is 150K they select the property I hear that will probably be 1M with construction, equipment, your first supply order, 1 year capitol for backing, and another 50K for incidentals should it. Then hey you can pay everyone $15 hr. and life will be good for everyone. Then for your 1.5 Million investment you can make 3% well maybe less considering you're going to pay $!5 hr. Call it 2.5% Then you will have spent 1.5 million for a $25,000 a year job, not to bad, your employees will make more than you do. Being a business owner there were many months the employees made more money than I did. Of course no one ever hears about that.

I enjoy your threads AD I think you're missing it on this one.

Thanks



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace
No. They pay their taxes and they get something in return for it, unlike us. Look, in the past 6years the middle class and the lower class made 1trillion less each, while the owners netted 2trillion in gains, not through production, but through financial instruments, cutting wages, and increasing prices. That is what this is about, and until you recognize the problem with this trend, nothing I can say is going to help you.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace seriously? Have I talked to anyone about poverty in Britain ? And an article about how 18 million people live in sub par standards? We have 100 million unemployed here!!! 18 million, are you kidding me? 1/3 of our working age population doesn't work. And their poor have much more assistance than ours. Don't even go there. You are really either deluded or intentionally obfuscating.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: MarlinGrace
No. They pay their taxes and they get something in return for it, unlike us. Look, in the past 6years the middle class and the lower class made 1trillion less each, while the owners netted 2trillion in gains, not through production, but through financial instruments, cutting wages, and increasing prices. That is what this is about, and until you recognize the problem with this trend, nothing I can say is going to help you.


Your first mistake is thinking I need help. I am retired 57 years old and did it on my own without help from you or anyone else. It wasn't me who brought up europe for comparison it was you. If you think it's that great why not got there to live. They have a better system go. I can tell you here in VA, finding someone to work is getting to be a joke. I live in James City County, please call building and safety and ask if they have problems getting contractors to work. Find out if you can get a laborer just to clean up. I have work.

Why bring up Europe and then complain about conditions here? Seriously why not go if it's so great? I had a UK business partner once, and he doesn't share your jubilation. YOu want to blame everyone but yourself for your failings, you need to get over this I told you before it is you that hold yourself back no one else. Hispanics don't come here for minimum wage they come here for the opportunity. Some walking hundreds of miles. Ask yourself why everyone is trying to get here if it is so awful? The only thing deluded is the mentality that taking more from the rich and CEO's will make things better. It is utter BS. I have have said before if you took all the money from every rich person in the US it isn't even close to paying off the debt Obama has incurred let alone previous debt from other administrations.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGracehm. Okay, first off, Obama....whatever. Democrats, republicans, they are all the same, they are all bought and paid for by the corporate pigs, it was no different under bush and would have been no different under McCain....and will be no different under whoever is next. Cling to your delusions, though, if it pleases you. Secondly....you are 57? Well, the minimum wage when you were young was the equivalent of about 35000 a year now. So yes, you did it on your own, in a much better situation than you expect other people to do it now. If you had to start again in the same situation, it is much less likely that you would be so well off.....and that is the world you are bequeathing to your grandchildren, since your generation dropped the ball on civil rights and labor, and let TPTB erase so much of what your parents and grandparents fought for, and that you benefited from. Bravo, your generation. Thirdly, maybe you could find workers if you paid a wage that was more than a slow slide into deprivation and debt. Next comes the point where ..... I don't need to blame anyone for my failings....I don't have them. I have the skills to command a decent income which is more than three times the median. But that doesn't steal my ability to recognize the reality for the vast majority of americans, as it obviously does for you. Finally.....its not about taking money from the rich. Its about stopping the rich from taking the money from the poor. You and all your peers seem to fail to realize that this IS a competition for resources, a class war, if you will. Over the last 40 years the CEO's, the shareholders, the business owners have taken the vast majority of profit from the increase in our productivity for themselves, and left none for the rest. They do it based off of financial instruments (MBS, etc), and reductions in pay and benefits, shifting the costs to the workers and the customers. They also do it with lies, price fixing, artificial scarcity, etc. You seem to be ok with this, not recognizing its immorality, or its detrimental effects on society. You don't seem to care that you are condemning all of your offspring and their offspring to a continuing depreciation in standard of living. You have no consideration for the fact that people born now DONT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY that you grew up with, not because of actual natural forces, but due to greed, corruption, and manipulation. So, by all means, continue to go out and exhort others to ignore the fact that the situation is worsening, to just buckle down and work hard (like that guarantees anything in the face of corporate legislation against our social mobility), and when you come again, in your next life, perhaps you will be one of those peons, struggling against a system created to steal your money and pass it to those above you (for their 7th vacation home in the tropics) who is reading an old post on a now unused website called ATS where some old fart named marlingrace pissed away your inheritance when he actually had the chance to fight back against the corporations and predatory exploitative labor practices, because he was comfortable in the life that his ancestors fought to give him, and forgot there was a reason to fight. Hey, that actually sounds like a great sci fi flick!




posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace don't you guys get it? You all come on here and bitch and moan because people want more money. Well everyone wants more money! Thing is, over the last 40 years, the rich are getting it. And the poor and working class aren't. Any it's not because the rich work harder....it's because they can bribe congress and pass their own legislation and get their stooges into office,and manipulate the system. Is a stacked deck, and anyone who says otherwise is either naive or being disingenuous.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: MarlinGrace

From your article:

When taking into account the cost of living differences between Denmark and the United States, Rantzau’s $21 per hour becomes approximately $14 per hour.


From OP:

On a recent afternoon, Hampus Elofsson ended his 40-hour workweek at a Burger King and prepared for a movie and beer with friends. He had paid his rent and all his bills, stashed away some savings, yet still had money for nights out.
bold emphasis is mine

I do not think many American fastfood workers earning $8 an hour can say they are able to put money in savings after their bills are paid.


At 8$ an hour you can't say your bills are paid.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join