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.

 

Dunkin' CEO: $15 minimum wage is 'outrageous'

page: 12
34
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 09:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: OrdoAdChao
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

So we wait for a genius or wait for the government to change? There is no direct effect that we, as workers, can impose to shift the latter into something more towards the well being of the many versus the few.


You don't wait for the government to change....you change the government.

Old farts like me won't do it. Im happy to keep the status quo personally, because I have done quite well. You, or those who feel disaffected....change the government. Vote, think, talk...don't be violent. But civil disobedience...sure. But you won't catch the big game by sitting and waiting....get out there and hunt. My grand children will thank your generation.




We should just lay back and take it.

I really don't think that's what you're suggesting; I hope not, at least.


No, im suggesting that if our nation is to be righted, itll take people who aren't vested in the status quo to change it.




posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

And I would argue that just like the history of previous upheavals that I've mentioned before: it will take the alliance of classes below the ruling variety in order to succeed. We are rabble until those ever so slightly above us join in for their own good (EDIT) beyond threats of violence and loss of status.

Further edit:

To be fat, dumb and happy is just the former. Happiness is reliant on the first, and there are those who starve before us when a bit of our own bread would do them good.
edit on 25-7-2015 by OrdoAdChao because: Had to add that

edit on 25-7-2015 by OrdoAdChao because: That's alot of that!



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: OrdoAdChao
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

And I would argue that just like the history of previous upheavals that I've mentioned before that it will take the alliance of classes below the ruling variety in order to succeed. We are rabble until those ever so slightly above us join in for their own good.


I am in a very, very small class: the middle class. If you want the middle class to "pitch in", you have to make them less comfortable and give them a reason to quit clinging to that itty, bitty liferaft.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

My trade once existed in (EDIT OUT: your realm) the middle class before the owners decided that they were better than their workers and changed their stance. I literally work for a man that thinks over one-hundred tradesmen work because he wants them to and he could "ride off into the sunset" if he wanted. He might be able to, but our skills dictate that we will work and our alliance outside of the businesses dictates that we will work and ply our trade regardless of the company we work for.

With or without the business we work for at the moment, we succeed by our own merit and skill.

The business owners have learned to play a game while the workers have learned - whether they know it or not - how to ply a skill that is worthy to profit many businesses.
edit on 25-7-2015 by OrdoAdChao because: I meant to add more but an "a" is all it needed.... I think

edit on 25-7-2015 by OrdoAdChao because: I don't want to attack you



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Except for Beef going crazy I do not see a huge disparity with prices when we look at 1995 compared to today. I pulled a few off the net. It might be a bit low for 7.25 but doubling 4.25 1995 minimum wage and rounding up would put us at 9.00 not 15 as it seems you think even 15 is way to low based on your logic.


Food is actually the one area where purchasing power has remained largely even for the past couple decades, and when compared to the peaks of the 50's and 60's purchasing power for food has gone up. You can buy about the same amount of food with an hour of work today as you could 5, 10, or 15 years ago and you can buy more food with that hours work than you could 25 years ago. The reason people are saying they can't afford food today (and why we have so many on food stamps) isn't that the food is too expensive but rather that people can't afford to put as much of their budget towards food.

Basically rent, utilities, and transportation are all just as required as food in society today and hold a roughly equal spending priority. Those have all risen to require more hours of work per week, while the total hours per week has in many cases fallen. This has an end result of a person simply having less income for food even though the food itself hasn't gotten more expensive.

Edit: Medical care, rent/mortgage, university, fuel, utilities, and entertainment are areas where purchasing power has declined.
edit on 25-7-2015 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The reason I don't often disagree with what you is because you A at least admit there is a serious problem and B give us a real perspective on how to deal with the current paradigm.

I can respect that. But not seeing a problem on the other hand..



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I agree that food is not the problem in terms of monetary expenses. Rent is a big one, qualifying for a mortgage might be greater (which relies on the notion of credit, not to mention the predatory practices of banks) but really, owning vs renting was a mental struggle versus an economic - once upon a time. Now we rely on an idea of inflated value of homes, which does relate to rent. Luckily for the poor and working class, there are more apartment buildings; with higher property taxes and insurance than ever before. That may be due to horrid landlords preying on their tenants, or it might be due to banks requiring excessive amounts for property, but really it comes down to the governments regulation of property and insurance. Bank owners (I personally struggle with the concept of a "bank owner") are a direct cause of most of the inflated values and inflated insurance premiums.

If there is one conspiracy I personally agree with, it is the "bankster" idea. They, and their government servants, are to blame for the ills of our economy. Though, I might say, that the participants (myself included) are as much to blame.

Awareness does not mean escape.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Some people's response to this idea leaves me scratching my head...

'You mean to tell me someone should get $15 am hour for flipping burgers! *occupation x* doesn't even make that much!'

As if minimum wage laws were written exclusively for 'burger flippers.' As if other wages wouldn't have to adjust in relative proportion. Some serious lack of logic.
edit on 26-7-2015 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 12:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: nonnez
a reply to: muse7

Yeah . . . he may have busted his ass as you say but $479 per hour plus bonuses and perks . . . come on?! The problem with the world now is greed. I am not saying it hasn't always been but now we have an opportunity to start doing something about it. Tell me that if all these folks on top did not make such extreme profits on their products and services wouldn't the cost of living go down for everyone else. If everything was cheaper wouldn't it take less money (and therefore wages) to get by? I am also not saying that companies and people should not make a profit at all but only that they make a reasonable profit on non-luxury goods and services. If they would/could somehow cap these crazy profits and wages maybe we would not need to be talking about ever higher minimum wages because the cost for the average consumer would not break their banks and make them scrape by or use credit they cannot afford. Capitalism needs some caps far more than workers need wage increases because people cannot self-regulate their desire for more . . . more . . . more.

Businesses make as much profit as they possibly can, period. Salaries and things of the sort are another matter entirely.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: TheJourney

I am right there with you, and would add that there are no "wage laws" that benefit workers at all. The idea of a wage, currently, is up to the business in the social sense, and up to the government in legal sense. Both are products of society, so, in all reasonable regards, the society should dictate the wage.

However, in our current climate, banks dictate both the business and government side. Money is the issue, and, in my opinion, that fact leads to our current social and governmental climate. Money is all that matters. The life and liberty of the individual follows the money, their happiness is relegated to anecdotal ideas of the "happy poor" and the "wretched rich".

I worry more about the society as a whole - because humans are a social animal first. We rely on one another regardless of the recognition of it. I personally believe that there are a huge faults in parts of society that have been created by individuals working for their own gain and not the whole - and that fact has lead to where we are. Jobs, at this point, are sacred. While I could flip burgers, I choose to do otherwise and really, I am a car payment and a mortgage ahead of the burger flipper who only dreams of being afforded a wage that could get them a loan.

And the sad fact is, I own all my vehicles and property, so I simply recognize where I might be without the fortunes of my birth.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 12:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheJourney
Some people's response to this idea leaves me scratching my head...

'You mean to tell me someone should get $15 am hour for flipping burgers! *occupation x* doesn't even make that much!'

As if minimum wage laws were written exclusively for 'burger flippers.' As if other wages wouldn't have to adjust in relative proportion. Some serious lack of logic.

So everyone makes an extra $8 an hour and prices magically all stay the same? The job you went to college to get so you can make twice what McDonald's makes, you now only make 50% more.

If they adjust on a flat rate then the rest of the middle class is hurt. If it's a % rate then all we did is force everything to double and nothing is fixed.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheJourney
Some people's response to this idea leaves me scratching my head...

'You mean to tell me someone should get $15 am hour for flipping burgers! *occupation x* doesn't even make that much!'

As if minimum wage laws were written exclusively for 'burger flippers.' As if other wages wouldn't have to adjust in relative proportion. Some serious lack of logic.


Talk about lack of logic....as you point out, you make minimum wage $15/hr, all you end up doing is making $15 = $7.25

Talk about pissing on someone and telling them its raining



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:07 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Sounds like almost exactly what I was saying.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
This should have nothing to do with the fast food industry. Unskilled labor.. what is it worth. It's obviously critical, but saying "without these workers industry would fail" is a ridiculous comment. There are so many folks out of work, or without other skills, or young and just starting out, that finding these sorts of workers will never be an issue.

I think overall, wages have not kept up with growth since recovery from the last recession. So I think some wage increases are warranted. But not such a huge jump. 12 bucks an hour might be a realistic step. And while it is nice to think that everyone should be able to live in comfort at minimum wage, you have to consider businesses as well. There are a lot of small and medium businesses that will hurt badly by giving their workers such a huge increase in pay. And while you may think salaried folks should just be happy that lower wage employees all get raises.. they in general, won't be. You busted your butt for years to make say, 28 bucks a year. And then a dude working in the mailroom making 10 bucks an hour just got their pay raised by 50%. And you got zilch. You really think they will simply be happy for their co-workers? No.. because all the money spent on those folks is money -they- won't be getting themselves when it comes time for raises. You spent money on classes and college, you spent nights and weekends studying to improve yourself.. and it means what? That you should just be happy a 19 yo dude in the mailroom just got a 50% raise so he can live easier?

In an optimal world, the Venus Project sort of world.. sure, that makes sense. In our current world.. it doesn't. Such a drastic pay raise for folks making minimum wage will have repercussions at all levels. We'll see in the long run.. but it will mean I think, higher prices, lower business as a result, loss of jobs, and closing of businesses.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

If someone went to college to make twice what a McDonald's worker makes, they fell into the college trap or are passionate about their profession and hardly care about the money they make as long as it gets them by.

Honestly, I've "gradumanated coledge" and have worked multiple jobs before and after which payed little. It was good fortune which lead me to a decent job, well outside my studied field, and then into the trades where the pay somewhat reflects the work I do.

To argue that college means something is just another score for people who take advantage of those who are inexperienced enough to get snared into a monetary trap. I've lucked out and via that luck have been able to somewhat avoid all of those traps that lead to misery and discontent. But, as a human, I am still very discontented with the fates that other humans find themselves in. Debt and disregard from the "F* you, I got mine" variety has cost our society more than the dollars which have been made.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04So everyone makes an extra $8 an hour and prices magically all stay the same? The job you went to college to get so you can make twice what McDonald's makes, you now only make 50% more.

If they adjust on a flat rate then the rest of the middle class is hurt. If it's a % rate then all we did is force everything to double and nothing is fixed.


That's the general idea behind minimum wage, it shrinks the wealth gap which in turn means that people making above the new minimum end up worse off. You can't both shrink a wealth gap and keep everyone at the same SES.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04So everyone makes an extra $8 an hour and prices magically all stay the same? The job you went to college to get so you can make twice what McDonald's makes, you now only make 50% more.

If they adjust on a flat rate then the rest of the middle class is hurt. If it's a % rate then all we did is force everything to double and nothing is fixed.


That's the general idea behind minimum wage, it shrinks the wealth gap which in turn means that people making above the new minimum end up worse off. You can't both shrink a wealth gap and keep everyone at the same SES.


Everything should scale upwards except for the top. The richest people can have a smaller relative portion of the total money. They'll be ok.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04So everyone makes an extra $8 an hour and prices magically all stay the same? The job you went to college to get so you can make twice what McDonald's makes, you now only make 50% more.

If they adjust on a flat rate then the rest of the middle class is hurt. If it's a % rate then all we did is force everything to double and nothing is fixed.


That's the general idea behind minimum wage, it shrinks the wealth gap which in turn means that people making above the new minimum end up worse off. You can't both shrink a wealth gap and keep everyone at the same SES.

Which means the middle class, which is already hard off, will be worse off. Perhaps if we couple this with the end of many welfare programs it would not be so bad, but that will never happen.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Keeping with the status quo is what has drifted us into the current climate. The middle class damning their own and stepping on one another is what has lead to their demise. The working class is now in the same boat. How on earth are we supposed to prosper if we keep this up?

If we continually blame the "others" without recognizing that we are little different, we will fall down this path of social destruction and end up in a place far worse.



posted on Jul, 26 2015 @ 01:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheJourney
Everything should scale upwards except for the top. The richest people can have a smaller relative portion of the total money. They'll be ok.


Since this has never happened before...can I ask what you are basing this off of?



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join