It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Dunkin' Donuts Worker's Death Reveals The True Cost Of Our Low-Wage, Part-Time Economy

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 02:40 AM
a reply to: BlubberyConspiracy

We can mass produce the necessities of life. Food. Shelter. Water. Education

exactly...a good example is when the fly in humanitarian aid to third world countries....just another way of keeping slaves...we have the ability , knowledge and resources to teach them to become self sufficient yet we don't...

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 02:53 AM

originally posted by: karmicecstasy

originally posted by: smithjustinb
I think all this death reveals is the true cost of not having proper ventilation. If you don't like your situation, what are you doing to change it? Complaining? Asking for handouts and still not changing?

She was trying to changer her situation. By working four jobs.

Her situation was the four jobs. That is what needed changed. That was the problem.

Another disgusting post.

How? By saying that if people don't like their situation, they should work to get out of it? How is that disgusting. Beheadings are disgusting. Being a motivator to get people out of poverty and bad situations isn't disgusting.

If your situation isn't working out for you. The best advice you can receive is, "change your situation". You're saying that's disgusting? Giving out welfare doesn't make the world a better place. It makes the world a place filled with people who didn't have enough ambition to make something out of themselves. Its an easy way out of a challenge that never gets overcome. It builds no strength. I builds no character. It sucks the life out of everyone who has made something of themselves and everyone who is not weak and makes their burden greater.

Trying to turn this into a political issue.

It was presented as a political situation. The title includes the words, "Low-Wage, Part-Time Economy". Those words alone not only show that this is a political thread, it shows the author's political bias. Right off the bat. Everything is a political issue when everything is subject to government regulation. The economy being the number one.

Get a clue.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 02:56 AM
a reply to: Willtell

that is so sad.


posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 03:50 AM
a reply to: Willtell

Four jobs, and yet she was sleeping in her car.

And yet the title of this thread, the article... It is misleading. This death does not reveal anything that people at the sharp end have not been saying for YEARS, and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous in the extreme! The real story here, is that despite the protests of the hardworking poor, jobs are STILL being offered which do not pay enough to live on.

A person should require ONE place of work, at a rate of hours and money per hour which facilitates living. Dunkin Donuts can afford to pay its operatives enough to live on, and I know that because I know how big the company is. It would be one thing if your average family business had to offer hours at a smaller rate of pay, because we all know that running a small business is actual hard labour for EVERY person in the business, including its directors.

But Dunkin? They are a CHAIN, and as such they have no damned excuse, and nor do any other large businesses that this hardworking lady might have been employed by. This lady had the determination to roll up her sleeves, and force the work of four people from herself, to sleep in her car, just to make the ends tie up somewhere. She represents the elbow grease and the grit, which are totemic for all working people across the globe.

Her only reward was death. I would hope that this and other similar scenarios playing out as we speak, will lead to better treatment of the working poor, a ban on low hours contracts, and laws which prevent massive companies with huge profits, from reducing worker numbers, just because they are obligated to pay them properly and given them enough hours.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 03:58 AM

originally posted by: Kali74
Four fking jobs!

And probably still on assistance of some kind. But according to some people around here she was still beneath them.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 04:21 AM
a reply to: CranialSponge

You may see a 50 billion dollar profit with Dunkin Donuts, but if they spent 49.5 billion to make that 50 billion....

are you sure you are not mistaking revenue with profit...profit means just that...

Dunkin' Brands Group Inc. said its fourth-quarter earnings rose 23% as the restaurant company posted strong same-store sales growth driven by increased customer traffic and a higher average ticket at its domestic doughnut-and-coffee stores. Additionally, the company boosted its quarterly dividend by 4 cents to 23 cents a share. The parent company of Dunkin' Donuts and Baskin-Robbins has been working to expand its doughnut-and-coffee brand westward in the U.S., improve its performance abroad and stage a turnaround of its ice cream shops domestically. The company said sales of ice cream cups and cones, beverages and cakes drove growth at its U.S. ice cream shops after it released popular holiday flavors such as Winter White Chocolate. The company said in January it plans to open about 400 Dunkin' Donuts restaurants in the U.S., with 15% to 20% in new markets such as California, Colorado and Texas. In the latest period, the company opened 309 new restaurants around the globe. Dunkin' reported a profit of $42.1 million, or 39 cents a share, up from $34.3 million, or 32 cents a share, a year earlier. Excluding costs related to an increase of shares outstanding, earnings rose to 43 cents from 34 cents. Revenue jumped 13% to $183.2 million.

so this business was doing it tough they only made 42 million for the year,how on earth could they afford to pay their workers a living wage ?
edit on 30-8-2014 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 04:23 AM

originally posted by: beezzer
Let's all concentrate on the poor woman who had to work 4 minimum wage jobs.

Let's all focus on the debate about how low minimum wages are.

Let's all ignore the fact that America's worker base is service-related.

Let's all ignore the fact that America's creative manufacturing base has been wiped out.

Let's focus on minimum wage industry and ignore supporting, endorsing, creating professions like medicine, engineering, production, manufacturing, construction, architecture, science, etc.

We have a president and congress soiling themselves over minimum wage and they are purposefully ignoring the fact that in a service industry, you can't raise wages unless you raise the cost of service!
They are ignoring America's weakening educational levels, America's poor professional levels.

Forget having more scientists or engineers!

Let's raise the effing minimum wage to 50 effing dollars an hour!


I'm not the sharpest bowling ball in the drawer, but even I can see this is going the wrong way!

I have to agree. The probkem here is not the minimum wage of loe skilled jobs but the lack of real career jobs.

The solutions not to raise minimum wage but to create more REAL jobs.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 04:30 AM
a reply to: eManym

Ok, when are they supposed to do this? And with what money?

I would love to see you shoehorn college into a work schedule consisting of four jobs.

Do you understand that some people are just trying to survive and that if they lose the income from one job they will end up homeless?

It's a tough row to hoe for people in the service industry today. There aren't many manufacturing jobs around.

Do you think that someone who has to put in 80 hours a week working just to make a meager living are lazy?

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 04:30 AM
a reply to: eManym

I have no kids or gf at the moment. This is a small city with no jobs. At least none that will pay any better than my current. Ive saved up a bit. So im considering setting out in search of work and using my experience on my journey as inspiration for my other interest.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 04:34 AM

originally posted by: beezzer

Policy Basics: Where Do Our Federal Tax Dollars Go?


Defense and international security assistance: In 2013, 19 percent of the budget, or $643 billion, paid for defense and security-related international activities.

. . . .

Social Security: Another 24 percent of the budget, or $814 billion, paid for Social Security, which provided monthly retirement benefits averaging $1,294 to 37.9 million retired workers in December 2013.

. . . .

Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP: Three health insurance programs — Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) — together accounted for 22 percent of the budget in 2013, or $772 billion.

. . . .

Safety net programs: About 12 percent of the federal budget in 2013, or $398 billion, supported programs that provide aid (other than health insurance or Social Security benefits) to individuals and families facing hardship.

Plus there's a neat chart on the link I provided.

So cutting the big D-fence is all good and well. But we aren't starving social programs as it is.

We're doing something wrong though. We are pouring money down the drain. We "ain't" getting a return on the investment of all these social programs.

Maybe these social programs are part of the problem, because they sure as hell aren't part of the solution!

This is were I disagree, just cutting welfare first wont help at all.

You need viable jobs around first.

If you not your cutting millions of people loose with nowere to go,

Jobs firsts cuts later.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 04:40 AM

originally posted by: caterpillage

originally posted by: Willtell
Understand little people…our economy is like a reservoir and ONLY rich folks swim in it but WE ALL have to drink out of it and the thing is when they swim in it they poison it and when we have to drink it we are drinking poinonous water (a poisonous economy)

So analogize the macro economy to this allegory. Then you will understand

So what then do we do to the rich? Kill them? Take all their money? Make them illegal and put them in prison?

Please tell me a solution for our problem. And yes I agree we have a problem, I'm not trolling you. Lol

Not with law abiding honnest rich no.

But for fraud and law breakers yes I would throw them in jail and seize there assets.

In 2007 there should have been no bailouts.

The banks should have been left to fail, everyone who had debts with said banks shoukd have got clean slates ( no bank no debt) and the culprits responsible arrested jailed and had there personel assets seized to help pay for the damage,

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 05:00 AM
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

are you sure you are not mistaking revenue with profit...profit means just that...

I'm talking about the bottom line on the income statement, net profit from operations (revenues minus expenses).

What you don't see is the balance sheet, the liabilities that have to be carried in order to make those profits.

It's no different from your net paycheque. What you take home is what you've "profited" from earned income (minus deductions). But then you take that net pay, deposit it into your bank account, and have to turn around and pay your creditors from it (car loan, mortgage, etc), so what you're actually left with in the bank at the end of the day is far less than what you "profited".

Businesses are no different.

Businesses have to pay creditors, shareholders, dividends, etc out of those net profits. Those costs of doing business do not show on the income statement.

Just like how your car loan payment doesn't show on your paystub, neither do the creditors of business operations.

So if your functioning with a very low profit margin, you may find yourself struggling to pay your creditors even though you're showing a profit each year.

People see "50 billion profit" and think: "Holy crap that company is making a ton of money, those greedy bastards !"

So no, profit is not just profit... there's a lot more going on than just what you're seeing in dollars or share values.

I'm not trying to defend the greed of some corporations, I'm just clarifying some things for those who may not understand the true meaning of the numbers they're looking at.

edit on 30-8-2014 by CranialSponge because: typos

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 05:01 AM

originally posted by: eriktheawful

I'm with you on this.

Now, let's take it a step further: Get rid of federal income tax.

Looking at my wife's pay stub and comparing her Gross pay with her "take home" pay after taxes and SS.....we would be able to provide a LOT more if that money was not being consumed by the feds.

You would be able to provide a whole LOT more right now. What happens in the future when wifey has some kind of catastrophe and that take home pay goes to zero? It is very easy to say yeah I would like to take home more money "tax free", and another to live out the reality of it. SS and Medicare/Medicaid are functioning the way the way they were actually supposed to. And I can tell you from firsthand experience that when the day catastrophe knocks on your door the fact they exist are one of things that you will use to bounce back from it.

And Beez for the most part I agree with you. But as to why look at the low end of the labor pool and the minimum wage? Because that is where you have to start. Many people don't seem to get that. They come up with all kinds of arguments on why not, most of which are unfounded. In the 60's a McDonald's worker could afford a modest dwelling a basic car meet their expenses and still have a modest disposable income on their one job. It wasn't the best and of course one in that job would have to improve their skillset to improve their living conditions but they could survive.

So what changed between the 60's and now? It certainly wasn't the skillset required to work at McDonald's. People in skilled labor have been suckered into the false belief that you are espousing here. The belief that raising the minimum wage devalues your skills and will make your value worth less. I won't even sugar coat it, at first yes it probably will for a short period of time while the scales reset. There is going to be some discomfort and some economic pain. But just like way back in the day when they first introduced the minimum wage it will subside and everyone across the board will gain from it. Because employers will have to raise skilled wages to attract the best skilled workers.

This country has the hardest working most skilled and most driven workforce in the world, yet the middle class is vanishing, and Wall Street has you convinced it isn't their demand for higher and higher profits each and every quarter that is the problem. Our economy is being ran by an investor class that is penny wise and pound foolish. They are dead set on cutting off their own nose to spite their face and convinced you that it is the guy under you on the ladder that is the problem.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 06:09 AM

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Kali74

Give me a break!



Who makes the laws?



the rich and corporations that buy off the government through campaign contributions and such. they control the politicians to work in their favor. so while it is the government passing the laws, they get their marching orders from those that have bought them.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 06:24 AM
Are you aerious? Dunkin Donuts has not been a choice for decades. Globalization has helped turn the USA into a slave nation.

All the conditions for a revolution are in place. God bless that woman and her family. Her death shall not be in vain.

a reply to: eManym

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 06:39 AM
I'd like to see George Osborne living on the minimum wage for a month and then hear his comments. I suspect he would get the shock of his life, but it would give him a touch of reality - which would be about time, considering his age.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 06:58 AM
a reply to: beezzer

Beez we're dead on the floor barring a miracle...

No one has the stomach to fix the educational system in the U.S. - we can't even agree on what's wrong with it...curriculum, kids, parents, teachers or fatty lunches? LoL!

As for a more solid job base...laid off workers blame profiteering and the owners blame taxes. Meanwhile, ethe first tier of the crappy, low wage job base is packing his crown and moving to Canada.

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 07:01 AM
a reply to: CranialSponge

thanks for the clarification ...

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 07:03 AM
Come on guys the solution is simple!

If we could just deregulate the workplace a little more, if we could just give corporations a few more tax breaks and loopholes, if only we could lower the minimum wage a few more dollars...if only we could cut food stamps and a few more social safety nets then you might get lucky and get a few more scraps from the table

posted on Aug, 30 2014 @ 07:04 AM
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough the first time around.

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in