Fast food strikers Reddit Q&A..... ROFLMAO
If anyone knows the douche who started this tell them to punch themselves in the face. http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1s6cz6/we_are_fast_food_workers_m…
Trending Content
| +50 | Interviews Are So Fake | 33 | 3s | |
| +33 | 2024 UK Election - Tories finished? | 21 | 1d | |
| +29 | ADHD ! | 12 | 1h | |
| +28 | Being Christian in investment banking | 14 | 2d | |
| +26 | Non-Competes Banned | 28 | 3h | |
| How do I become Sigma | 15 | 19h | ||
| +19 | Moelis has the cutest Analysts? | 4 | 2d | |
| +18 | Best NYC neighborhood for single 30M | 12 | 3d | |
| +16 | Underage intern, drinking? | 7 | 2d | |
| +13 | Secretive vs Universal Prestige? | 7 | 2d |
Career Resources
Gave me a little chuckle. What should I ask them...
I would ask them if their balls have dropped yet. But the answer would be too obvious.
See, I am torn.
Part of me supports raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour and cutting back welfare. If you can do a menial job and make a good wage you have no excuse to be on welfare.
But then again I realize that raising the minimum wage will just cause McDonalds and other places to automate. No need to have people taking your order when you could simply have touch screens and a robot helping you make burgers.
In the end if you make labor expensive businesses will seek to reduce this expense.
Not just that but the other effects. Jobs that now pay 15 to 20/hour will have to raise their rates to retain their people and it will just be forced inflation. There is an easier thing to do. Just increase the frequency of scratch off lotto ticket winners. That should placate the poors.
It'll just speed up the process. Shit's going automated with or without minimum wage
What's wrong with that? Many retailers (for example, CVS and Home Depot) have already replaced a lot of cashiers with self-checkout machines for instance, and economic growth is a function of labor productivity growth which is a function of technological advances. So the store manager is more productive because he just has to oversee a bunch of machines instead of babysitting a bunch of incompetent apathetic slobs.
Who the fuck works in fast food and tries to raise a family. I mean at what point do we just say "sucks to be you". I mean don't have kids, try and learn a skill, take some night classes. I have no doubt there are some hard luck stories related to people making minimum when they shouldn't but, but lets face it, many people making minimum wage are idiots who can't do the basics correctly.
Personally, I don't give a shit. The unskilled, uneducated and those unable to perform the basics of a job (show up on time, be professional, do tasks given to you correctly) will never have a good life.
Another interesting side effect of raising the rates for these jobs is they will be more in demand. Where as morons can get by on the minimum wage, people will be expected to actually do work and do it well to stick around at $15 an hour.
I'm on the same fence that you are. The angle that most people fail to consider is: if a Wal-Mart employee is working 40 hours a week and can't get by, and thus receives public benefits...are we, the taxpayers, subsidizing WMT's labor costs?
The cynical argument where..."oh fuck them, $1 earned is better than $0 earned", only works in a vacuum where social safety-net programs don't exist.
On top of which, I personally believe that all Americans deserve a baseline standard of living. What that means and how it's administered is a different discussion entirely.
Honestly, Wal Mart is helping the tax payer. Instead of paying 50% we would be paying 100%. This idea that they are dumping costs on us fails to realize the fact that Wal Mart hires people nearly anyone. If you work hard you can at least move up in Wal Mart.
Unfortunately, too many people stack the entire deck against themselves and get fucked.
I've been reading the minimum salary debate and it interests me. Like end all welfare and just have a minimum draw. Might be worth while to keep the uneducated masses placated. Add in mandatory child limits and birth control and we could eventually stem the tide.
I think the negative income tax is the best way to do it actually. You disable these massive government bureaucracies and give those in need cash, plus they are still incentivized to work, as they will be even better off.
What's funny is how the har core GOP doesn't want to pay for birth control, yet it would yield enormous long term savings possibly paying for itself thousands of times over.
Interesting...haven't heard of this in a while. Isn't this done in some form already for people below the poverty line with children? Don't they get a credit of some sort? What woudl be the specifics...genuinely interested in hearing more. thanks
NIT is by far the optimal policy solution. Next would be to chuck stacks of cash at poor people. Raising the minimum wage significantly makes 0 sense.
The whole argument that the tax payer is subsidizing WalMart's labor costs is asinine. You are paid your marginal product. If you want to make the normative claim that the US as a society should guarantee a certain living standard for all citizens, then that can be accomplished with various public policies that won't result in European food prices and unemployment.
The raise the minimum wage to lower government welfare idea is a farce. You raise the min wage then suddenly some group of politicians will loose their votes. If the bottom 15% wages suddenly rise by 50% guess what they are still in the bottom 15% because everything will adjust to the new norm and so will the federal poverty line. Its really just a way to increase tax revenues by flooding the market with additional money via wages.
If we don't raise the minimum wage, how will the poor afford their cable TV, smart phone, AND food for their children?
Poverty Action: New Study Finds Cash Alone Effective Way to Fight Poverty
http://www.poverty-action.org/node/6099
DB: Wasn't disagreeing with you if that's what it looked it. But yeah, I think a negative income tax is the best way to go about it. Wage subsidies are another good choice. Even some sort of guaranteed income (i.e. get paid $20k to sit on your ass) would be preferable to a (large) increase in the minimum wage. In general, I believe that individuals know best what they want to spend their money on. The fact that some people don't have money (and are for whatever reason incapable of making money) needs to be looked at as its own issue.
And yeah, I think birth control should be paid for by the state in the sense that it'll save us money in the long-run. Mandated birth control would be a bit extreme, but maybe we could offer people a lump sum payment for getting a vasectomy or w/e.
@theapplebear Oh okay, I thought you were making the case against NIT. I read the post too quickly. My bad.
http://i.imgur.com/4VvbwyG.jpg
The future is near. Cannot wait!~
Aut enim voluptas aut recusandae impedit. Aut non cumque id fugiat impedit. Sunt distinctio ea fugiat voluptates nemo dolor. Reprehenderit cumque blanditiis amet assumenda corporis. Assumenda adipisci sint sapiente in qui assumenda. Iusto voluptate voluptas quia possimus dicta.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Perspiciatis est alias repellat dolores magni harum deserunt magnam. Non et doloribus nulla rerum. Dolores est veniam officiis maiores et voluptas fugiat.