It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 6:25 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 369 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 13  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Hank Scorpio wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Isnt there a certain point where not getting the job done affects profits?


If I dont stop reading this thread and posting in it, we will soon find out :lol: :lol:

:lol:

Multi tasking, Henry. Multitasking. Ive been dealing with a millionaire man-child and his issues with this damn electric trading the whole time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
I can't answer that. But, I think a shift of this magnitude will throw things very far out of whack. We are just now starting to get competitive with China and the like again for certain products based on our wages compared to their wages and the time, quality, and cost of transporting those goods back to the US. As a result, jobs/work is starting to come back to the US that went over there as recently as a couple years ago.

I'd hate to see that gap widen again and the flow of jobs start streaming back the other way.
I think it should be pointed out that even as probably the biggest fan of $15 minimum wage, I don't think it should happen overnight. Even a 5 year plan that steps it up fro $10 to $15 would be good with me as long as it then continued to raise at some sort of logical level every year.

Agreed and I just wanna reiterate that because I can see how some of my posts may have led people to believe otherwise


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
badrogue17 wrote:
pittmike wrote:
What the hell brought this up..... again?

I think CiJ is pissed that people aren't attending poker games due to lack of funds and wants higher wages or something

Fast food worker protests all over the country today.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:08 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
rogers park bryan wrote:
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
But, that's again, another study of historical state-level modest increases in the wage.

This is, if I may, "paradigm-shifting news, gentlemen!"

This would be an historic increase and a drastic one at that.

You're talking moving it from like 7.50 to 15 in one move.

Im a proponent of the 10.10 and then increases every year or so till it gets to the level where it matches inflation


What does that solve? Raising the minimum wage will likely cause more problems. Most of the jobs I had as a kid (I've been working since I was 11) I couldn't have gotten if minimum wage was $12. It wasn't worth paying me that much. Young Nas would have probably turned to a life of crime without those opportunities.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:15 pm
Posts: 48803
Location: Bohemian Club Annual World Power Consolidation Conference & Golf Outing
pizza_Place: World Fluoridation Conspiracy Pizza & WINGS!
The system is in place and isn't going away so there is no sense arguing about the system itself.

I think setting it at $15, even in 5 years, is too high. In truth, that might be even worse for the workers since it gives employers time to figure out how to make their systems more efficient to eliminate workers in the future.

A move that large makes the cost/benefit analysis drastically different and would likely result in buy/make decisions or automation capital expenditure decisions that value the buy or automate side of the equation far more than they currently do.

But, I could be wrong. It's happened before.

I liked Mike Harkey.

_________________
You know me like that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Nas wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
But, that's again, another study of historical state-level modest increases in the wage.

This is, if I may, "paradigm-shifting news, gentlemen!"

This would be an historic increase and a drastic one at that.

You're talking moving it from like 7.50 to 15 in one move.

Im a proponent of the 10.10 and then increases every year or so till it gets to the level where it matches inflation


What does that solve?

I think that's been covered. People would have more money. There would be a more even split of money than there is now, imo

Nas wrote:
Raising the minimum wage will likely cause more problems. Most of the jobs I had as a kid (I've been working since I was 11) I couldn't have gotten if minimum wage was $12. It wasn't worth paying me that much. Young Nas would have probably turned to a life of crime without those opportunities.

That doesnt really make sense to me, maybe im missing something.

The minimum is the minimum. Whatever young Nas made has to be adjusted for inflation.

If the wage to cost ratio is the same as it was when you were young, what's the problem?

What are the other problems youre thinking of?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
The system is in place and isn't going away so there is no sense arguing about the system itself.

I think setting it at $15, even in 5 years, is too high. In truth, that might be even worse for the workers since it gives employers time to figure out how to make their systems more efficient to eliminate workers in the future.

A move that large makes the cost/benefit analysis drastically different and would likely result in buy/make decisions or automation capital expenditure decisions that value the buy or automate side of the equation far more than they currently do.

But, I could be wrong. It's happened before.

I liked Mike Harkey.

Ok, so basically you're saying that the minimum cant and wont ever match up with inflation and that ship has permanently sailed?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 30328
rogers park bryan wrote:
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
The system is in place and isn't going away so there is no sense arguing about the system itself.

I think setting it at $15, even in 5 years, is too high. In truth, that might be even worse for the workers since it gives employers time to figure out how to make their systems more efficient to eliminate workers in the future.

A move that large makes the cost/benefit analysis drastically different and would likely result in buy/make decisions or automation capital expenditure decisions that value the buy or automate side of the equation far more than they currently do.

But, I could be wrong. It's happened before.

I liked Mike Harkey.

Ok, so basically you're saying that the minimum cant and wont ever match up with inflation and that ship has permanently sailed?

I would be of that opinion also, got side tracked and forgot to make that point.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 2974
Location: who wants to know?
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
You're missing the point. I'm saying that these companies will halve their workforce regardless of whether or not it leaves them with enough employees to get the work done. The key is profit.
That point makes no sense. If what you say is true then why wouldn't they just have one employee right now? That would save them a ton of money right now.

McDonalds isn't going to halve its workforce and then not be able to make hamburgers.


You underestimate both the need to please shareholders and the motivation of employees faced with losing their job OR doubling their salary.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
A move that large makes the cost/benefit analysis drastically different and would likely result in buy/make decisions or automation capital expenditure decisions that value the buy or automate side of the equation far more than they currently do.
This is the best point against it. I'm just not sure if companies haven't already reached the point where they value labor so little that they aren't looking to automate everything. I mean, $15 an hour is more expensive than $0, but so is $8 an hour. It's actually pretty amazing just how micromanaged these jobs are. To me, it looks like 75% of the tasks of the restaurant are now either done by the push of a button or outsourced/automated. Just wait until we are ordering to kiosks or even putting in our orders on our phones.

In other words, I think most of these businesses are now going with the idea that it will always be cheaper to automate rather than pay a person and are working towards a future where fast food restaurants are basically full size versions of vending machines.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
WestmontMike wrote:
You underestimate both the need to please shareholders and the motivation of employees faced with losing their job OR doubling their salary.
No. Shareholders demand right now that the company uses the minimum amount of employees possible. $15 an hour is expensive. $8 an hour is expensive too.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 2974
Location: who wants to know?
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
You underestimate both the need to please shareholders and the motivation of employees faced with losing their job OR doubling their salary.
No. Shareholders demand right now that the company uses the minimum amount of employees possible. $15 an hour is expensive. $8 an hour is expensive too.


I find it odd that you're agreeing with Dr Ken and disagreeing with me when we're saying the same thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
WestmontMike wrote:
I find it odd that you're agreeing with Dr Ken and disagreeing with me when we're saying the same thing.
You aren't saying the same thing. You seem to believe that McDonalds could cut its labor force in half right now and still make the same amount of revenue. If they could do that, they would do it because it would make them more money.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 2974
Location: who wants to know?
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
I find it odd that you're agreeing with Dr Ken and disagreeing with me when we're saying the same thing.
You aren't saying the same thing. You seem to believe that McDonalds could cut its labor force in half right now and still make the same amount of revenue. If they could do that, they would do it because it would make them more money.


No, that's not what i'm saying


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote:
The system is in place and isn't going away so there is no sense arguing about the system itself.

I think setting it at $15, even in 5 years, is too high. In truth, that might be even worse for the workers since it gives employers time to figure out how to make their systems more efficient to eliminate workers in the future.

A move that large makes the cost/benefit analysis drastically different and would likely result in buy/make decisions or automation capital expenditure decisions that value the buy or automate side of the equation far more than they currently do.

But, I could be wrong. It's happened before.

I liked Mike Harkey.

Ok, so basically you're saying that the minimum cant and wont ever match up with inflation and that ship has permanently sailed?


That would basically be the point at which it's time to consider more aggressive methods of negotiation.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 30328
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
I find it odd that you're agreeing with Dr Ken and disagreeing with me when we're saying the same thing.
You aren't saying the same thing. You seem to believe that McDonalds could cut its labor force in half right now and still make the same amount of revenue. If they could do that, they would do it because it would make them more money.

Why do we continue to say McDonalds?

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
WestmontMike wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
I find it odd that you're agreeing with Dr Ken and disagreeing with me when we're saying the same thing.
You aren't saying the same thing. You seem to believe that McDonalds could cut its labor force in half right now and still make the same amount of revenue. If they could do that, they would do it because it would make them more money.


No, that's not what i'm saying
You are saying that if the minimum wage was raised to $15 an hour that they would cut their labor force in half. Why not do that now?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
Hawg Ass wrote:
Why do we continue to say McDonalds?
They are just a good example.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
I find it odd that you're agreeing with Dr Ken and disagreeing with me when we're saying the same thing.
You aren't saying the same thing. You seem to believe that McDonalds could cut its labor force in half right now and still make the same amount of revenue. If they could do that, they would do it because it would make them more money.


No, that's not what i'm saying
You are saying that if the minimum wage was raised to $15 an hour that they would cut their labor force in half. Why not do that now?


Likely the cost benefit isnt there yet.

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 2974
Location: who wants to know?
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
I find it odd that you're agreeing with Dr Ken and disagreeing with me when we're saying the same thing.
You aren't saying the same thing. You seem to believe that McDonalds could cut its labor force in half right now and still make the same amount of revenue. If they could do that, they would do it because it would make them more money.


No, that's not what i'm saying
You are saying that if the minimum wage was raised to $15 an hour that they would cut their labor force in half. Why not do that now?


Because they don't have to.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43572
WestmontMike wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
No, that's not what i'm saying
You are saying that if the minimum wage was raised to $15 an hour that they would cut their labor force in half. Why not do that now?


Because they don't have to.[/quote]
:lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Last edited by Douchebag on Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 2974
Location: who wants to know?
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Likely the cost benefit isnt there yet.


This guy gets it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
WestmontMike wrote:
Because they don't have to.
:lol: Do you realize how much money they would save with 50% less employees? You were saying the shareholders would demand it at $15 an hour. They also would demand it at $8.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:57 pm
Posts: 2974
Location: who wants to know?
Douchebag wrote:
:lol: :lol: :lol:


this guy doesn't get it


Last edited by WestmontMike on Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WestmontMike wrote:
Because they don't have to.
:lol: Do you realize how much money they would save with 50% less employees? You were saying the shareholders would demand it at $15 an hour. They also would demand it at $8.


No because there are sacrifices in service/employee retention that are in play at $15 vs $8.

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:15 pm
Posts: 48803
Location: Bohemian Club Annual World Power Consolidation Conference & Golf Outing
pizza_Place: World Fluoridation Conspiracy Pizza & WINGS!
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ok, so basically you're saying that the minimum cant and wont ever match up with inflation and that ship has permanently sailed?


I'm a little confused by your comparison of a rate of change calculation to a static number.

If you are saying that it has not changed at the same rate as inflation, you are assuming there was some optimal arbitrary number chosen in the past which, if it had maintained a rate that increased at the same rate of inflation, would still be optimal today.

I'm stating that there's no way to know what that number truly should be because it doesn't really exist.

_________________
You know me like that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 38609
Location: "Across 110th Street"
I love how this has turned into a generally well intentioned debate over seven pages.

At the same time a 30 second SB commercial costs $4MM, there's a local family that produces nothing but continues to idly live off of marketing the sweat of the venerated Papa Bear (who's been dead for three decades), the LA Dodgers make $200MM per year on local broadcasting(advertising) and simple product placement in brings in $100s of millions (billions?).

Yeah, its the minimum wage workers that are the problem. NOT the corporate waste and hundreds of billions in advertising (that creates nothing tangible).

The Kardashians would agree.

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Regular Reader wrote:
I love how this has turned into a generally well intentioned debate over seven pages.

At the same time a 30 second SB commercial costs $4MM, there's a local family that produces nothing but continues to idly live off of marketing the sweat of the venerated Papa Bear (who's been dead for three decades), the LA Dodgers make $200MM per year on local broadcasting(advertising) and simple product placement in brings in $100s of millions (billions?).

Yeah, its the minimum wage workers that are the problem. NOT the corporate waste and hundreds of billions in advertising (that creates nothing tangible).

The Kardashians would agree.


I dont think anyone is against the workers here or think that they are the problem. We all think the corporations are the problem. RPB and Rick think that they will just say "Aw shucks. Time to cut our profits and pay people more" I think that they will raise prices for everyone and continue to rake in profits and purchase stupid commercial time for the SuperBowl.

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
Hank Scorpio wrote:
No because there are sacrifices in service/employee retention that are in play at $15 vs $8.
That's the thing though. You are now putting in things that hurt the business. WestmontMike seems to be saying that they would just say "It's now $15, fire half the employees!" like it would not have major repercussions.

I can promise you that if they could function with 50% of the workforce, they would be getting rid of most of those people at any price.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 3:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 30328
Regular Reader wrote:
I love how this has turned into a generally well intentioned debate over seven pages.

At the same time a 30 second SB commercial costs $4MM, there's a local family that produces nothing but continues to idly live off of marketing the sweat of the venerated Papa Bear (who's been dead for three decades), the LA Dodgers make $200MM per year on local broadcasting(advertising) and simple product placement in brings in $100s of millions (billions?).

Yeah, its the minimum wage workers that are the problem. NOT the corporate waste and hundreds of billions in advertising (that creates nothing tangible).

The Kardashians would agree.

So would the Little League World Series and what has made it as big as it has become, correct?

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 369 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 13  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group