try and think in these terms: when I started my content biz I worked 80+ hours a week, didn't watch TV for 10 years.... so a guy hanging out, fucking around, gets a job at pizza hut and suddenly he's earned something?

you are combating the human condition....there has always been losers, winners and thief's... not going change because some bozo passes a law.. .. not sure what to do however one thing to comes to mind, is not allow people with such low income to have as many kids as they want... what's your thinking on that one?

I understand that businesses are in business to make as much profit as they can. However, I get annoyed when I see some businesses paying so little that their employees also end up on welfare of different types. This means the government is helping subsidize their profits.

I don't know that this is happening in these particular cases, but it happens with millions of employees all over the country.

Scandinavian countries don't have minimum wages. Almost every job in those countries falls under a union that negotiates wages and workers rights. The same is true in Germany as well. That's why all of their jobs have living wages.

But you are missing the part that the places out side of Seattle will have to compete for workers vs Seattle. Why would anyone go to work at McDonald's in the town next to Seattle for $8/hr when they can just go to Seattle and get $15/hr?

You are thinking it only goes one way, but all the wages in that area will increase meaning shutting down to move to the next town over won't really work. They will either learn how to run a business and pay a livable wage to employees or they will go out of business.

unlike you, if I was looking for a job at mc donalds I would much bigger issues than which town to work in :helpme

costco = made in China

According to the article, the % of Profit is small.

People who say it isn't the rise in pay,.......... Have you ever ran a Business and had to pay someone (Not an independent contractor)?

Not only does the employees paycheck go up, but the taxes you must pay as a business owner goes up as well... Social Security will kill ya..... If you think you pay a lot (looking at your W2's), just remember that the company has to match that!

there is a finite number of jobs in Seattle, so obviously not everyone that wants a job there can get it? getting an entry level job at $15/hr is like winning a job lottery for some... so entry level workers will try to move to Seattle to get a job... BUT they won't be able to find one...

to make things even worse, if you remember first lecture of econ 101, when price of something goes up, the demand (by employers for labor) goes down... so number of available jobs will actually shrink...

this will probably turn into a complete disaster... hopefully will end these ridiculous socialist experiments once and for all...

if government could run a business there wouldn't be a deficit would there? :2 cents:

You'd be safe hiring illegals.

I doubt they check lemonade stands too closely.

Maybe content production is a bit like that bookstore in San Francisco these days? Or radio shack?

In all fairness, the government is not a business.

Businesses do things for profit. If it doesn't make a profit or help to make a profit then most businesses won't do it. Most of what the government does is never intended to make a profit.

A more accurate statement would be "If the government could balance its budget there wouldn't be a deficit."

In Denver, Highlands Ranch to be exact.. The McDonnalds there had a sign on the door the entire time I was in the area (5 months). It said "Now Hiring" and after a bit of text it said $10/hr. (Anyone with half a brain and no criminal record can easily get a job for $15/hr or more meaning even at $10/hr it was most just school kids working there)

The Dollar menu still cost a dollar and most things seems to cost about the same as any other McDonnalds..


Meanwhile here in central FL.. the Dollar menu still costs a dollar and most things cost the same as any other McDonalds but they pay their employees here 7.65 to start.. (considering FL is a right to work state and wages are low, you see Adults working at McDonalds here because they don't get paid much better elsewhere for basic labor related jobs)


What is the difference? In one location the store makes a bit more profit per employee vs the other.

Wages really don't drive up per product cost very much in most businesses..

I have done so before, it was profitable but taking away time from other ventures that was more profitable. Sure I could have kept it running and have 2 half ass ventures or hired someone and loose the profit but keep the risks..
you need to look at what your own time is worth and invest it wisely

FYI, nice one bedroom apartments in areas of Seattle that are not shitholes now rent at $1,800 a month. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh These are LA prices.

You have no idea if the store is making a profit or not....

It is also supply and demand, as Many stores are now raising pay ABOVE min wage to get better workers, I assume..

Heck even in my state and even in my town different mcdonalds charge different prices... Sure its only about $.25 on items, but you never get the same total for same items at different places.

I am in a right to work state and the pay $9-$9.50 to START and my state is a very low cost to live state..

Not paying a Livable wage as you call it, will NOT run someone out of business... If the "workers" quit applying, then they will have to raise wages....

you mean the very exact same congress that pushed Obama care are on the people and made themselves exempt? that congress?

then maybe the government should not tell business how to operate? I have no idea what you do for a living, does that imply that I can step in and make you run your business the way I think you should?

Three things.

1. Many people in low wage jobs qualify for a variety of different welfare programs. This means that we the tax payers are subsidizing these people's incomes. Perhaps forcing businesses to pay a wage that is high enough that the average person working 40 hours per week no longer qualifies for welfare isn't such a bad thing. Walmart's employees alone costs the tax payers $6.2 billion dollars per year while Walmart made nearly $15 billion in net profit last year.

2. If the people in that area that this law is exists see a negative effect from this law or they flat out don't like the government telling people how to run their businesses they can always vote those people out of office in the next election and put people in office that will repeal the law.

3. Do I want the government telling me how to run my business. First off, I am self-employed and have been since 1999. However, I work on my own and don't have employees. If I do hire people it is as a contractor on a per job basis. If I did need to hire employees the odds are they would need to be skilled and would demand a higher wage than the minimum wage.

Not to defend Obamacare, but I don't think Congress is exempt.

Here is a factcheck article that says all congressional members and staff are actually being forced to buy insurance from the exchange unless they get it through a spouse who has a different job.

Ted Cruz just announced he is forced to use the Obamacare exchange now that his wife is not going to get insurance through her job.

Low minimum wages (below the cost of living) simply allow corporations to get their employees incomes subsidized by the government. Then who do you think are helping pay these wages? The tax payer aka us
So when a McDonald's or walmart pays $7 an hour, it's us picking up the difference instead of a multi billion dollar company just paying living wages

So for profit businesses are the ones abusing the tax payer and the government. Sorry that people have been blinded by conservative propaganda talking shit against the min wage. Which by the why when accounting for inflation peaked in the 1970s at over $10 in today's dollars.

And Kane mostly just beat me to it

one fulltime job at 40 hrs/week should pay enough to secure a living above welfare level

if your business relies on paying your employees below that and you have the rest of the tax payers substitute that by having to pay your employees food stamps or whatever, then you need to figure out how to be better or close.

and I do have employees, they earn about 3 times the minimum wage in this country

It's all adapt or die until someone's McWhopper goes up 25 cents.

when I was 18 I started working with a construction company.... I was earning top pay as a heavy equipment operator... running a scrapper, make $3.75 per hour, same as all the other guys... (we did works 60-80 hours a week though) that was in 1973... those guys are the last guys to work a job and support a stay at home wife, family and buy a home.... minim wage was $1.45... pretty much 1/2 top scale I guess... what happened? 'Arab oil crises'

No restaurant makes a 22% profit margin. Ever.

This is my thinking as well. Certain groups love to talk about govt leeches, but the truth of the reality is, any company whom purposely keeps workers as "part time" in order to get out of paying their obligations as an employer or much worse paying people at such a low wage the govt has to supplement their employees. Well that company is the true govt leech.

Walmart and most fast food is perfect example of govt leech business model.

McDonalds is not far off

McDonald's Profit Margin (Quarterly) (MCD)

they could for sure afford paying their people more

One could argue it is the government's willingness to hand out these subsidies to employees as being the problem. Allows these people to never work harder to be great employees and increase their worth to their current or next employers who value their skills. Doesn't make them accountable to survive. Lets them get by doing the bare minimum, with the least responsibility.

I would argue the safety net has gotten too big, too vast, and too easy to make people complacent and lazy.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh


you couldn't be more wrong.

that's not at all the same thing and certainly not what the article is trying to portray. The article claims the owners shuttered their businesses, closed them and walked away from their investment because of a pending accounting issue. didn't even try to sell them. that's not savvy in the slightest. and that's because the article is misleading. the business owners didn't do that.

how can i provide solutions to a bullshit problem? the article was misleading. they didn't shutter their businesses due to impending pay problems.

and yes, in most business roadblocks, stumbling points, etc, there is plenty to figure out. that's what running a business is. figuring shit out.

Welfare level is defined by the government at about $1000/month, which translates to $6.25/hr... which is way less than the current minimum wage, and that makes $15/hr about 2.5 of the "welfare level"...

so the whole argument: "no one working full time should live in poverty" is complete bullshit...

where exactly is the minimum wage $15/h right now? I must have missed when this became law

and i'll leave the "complete bullshit" comment to you - as far as i know you don't have employees

socialism is bad unless its for multi billion dollar companies!

it's not now, but it will be soon in Seattle (whole point of this thread), making it 2.5x level of "welfare level"...

how can someone working full time live below poverty line? minimum wage is 7.25 so that translates to about $1100 per month... which is ABOVE welfare level...

so where is the problem?

i was going to write an answer and then i thought of an old polish proverb: "not my circus, not my monkeys"

90% of your posts are you starting an argument then bailing out. :1orglaugh

You are overlooking that the poverty level is adjusted based on how many individuals are living in a household.

2015 Poverty Guidelines

It would be a different story if everyone was single without kids and could rent a room above a one car garage like Fonzi.

MaDalton is simply saying there would be less welfare if the average employee was better compensated rather than just paying them the bare minimum allowed by law.

:1orglaugh