The fast-food industry claims minimum wage law is costing jobs. Its numbers are fake

Knight said:
I took the lowest federal min wage @7.25an American worker @40hr work week before taxes earns $290.00. I'm not suggesting the wage in India be the wage paid if those jobs are brought back to America. What I'm suggesting. Wages set by the employer should allow for the employer to earn a profit.

Do I think there should be a minimum wage ? I've never been interested in being an employer. As far back as I can remember even as a teen learning the trade of retail butchering I've never worked at a minimum wage job. So with that as my reference I'd say no to minimum wage. When a job with higher wages was possible to be had I had no problem changing or even moving to better our family circumstances.

Not everyone will move, not everyone has the physical or mental capacity to earn a higher wage. Many will take what they can get.
Click to expand...

It goes without a saying that if a business is not profitable, it'll go under. But if the only way to make it profitable is to pay wages that does not allow its workers a minimal life, then I suggest it's not worth having at all. Instead, let's encourage businesses that can pay a minimum wage as set at the state level. After all, wages is just another number that goes into the mixing pot of whether to start a business or not.

Your experience is fine, but it was of a time. Let's not forget, the Minimum Wage level set at the state level isn't set high - it's set at a level where someone can live a minimal existence. Back when I was young, changing jobs was quite easy. Today? We have a homeless crisis, we have working poor.

And yes, not everyone can/will move, and may not have the smarts - but those people still deserve a minimal existence: food, shelter, etc. I don't know where those people are expected to go if they're not earning enough to eat.
 

Della said:
That's true but it usually costs money to improve skill level. people who are earning very low wages rarely have money leftover for trade schools or colleges and sometimes they don't even have money for transportation to those schools.
Click to expand...

Talking about our own experience can be misleading, because times are different. However, thinking of my own career, much was self-taught. I read voraciously. I spoke to people about what I'd learned and we exchanged ideas. When I was working, I was studying. To an extent, I think this approach is still viable.

The thing is, I have tons of experience in my chosen field. However, there's nothing important I know that others couldn't learn. I don't believe you'd need a class or degree for it. IT was my thing, and I've met plenty of people with the papers but no common sense.
 
Knight said:
I don't think this is about NOT paying a minimum wage. I think it's about weather or not the $20.00 min wage set by the state is negativly impacting jobs. The article in the Op's post cited no problem with closings or job loss from Jan. to Mar. A little deceiving since the $20.00 increase didn't start until April.

Not explained in the article. How many are working part time and counted as full time employees. Numbers can be manipulated to reflect whatever the article author wants to present.

When it comes to wages An entry level firefighter starting at $26.00 an hour seems a little small compared to an entry level fast food employee at $20.00.

Entry Level Firefighter Salary in California
Yearly
Monthly
Weekly
Hourly
Table View
California Average
$28,127$53,886 /year$98,691
$26 /hour

https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Entry-Level-Firefighter-Salary--in-California
Click to expand...
Poor comparison w/out mentioning benefits, career path, etc.
 

Last edited:
againstthegrain said:
Poor comparison w/out mentioning benefits, career path, etc.
Click to expand...
Can't really compare apples to apples. The comparison was about the not very large difference in wages between entry level jobs.

For that $6.00 an hour difference.
One requires
Qualifications @ JoinLAFD: Los Angeles Fire Department.

The other pretty much only requires showing up to work.

I could be wrong but I think an entry level firefighter has a better chance for career advancement than a fast food entry level employee. Included in that would be wage increases commensurate with training & specialization.
 
Back to the Op's post #1.

As a topic this is interesting to read & discuss differing views. There is no denying that fast food prices are up. As for employment, I think it's too early to put a definitive claim one way or the other. I think it would be reasonable to look at the impact 6 months after the minimum wage increase has settled in.

It's not clear to me if impact corporate wide is skewing what the article's author is presenting. IMO a wait & see if closing locations helps like businesses to prosper. Then too what will the impact be on other jobs/employers that still pay this?

Minimum Wage
The minimum wage in California, effective January 1, 2024, is $16.00/hour for all employers. Fast Food Restaurant employers, effective April 1, 2024, and Healthcare Facility employers, effective June 1, 2024, will have a higher minimum wage.
Minimum Wage

State health care at $25.00 an hour minimum wage is projected to cost an additional 4 billion dollars the state budget. A budget that is already experiencing a huge deficit. IMO the impact on weather wage increases will negatively impact funding state aid to those that need it most isn't clear to me.

What is clear that taxes pay for how a state operates. I wonder how that huge deficitill be addressed?
 
I think we are missing the point.
It’s not a wage issue alone. It’s also a cost of living issue. Both are part of big feedback loop we call the economy. You can’t change one thing without affecting other things in the loop. And it comes back around over and over again until it gets worked out.
 
Knight said:
Can't really compare apples to apples. The comparison was about the not very large difference in wages between entry level jobs.

For that $6.00 an hour difference.
One requires
Qualifications @ JoinLAFD: Los Angeles Fire Department.

The other pretty much only requires showing up to work.

I could be wrong but I think an entry level firefighter has a better chance for career advancement than a fast food entry level employee. Included in that would be wage increases commensurate with training & specialization.
Click to expand...
Well you kind of understand the point.
 
Knight said:
Minimum Wage
The minimum wage in California, effective January 1, 2024, is $16.00/hour for all employers. Fast Food Restaurant employers, effective April 1, 2024, and Healthcare Facility employers, effective June 1, 2024, will have a higher minimum wage.
Minimum Wage

State health care at $25.00 an hour minimum wage is projected to cost an additional 4 billion dollars the state budget. A budget that is already experiencing a huge deficit. IMO the impact on weather wage increases will negatively impact funding state aid to those that need it most isn't clear to me.
Click to expand...
why are some jobs given a higher minimum wage?
 
Brookswood said:
why are some jobs given a higher minimum wage?
Click to expand...
The greater the job demands as the entry level period is completed the greater the pay to begin with.
I'm pretty sure my example of applying for the job as an entry level firefighter that requires testing should pay more than an entry level fast food applicant.

Or do you view all jobs as having equal weight.
 
Knight said:
The greater the job demands as the entry level period is completed the greater the pay to begin with.
I'm pretty sure my example of applying for the job as an entry level firefighter that requires testing should pay more than an entry level fast food applicant.

Or do you view all jobs as having equal weight.
Click to expand...
it’s confusing. The wage difference is not limited to fire fighters and fast food jobs.

Suppose two entry level jobs requiring nothing more than a HS education. One is in fast food. The other is dust bin emptying and floor sweeping. Same area. Is the COL for the floor sweeper less than that of the fast food server?

what was the reasoning that the California lawmakers used to justify mandating this difference?
,
 
Brookswood said:
it’s confusing. The wage difference is not limited to fire fighters and fast food jobs.

Suppose two entry level jobs requiring nothing more than a HS education. One is in fast food. The other is dust bin emptying and floor sweeping. Same area. Is the COL for the floor sweeper less than that of the fast food server?

what was the reasoning that the California lawmakers used to justify mandating this difference?
,
Click to expand...
I think we can agree the thread is about the fast food industry & the articles author claiming the numbers are fake. We really don't know for sure since the author used dubious methods to present his opinion.

But this thread gave us an opportunity to discuss other aspects.

You ask the reasoning behind the political decision to raise the wages of fast food workers.
IMO Taxes.

California has more than 540,000 fast food workers, about 195,000 of them in Los Angeles and Orange counties. Boosting wages to $800.00 a week before taxes.

Your thought that dust bin & floor sweepers have expenses is valid. The quantity of dust bin or floor sweepers is miniscule relative to fast food. Toss in the need for buildings & the taxes paid by fast food business owners not paid by dust bin & floor sweepers business owners. I think you understand the justification by Cal lawmakers.
 
VaughanJB said:
That's not really the point. The point is, is there a minimum upon which people can live a minimal existence?
Click to expand...
I disagree. The point is, this is about entry level employment not long term jobs that take ongoing training with increased wages as skills & on the job performance are evaluated.

My example of fire fighter vs fast food should be a clue that after entry level change in responsibly is different.
 
Underpaying the help is socialism as it depends on government assistance for those workers to get healthcare, food and shelter. I wouldn’t mind a little socialism but I’d rather it not go to lining the pockets of the already wealthy.
 
It's all about greed. Yes, it's that simple. We need laws protecting us from greed. It's that simple, why complicate it with theory?
 
VaughanJB said:
Not sure it would do any good. Are there really people out there eager to work for below minimum pay? As for unions, too many companies fighting the very idea!
Click to expand...
Florida agreed to LOWER the minimum wage so where ever they are, I'd check Florida first re:below minimum wage.
 
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" Karl Marx, 1875

A Star Trek Universe is what I call that statement.
 
Knight said:
I disagree. The point is, this is about entry level employment not long term jobs that take ongoing training with increased wages as skills & on the job performance are evaluated.

My example of fire fighter vs fast food should be a clue that after entry level change in responsibly is different.
Click to expand...

And it appears, we will forever disagree. Personally, I think your way of thinking simply creates a market where slavery is okay, as long as you persuade people to accept it. These people will, by definition, be the most vulnerable. This is bad for society, bad for the economy, and bad for government. IMO.
 
againstthegrain said:
Capitol vs Labor will always be in conflict and this example is no different.
Click to expand...

True. However, we are at a critical juncture, imo. The homeless crisis is the thin end of the wedge. The people with nothing are becoming more visible. When it gets to a point where working 40 hours a week does not allow you to buy food and provide housing, then something needs to give. This isn't simply a matter of the poor and the more wealthy. It's the people working, but not being able to provide, and those who can.
 
Pepper said:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" Karl Marx, 1875

A Star Trek Universe is what I call that statement.
Click to expand...

"Gimmie" was a 21st century slang term for a group of inhabitants of the United States of America's Sanctuary Districts. They were useful members of society who needed help finding work and a place to live ("Gimmie" as in "give me work", "give me shelter", etc.). A service the Districts allegedly provided for them was help in finding job placements, but in truth, this service was either ineffective or non-existent.
Click to expand...
Gimmie

The Federation was a paradise for the elite. For anyone else not so much. Here are its roots before the Vulcans made contact and encouraged the Earth's elites to take full control much as the High Command had hundreds of years before in their own empire:

"Welcome to the 21st Century, Doctor"
 
VaughanJB said:
And it appears, we will forever disagree. Personally, I think your way of thinking simply creates a market where slavery is okay, as long as you persuade people to accept it. These people will, by definition, be the most vulnerable. This is bad for society, bad for the economy, and bad for government. IMO.
Click to expand...
Nice try.
Using slavery is a nice appeal to emotion. But when definition of the word slavery is known that appeal goes away.
What is the real definition of slavery?


Slavery | Definition, History, & Facts | Britannica


slavery, condition in which one human being was owned by another. A slave was considered by law as property, or chattel, and was deprived of most of the rights ordinarily held by free persons.Jun 2, 2024.
If I understand your position all employers should pay wages that provide a high standard of living no matter what.
For me capitalism works with employers either making a profit & employing people or failing. Failure is often undone when a better business model replaces it in the market place.
 
Knight said:
slavery, condition in which one human being was owned by another. A slave was considered by law as property, or chattel, and was deprived of most of the rights ordinarily held by free persons.
Click to expand...

But it wasn’t the definition by which people were enslaved. It was the control of resources, of sticks and carrots, which enabled those who controlled the resources to keep human beings as chattel. So it may sound a little simplistic to call fast food workers slaves, but it still makes sense to ask why do people do that work for so little. It has been suggested that it is only transitional work for the young to do while their upkeep is still provided largely by their parents. But I’d it only young people employed in that profession? Seemingly not.

As a result we have a class of people whose work life is monopolized doing work which cannot be stretched to cover minimal requirements. It therefore falls to society as a whole to provide medical care out of the emergency room and to supplement the cost of food and shelter. It is certainly socialism, but who does it serve? Who is profiting? It is only the employers who benefit. The employees do not advance and the society made up of people who work for a living are being drained so that the employers may profit.

Slavery is just a word. It doesn’t look exactly like that but it is certainly exploitive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top