|
If it makes it through the legislature, is Brown gonna sign or veto? I hate to ask the question but after his prison shenanigans...
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:31 |
|
|
FCKGW posted:Also the manager of an In-N-Out store makes 6 figures
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:If it makes it through the legislature, is Brown gonna sign or veto? I hate to ask the question but after his prison shenanigans... Of course Governor Moonbeam is actually powered by GOP tears: quote:“This legislation is overdue and will help families that are struggling in this harsh economy,” Brown said in a statement. CA pretty much exists to call the bluff of GOP states such as showing the better parts of Obamacare will work out fine, Medicaid expansion is the right thing to do and also show increasing the minimum wage to $10/hr will not cause the economy to collapse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:If it requires a full day of work you should be able to live off of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
Hopefully, California will eventually index it to cost of living like Oregon and Washington state. There was some talk of Seattle pushing for a living wage of $15, man it would be great if it could happen in Portland.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 06:31
|
|
|
Miss-Bomarc posted:I remember when McJobs were a bad thing, when they were proof that Republican idiocy had permanently damaged the economic makeup of America, when it was horrific to think that someone would have a multi-year full-time career as a fast-food worker. They seem to be the only potential source of Unionization (and there is absolutely zero way they are ever being outsourced) these days so work with what you've got.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 13:41
|
|
|
Miss-Bomarc posted:I remember when McJobs were a bad thing, when they were proof that Republican idiocy had permanently damaged the economic makeup of America, when it was horrific to think that someone would have a multi-year full-time career as a fast-food worker. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you. Are you advocating paying fast food workers less than a living wage as a way to incentivize them to get "better" jobs or something?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
GrumpyDoctor posted:Maybe I'm misunderstanding you. Are you advocating paying fast food workers less than a living wage as a way to incentivize them to get "better" jobs or something? If you want to say "gently caress that, fast food jobs are the only ones left" that's fine, and I can't completely disagree, but it's also a measure of how far our attitudes have changed regarding low-skill or low-education workers. "A McJob is all that you can hope for" is not exactly the most inspiring rallying cry.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
Miss-Bomarc posted:"A McJob is all that you can hope for" is not exactly the most inspiring rallying cry. Raising the minimum wage doesn't send this message, it says that if you are working full time, you deserve to earn enough to live (and maybe even help support a family.) People will still want to get out of McJobs because they're lovely to work at even if they paid $50/hour, the incentive to get a better job is not being removed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
computer parts posted:They seem to be the only potential source of Unionization (and there is absolutely zero way they are ever being outsourced) these days so work with what you've got. That said, I agree with the notion that people working lovely low-value jobs should try to get more useful ones that pay more, but there are 2 problems with that: First, education costs largely fall on individuals, so paying them poorly makes the problem of them being unqualified worse. Second, even if that's resolved, the availability of "good" jobs is already limited to the point that many of them are asking for severe levels of overqualification to get in, so there probably aren't enough "good" jobs available even if we replace all menial labor with robots. As it stands, lovely worker pay isn't an outcome of the low job value though, it's an outcome of compensation structures shifting an ever-larger share of money up the management chain and out to investors despite the questionable returns (i.e. as Warren Buffett put it, nobody wants to be in the bottom 25% of CEO pay, but somebody must be in the bottom 25% of performance, and investor returns has as much to do with how much capital they've accumulated as it does how good they are).
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:Saying we need lovely jobs so we can have unions to fight back against lovely jobs is a bit circular. The only problem with lovely jobs in general is that they generally don't compensate you well enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
The lovely jobs do and will continue to exist, because some types of work are both needed and really crap to do. I put agricultural labor at the top of that list and fast food work well below, but there are plenty of other crappy jobs, too. These jobs pay enough to attract labor. So, on the face of it, they pay "enough". A big problem with the above statement, though, is that the wages of these jobs are so low that the taxpayer has to subsidize the work; directly through food stamps, welfare, tax credits, subsidized housing, subsidized health care, publicly-funded emergency rooms at hospitals, publicly-funded public transportation networks primarily utilized by the poor; and indirectly through the high costs of law enforcement and criminal justice (poverty being a major driver of crime), higher rates of transmitted disease (poverty being a major driver of poor health), and more. (Another problem with the statement is that if there are more workers than jobs, obviously people will fill all the jobs even if they do not pay "enough," because any work is better than no work.) To my mind a major point of raising minimum wages is to shift the actual burden of supporting low-wage workers back towards their employers, and by the transitive property, those employers' customers and/or stockholders. E.g., when you buy a hamburger you should have to pay the cost of supporting the guy making the hamburgers, rather than having a large portion of that cost underwritten by taxpayers. If working a 40 hour week for minimum wage provided enough income to keep someone above the poverty line, the costs to everyone would be far less. There is also an ethical argument to be made about wage-slavery and exploitation of the disadvantaged, but ethical arguments are harder to win. It seems to me that a conservative voter is more likely to be convinced a higher minimum wage is needed if you make an economics argument about the cost to taxpayers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
Miss-Bomarc posted:Welcome to the new economy, where fast food service is expected to be a viable career path. http://www.alternet.org/economy/obama-legacy-income-inequality quote:New research from inequality experts Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez has revealed that we now have the biggest gap between the rich and rest of America since economists began tracking data a century ago.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 21:37
|
|
|
Basically the same people who got a bailout or profited from the 2009 meltdown now get to buy the whole state at discount to build a new property bubble. It's so dumb to see how yet again the whole state economy is geared towards appreciation not affordability.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2013 23:02
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The only problem with lovely jobs in general is that they generally don't compensate you well enough. That said, the problem with "McJobs" isn't just the compensation, it's also that they're deliberately as specific and devoid of responsibilities as possible, which makes them dead-ends for advancement, completely disposable, and obliterates opportunities for employees to meaningfully contribute to the business.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 01:13
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:Let me rephrase then: It's stupid to say "at least the people getting a raw deal at their job will help union recruitment" when union recruitment mostly an end to the means of not getting a raw deal at their job. What more meaningful contribution could there be to a fast food joint than preparing and serving the food?
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:What more meaningful contribution could there be to a fast food joint than preparing and serving the food? Marketing, management, business development... I could go on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Marketing, management, business development... I could go on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 02:19
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Marketing, management, business development... I could go on. Think about it like this: when you start a restaurant, what do you hire and train first? Marketing/management/business development or the people who are actually providing the goods you are selling? OneEightHundred posted:That said, the problem with "McJobs" isn't just the compensation, it's also that they're deliberately as specific and devoid of responsibilities as possible, which makes them dead-ends for advancement, completely disposable, and obliterates opportunities for employees to meaningfully contribute to the business. Under that perspective, maybe the issue isn't just trying to meaningfully contribute to the restaurant, but actually paying the people as if they were. If a day's worth of work is not enough to pay for your family, then you can't possibly be paying enough for people to care about their work. Pigasus fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Sep 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:What more meaningful contribution could there be to a fast food joint than preparing and serving the food? Clearly a position where an individual can shine and differentiate themselves from the herd.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 03:02
|
|
|
Human beings are not a herd, though?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 03:13
|
|
|
Fast-food employees are.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 03:57
|
|
|
All Of The Dicks posted:Human beings are not a herd, though?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:You are incredibly and exactly wrong. Have fun marketing and managing your food-less restaurant. Have fun wasting money preparing and cooking food for nobody. Pigasus posted:Think about it like this: when you start a restaurant, what do you hire and train first? Just because you hire and train a group of workers first does not mean they are making the "most meaningful" contribution. That's a hilariously short-sighted way of looking at things. I mean, gently caress, have you ever worked at a fast-food restaurant? Because let me tell you: when you're cooking food in the back or serving it to people's tables it sure as hell doesn't feel like you're doing anything "meaningful." You're just there as an easily replaceable cog and that's it. I say that as someone who has been through it all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 04:33
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Have fun wasting money preparing and cooking food for nobody. Everyone is replaceable. From the CEO to the cashier, no one can't be replaced.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 04:45
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Everyone is replaceable. From the CEO to the cashier, no one can't be replaced. the CEO gets a better deal when replaced.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 04:55
|
|
etalian posted:the CEO gets a better deal when replaced. Yes, you've identified one of the problems.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Everyone is replaceable. From the CEO to the cashier, no one can't be replaced. Correct. The question is the difficulty of replacing someone, which is determined by how much skill their work requires to perform and how much economic value they add to the organization.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Just because you hire and train a group of workers first does not mean they are making the "most meaningful" contribution. That's a hilariously short-sighted way of looking at things. I mean, gently caress, have you ever worked at a fast-food restaurant? Because let me tell you: when you're cooking food in the back or serving it to people's tables it sure as hell doesn't feel like you're doing anything "meaningful." You're just there as an easily replaceable cog and that's it. I say that as someone who has been through it all. Thanks for the life lesson about fast food work, but I'm guessing my point was lost here. What I was trying to say is that people doing the grunt work should not feel or be treated like they're useless or the "easily replaceable cog". Replacing them takes time and effort in terms of finding someone new and training them to meet standards. However, when these people are being paid below living wages and they're being treated like they're not worth the money to have a decent standard of living in society, then anybody would feel like an "easily replaceable cog" no matter how much upward mobility the job would have. This is true for any kind of worker, fast food to white collar office work. I'm not sure why this turned into a discussion about who does the most meaningful work for a fast food company when the real issue at hand is how low minimum wage is and how people can't unionize to work towards fixing these kinds of problems.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
withak posted:Fast-food employees are. Perhaps we could minimize costs by keeping them in pens, and slaughtering them when they have outlived their usefulness.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 05:59
|
|
|
All Of The Dicks posted:Perhaps we could minimize costs by keeping them in pens, and slaughtering them when they have outlived their usefulness. Ok but this was your idea, not mine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 06:06
|
|
|
Have you seen this awesome show called Undercover Boss?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 07:50
|
|
|
We should just nationalize all fast food chains, replace all the workers with robots, and then just pay everyone some minimum income like 50k/year or whatever. Done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 11:26
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:You are incredibly and exactly wrong. Have fun marketing and managing your food-less restaurant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
Pigasus posted:Thanks for the life lesson about fast food work, but I'm guessing my point was lost here. What I was trying to say is that people doing the grunt work should not feel or be treated like they're useless or the "easily replaceable cog". Replacing them takes time and effort in terms of finding someone new and training them to meet standards. However, when these people are being paid below living wages and they're being treated like they're not worth the money to have a decent standard of living in society, then anybody would feel like an "easily replaceable cog" no matter how much upward mobility the job would have. This is true for any kind of worker, fast food to white collar office work. I'm not sure if you fully grasp the logic here. Them being paid little is not what is making them feel like easily replaceable cogs. They are being paid little because they are easily replaceable cogs. The pizza shop under my apartment had a sign yesterday morning that said "experienced pizza cooks wanted." Do you know how long the sign stayed there? 4 hours. If someone can find your replacement in under 4 hours, guess how much they are going to pay you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
So apparently in San Diego you guys have a part Native Alaskan, part Filipino, part Puerto Rican interim mayor who is also openly gay? And, according to Roll Call, he may replace his mentor in the 53rd Congressional District? Why don't you share that political good fortune with the rest of the states, especially us red-staters?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Have fun wasting money preparing and cooking food for nobody. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:Yeah no one eats "food" without some business vampire eating money at the top of the enterprise. You must have never seen a fast-food joint that opens, remains empty 24/7 because nobody has heard about it and therefore trusts it, and then goes out of business. Honestly it is by far the most common reason newly opened restaurants go bankrupt: the "open it and they will come, because everyone needs food, right?" mentality just does not work. The only exception is nationally recognized fast-food chains. And guess why those are successful: because there are "business vampires" at the top of the enterprise marking the poo poo out of the business. People have heard about Chipotle because of ads on TV and the Internet, not because of their master chefs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
Gygaxian posted:So apparently in San Diego you guys have a part Native Alaskan, part Filipino, part Puerto Rican interim mayor who is also openly gay? And, according to Roll Call, he may replace his mentor in the 53rd Congressional District? That only happened because their former mayor was such an inordinate scumbag that his actions were inexcusable for San Diegans. And san diegans have had some corrupt motherfuckers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:31 |
|
|
FilthyImp posted:That only happened because their former mayor was such an inordinate scumbag that his actions were inexcusable for San Diegans. And san diegans have had some corrupt motherfuckers. It seems to be a revolving door job given all the career ending scandals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2013 01:46
|
|