Topic: Entitlement Mentality - page 6. (Read 11684 times)

I've weighed my statement against yours, and I found more truth in mine. See here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2893060


I suggest you seek studies on the cost of living for various geographical regions instead of asking me. I submit that it is greater than minimum wage. I made no claim as to what the exact amount is. Likewise, I suggest you defer to consumer reports or other journalistic reports regarding the appeal of In-n-Out burgers over your own misguided conclusion based on zero experience.

The topic is wages. Quality of food is subjective, and a straw man you added to the discussion. We have also already established that you don't understand business or economics, so why are you contributing to that subject?


Define livable? I don't mean feel-good buzzwords. How do you actually figure out what to put down on paper? You have mentioned something about time being important, something about hard work needing to be rewarded, and some other feely subjective things. How about you bring it all together and tell us what a livable wage is, how it might be different in different economic environments around the country, or why someone who wants or needs the job, and is willing to earn less for it,should be prevented from doing so?

Something approaching livable.

We've already established that you have no experience with In-n-Out. Why are you even contributing on this subject?

Feel free to keep ignoring how you would establish what a "fair wage" is by the way.

OK, let's compare McDonald's at Downtown Disney to any In-n-Out in the whole country (I am actually being fair, because McDonald's in Italy and Germany is WAY better than here).

Sales per store: McDonalds wins hands down. That place is packed from early morning to late evening with huge lines.
Ratings: Likely a tie. That McD's uses the best quality ingredients and has impeccable service
Worker happiness: No clue. Those McD's workers live in Florida, right next to Disney, work in a high quality wealthy area, and get somewhere around $10+ an hour.
Freshness of food: tie for that location
Price per volume: In-n-Out wins. That McD's is very expensive
Earnings per store: Pretty sure almost every McDonalds store earns more than any In-n-Out. The one in Downtown Disney earns more than most other McDonald's.

Final result: You can make up any conclusion if you are selective in what you compare.
Bottom line is, McDonald's bottom line trumps In-n-Out's bottom line.

Maybe because they're where better places are not?

Compare sales per store. Compare ratings. Compare worker happiness. Compare freshness of food. Compare prices per volume of food received. Compare earnings per store.

The argument was on what is a better business. I do not care whatsoever what people think the quality is. McDonald's is more successful and cheaper. Also, how does McDonald's rank lowest if it's the most popular, I wonder?

Strawmothafuckinman

My opinion actually matters because I've eaten at both restaurants. You've admitted that you have not eaten at In-n-Out. Given that, you might consider that my opinion carries more weight than yours.

And you might want to factor in this:

http://consumerist.com/2011/06/30/science-confirms-in-n-out-burger-is-the-best-and-mcdonalds-the-worst/

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/07/02/in-n-out-v-mcdonalds-which-burger-chain-has-been-deemed-superior/

http://voices.yahoo.com/in-n-out-vs-mcdonalds-337393.html

http://blogs.wsj.com/independentstreet/2009/01/28/in-n-out-burger-vs-mcdonalds-guess-who-won/

But I guess you guys think you know better because it's important to save face with your arguments.

Stop being a bunch of dumbfucks.

That's your opinion.

Earlier, I said to name a company that was cheaper but more efficient. You failed to find one. McDonald's is the cheapest as far as I know and it's certainly one of if not the most successful fast food chain. I like McDonald's food better, but opinions don't matter. Perhaps you are uninformed if you think that your opinion is evidence for an argument.

Sorry, but to me, a cheeseburger is a cheeseburger. The only difference is how thick the beef is. Besides, this is irrelevant. Stop avoiding the issue, and answer why someone who wants a job more than someone else should be prevented from getting it, or how something as nebulous and undefined as "decent" and "good" can be narrowed down to a specific number?

So what?


No, you can't, since you've compared it to a McDonald's cheeseburger in two separate threads. See here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2893060

I've eaten at McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, Hardee's, Checkers, Fudruckers, Rally's, Red Robin, and a few others. I can pretty damn well guess what kind of burger In-n-Out offers. If you don't want shitty McDonald's burger, you can still get a good burger for $3 at McD's, plus a buck for fries and soda, and it'll still be about the same. No, it won't be as fresh, but you'll have more than just cheese and beef on it.



Yes, I am making the argument that McDonald's is able to employ more people, in a wider range of areas, than In-n-Out. The fact that there are barely any In-n-Outs out there compared to McDonald's supports that claim. If you wish to refute or explain away the facts to answer why there are way fewer In-n-Outs, I'm all ears.
Also, please answer the question: How will you determine what is a "decent wage" and what is the actual number?


No, you got it backwards and wrong. You are the one desperately trying to show that businesses can afford to pay a lot more. I am trying to show that it's not up to the businesses. Businesses are offering work for whatever people are willing to take it for. If someone is willing to take the job for less, because they need it more, they are not prevented from doing it. Also, different McDonald's charge different prices and pay different wages depending on where they are. A BigMac meal in Downtown Disney, Orlando, FL can cost almost $10, and the wages are much higher, because it is a much wealthier and more affluent area. How do you set a wage level while still accounting for these differences?

Yes, and it's better tasting than McDonald's, too.  You have a serious problem with inference.  I want a McD's burger because it's cheaper and more nostalgic, and all I have to tell them is "no pickles."

You read way, way, way too much into stuff, find things that aren't there, then turn those imaginary things into the context of your argument (you are the straw GOD!).

I'd take a $1 McD's burger over a $2 In 'n Out burger any day.  I always have to remove tons of crap I don't like from In'n Out burgers.

A McDouble doesn't compare. Stop pulling from Rassah's uninformed playbook.

Since we've had this conversation before, I know the following:

You've never eaten at In-n-Out, and nobody but someone who has never eaten at In-n-Out makes a fool of themselves comparing a McDonald's 99 cent cheeseburger to anything In-n-Out offers. Please stop offering your opinion on this matter.


Still not getting it, are you? In-n-Out employs about the same number of employees per lunch served as other fast food restaurants, but pays more. Therefore, it appears you're trying to make the argument that if other restaurants adopted a model such as In-n-Out, there would be less jobs for burger flippers.

Here's some advice, since you desperately want to show that businesses can't afford to pay more: look at the various fast food business models, and see where they're wasting money and why they're wasting money.

By the way, McDonald's is a corporation, but as a corporation it owns very few stores directly. It's actually mostly a corporate franchise, where individual franchise owners set up a restaurant, pay royaltees (franchise fees) to the corporation, and in exchange get marketing materials and contracts for products (food/ingredients). So the reason that there are so many McDonaldses around isn't because the corporation is being inefficient, sticking them everywhere, it's because individuals think that a McDonald's in some piece of land will be good business, and open it up themselves. Sometimes they are wrong, and it turns out to be a bad investment. Likewise, McDonald's owners hire local people to work in their restaurant for whatever wage they will accept. They want lower wage employees because it costs a few million to open up a franchise (close to $6 I think), and they need to make their investment back. So, if you force minimum wages to be higher, it won't be profitable to upen, or run, McDonaldses in various places. Good is that there may be fewer McDonald's around. Bad is that there will be fewer jobs for poor unskilled workers.