Topic: Entitlement Mentality - page 8. (Read 11684 times)

Once again, the poster boy for those who don't listen speaks.

1. If you're just plain bad and slow at your job, nobody is advocating any type of wage. But if you do your job well at, say fast food, for 40 hours a week, you deserve a decent wage. Such a job may not require a degree, but that doesn't mean it isn't work.

2. As for your arguments about raising the cost of burgers, that's dependent on how the business is structured, and there are businesses which pay a decent wage, make better burgers than the competition, and charge less. If you can't compete with those businesses, maybe you shouldn't be in business.

Completely different argument. You made a pure Employer-Employee contract argument.  If you don't do the job you're hired to do, you get fired.  That doesn't mean I don't pay you a reasonable wage to do the job when you do the job I hired you to do.

You can't negate the fact that the 1% controls the majority of the wealth in the world.  We aren't talking about redistribution, we are talking about supporting the base of the pyramid that the entire economy is built on.  If you don't take care of the foundation, the rest of the house will crumble.  The stronger the foundation, the bigger the house can be built.

Let me pose it differently.  If tomorrow McDonalds raised their wages and exceeded other fast food chains, would you still have the same argument that bums watching hentai and breaking bad all day worked there? Or would you instead be dealing with a higher class employee striving to get a job at the better paying McDonalds?

There is nothing wrong with paying employees more to do jobs, all it means is that there is an immediate reduction in profit margins for teh business and reduction in take home at the top tiers.  It is a better long term stance in terms of growing corporate profits through adding spending power to the consumer base.

I will never understand the comments about getting paid what you're worth.  The lowest levels of labor should get paid the lowest of wages, but those wages should be the bare minimum needed for food and shelter and wages should rise from there.  If you're workers can't survive, how can they continue working for you and further, how could your business continue to thrive?  It's again very simple economics.

To argue the alternative is to basically say, corporations are entitled to all the profits they make and owe no one anything.  The CEO's at the top should be able to take the chunk they want because they are at the top of the entity that deserves it all.  Clearly this is misleading, because corporations wouldn't have profits without consumers and they wouldn't have profits without workers providing their services or producing their goods.  Lose the economy, you lose the profits and the benefits of running a business.   Again, econ 101.

Lastly, consider that workers are paid because they are NEEDED by the company.  Do you really think you get hired at McDonalds to flip burgers because they are just looking to help you out?  It's a fair transfer and should have a mutual benefit for both parties involved, even if it requires low skilled labor. 

Won't be long until machines are able to replace many of the labors we do on a daily basis  I read an article this week about artificially generated beef, grown through stem cells.  So how far away are we from artificially grown beef, automated cooks and serving machines and a prerecorded voice taking your order at the drive thru?  Should be a super fun argument when we start debating labor and fair living wages then.

I would love to know how you arrived at that conclusion. Do you know what 'to negate' means?  I'm guessing not if you can take two posts that are totally independent of each other and use one to negate the other...

Asserting a strong opinion is typically a good way to evoke a strong response.  So what?

Be careful with your words. in a free market wages are generally a reflection of productivity but they are not proportionate since its very difficult to calculate the marginal utility of employes and even in the best of circumstances requires at least a little guess work. i hate to nitpick but i only do it because its better that you hear it from me than someone who is intellectual dishonest and might attempt to use it to disprove the thesis, which is sound.

My point exactly, your pay is always proportionate to how much you contribute to society, if all that you do is dig up a hole so that another group can fill it back up then you deserve nothing. The faulty logic of raising the minimum pay in order to "take care" of the minimum wage workers accomplishes nothing but add to unemployment and ultimately to their misery.

why? what if i do a piss poor job? what if my employer asks me to pick up all of the sticks in his yard and i walk at like 1/10th of a mile per hour. instead of picking up 10 sticks and carrying them to the bin i pick up 1 and carry it to the bin then walk back into the yard and pick up 1 more. what if my work is creating significantly less value than is required to sustain my person? why am i entitled to more compensation than my labor is worth? where is this money supposed to come from? it necessarily must come from someone elses surplus productivity, why does that person owe me anything?

its easy to make generalizations like "everyone is entitled to a living wage" but you have to remember that employers are not forced to hire people. if you raise the price of a thing people will purchase less of it. if grocery stores raise the price of peanuts people will purchase fewer peanuts. if the government raises the price of labor than people will purchase less of it.

consider that what you probably really want is for everyone to have their basic needs taken care of, i.e. food water clothing shelter. if this really what you want, like i suspect it is, than a minimum wage would only accomplish the opposite of this goal. sometimes the most destructive actions are taken unwittingly in the pursuit of noble ends, like supporting a minimum wage for the right reasons with out understanding the economics of the situation.

If I knew for a certainty that a man was coming to my house with the conscious design of doing me good, I should run for my life. -Henry David Thoreau

Not everyone is intelligent enough or motivated enough to start a business.  If they were, we would be chock full of businesses with no workers!  We need workers, don't fool yourself.  If you are a business owner, you understand the value of having employees and people under you.

Also, they are still bottom of the barrel.  So does that mean they do not deserve a living wage, even if they work 40 hours a week?  I fail to see your logic on whether they deserve it.  You deserve a living wage if you work, period.  If you do MORE work, start a business, provide more value to society, you deserve more than a living wage.  Pretty basic stuff.

If they have 100,000 US employees, and paid each of them an additional $1000/annually, that would amount to $100m in wage increases.  Their net income would fall from $5464million to $5364million.  You still don't think they can afford it?

Indeed, considering his immediate next post negated just about everything he said about himself in the previous.

Hmm.

I'm just not getting a hint of those illuminations here in this thread. Perhaps they are dimmer than you think?

Lol, yes, I did construct the OP in such a way that I figured it would bring some heated comments.  And you're right, that's exactly what I was looking for.

I admit I'm under-qualified on paper.

I believe I'm overqualified in terms of competence and ability.

And, in fact I actually did take a (voluntary) pay cut to the tune of about $5,000 in order to allow for extra money to be funneled directly towards patient care.  That $5,000 was (originally) specifically allotted for my salary.

Now, if I really wanted to brag or believed that I was some pinnacle of moral enlightenment, don't you think that might have been the first thing I said?  You should probably be feeling like a dumbass right about now.

I'm a very humble person and I don't like to brag about my skills, sacrifices, or accomplishments.  But, when you challenge my skills, my accomplishments, my intelligence, my conduct, or my professionalism in my field of work, I will illuminate your ignorance so you can see it a bit more clearly.

Pay who? Pay the low wage workers? Pay for what? They don't deserve it, if they wanted they could spend their time doing business instead of whacking it off to hentai and watching Breaking Bad or whatever teenagers are doing these days, their net income is 5464 million $ and they deserve every cent, taking even a dollar from their net income forcefully would reduce them to slavery.

Just in case you wondered what the financial situation of McDonalds is:

Total revenues: 27567 million $
Net income: 5464 million $
2012 Annual Report.pdf

Looks like they can afford to pay a little more.

You were responding to a comment that I'd made about inflation. If you were ignoring my comment and just repeating what you'd said before, you did not make that clear.

Go play in the corner with your strawman, I said no such thing.

Who is this "We" anyway? How many fast food restaurants do you own?  (I know I don't. Though I've worked in a couple).

Ah this entire thread is too good to pass up!  The OP was clearly enticing an argument, let's be clear on that.  He feels one way, provided little to no factual data to back up his argument, then invites an opinion.  Clearly it will not serve to convince you of anything.

Inflation = Basic function of economics.  As economies grow, as we add GDP and produce additional goods and services, as money supply increases, then the value of what you currently hold decreases in proportion to the goods and service available.  This is called inflation.  It is the same thing happening to your mining rigs as difficulty "inflates" and reduces the amount of "transactions" it can do proportion to the rest of the network.  So first point, this happens in every economy and is innate, it can't just be blamed on certain entities or people because there would be no growth if there was no inflation.

As the economy grows, those at the top are the ones who reap the largest reward.  Think of the economy as a giant pyramid full of workers at the bottom and Businesses at the top, followed by CEO's and Execs until the lower levels reach back into the basic workers at the bottom.  Revenues, product creation, services all start at the base level with the workers.  The revenues flow back to the business at the top, trickle down the CEO and Execs and through middle management till they reach the bottom of the pyramid.  The bottom produces the most but everything flows through the top first where the lions share is consumed by the business and corporations then passed on the top tier individuals and downward.

Now workers are producing all the product and through productivity they are growing the economy.  As the economy grows, what happens? That's right we get Inflation!  Yes, it's a sign we are doing well!  The problem is that the workers are not compensated for this growth in the economy, they are not paid wages based on inflation.  They are paid wages based on the box that they were originally hired into. Good bad or indifferent, that's their box.

Ultimately it falls on the corporations and leadership to make SURE that their profits and growth are actually passed on to the workers producing the goods and services.  

When the cost of living continues to rise and workers do not receive basic living increases, they are basically working themselves to achieve growth for someone else WHILE their standard of living decreases.  No one wants to be in that situation.

Whether these particular strikes are founded or not? The OP needs to provide more information.  Does McDonalds actually have 5-10% margins? On how much Revenue? How much is Top Brass being paid in comparison to their lower level employees?  What is the basic standard of living in the area?  

Fact of the matter is, corporations need to go back to the basics.  Better paid workers mean better paid consumers and equal higher corporate profits. So inflation continues to rise.... We need dynamic wages and income increases to keep up!

Have you considered asking for a pay cut? You did admit you're under qualified. Consider it.

Listen to how stupid this sounds--re read it.

You are basically saying we need to keep paying them $8.25/hr and deal with inflation and it will fix all inequality issues. You, sir, are a moron.

I never said inflation to be a good thing, I simply said raising the min. wage was a good thing for every PERSON. You're welcome to go re-read it again if you think I've said anything otherwise. Inflation is something the world has to deal with, not just the U.S., especially considering the global economy is technically tied to the U.S. dollar. This guy's discussion, however, is a social one, and is not necessarily tied down to inflation, so I'm not sure why you are obsessing about it.