Fast food workers vow civil disobedience

[Skjellyfetti]

Middle class wages have been stagnate for the last decade when adjusted for inflation.

So, your analogy doesn't really work.

[Chizzang]

It isn't so much pro-Walmart as it is being anti-government mandating things that don't address the issues. The truth is I avoid Walmart at every opportunity. But the ugly truth is Walmart is able to take advantage of an economy that isn't providing opportunity for better. If I thought for a minute that raising the minimum wage would actually help I would support it in a heart beat. More than likely it would provide Walmart with more incentive to treat their employees like crap.

I hope I don't come across that I'm all for minimum wage being artificially hiked by the government...
I agree with CID1990 artificial major spikes in minimum wage are the same as a perpetual motion machine

What I'm talking about is two-fold on this thread
1) Minimum wage workers have the right to unite and protest and more power to them
2) and Seriously investing in your employees has proven to be effective (see Costco & Starbucks)
and the 25 articles in Forbes magazine about those companies strategies to take low grade wage workers and empower them and invest in them and gain positive corporate growth from that strategy

in stark contrast to McDonalds and Wal-Mart's strategy of paying as low as legally possible and reducing hours to reduce benefits

There are two strategies for low grade grunt work in America
1) Wal-Mart and the like
2) Costco and the like

Both strategies have proven to be very effective / I like one more than the other

[CAA Flagship]

What the hell is wrong with you two?

What? You don't agree?

No, I don't agree that a middle class is not needed. A middle class is absolutely essential for America.

[OL FU]

It isn't so much pro-Walmart as it is being anti-government mandating things that don't address the issues. The truth is I avoid Walmart at every opportunity. But the ugly truth is Walmart is able to take advantage of an economy that isn't providing opportunity for better. If I thought for a minute that raising the minimum wage would actually help I would support it in a heart beat. More than likely it would provide Walmart with more incentive to treat their employees like crap.

I hope I don't come across that I'm all for minimum wage being artificially hiked by the government...
I agree with CID1990 artificial major spikes in minimum wage are the same as a perpetual motion machine

What I'm talking about is two-fold on this thread
1) Minimum wage workers have the right to unite and protest and more power to them
2) and Seriously investing in your employees has proven to be effective (see Costco & Starbucks)
and the 25 articles in Forbes magazine about those companies strategies to take low grade wage workers and empower them and invest in them and gain positive corporate growth from that strategy

in stark contrast to McDonalds and Wal-Mart's strategy of paying as low as legally possible and reducing hours to reduce benefits

There are two strategies for low grade grunt work in America
1) Wal-Mart and the like
2) Costco and the like

Both strategies have proven to be very effective / I like one more than the other

Actually, I agree and agree.

[Chizzang]

I hope I don't come across that I'm all for minimum wage being artificially hiked by the government...
I agree with CID1990 artificial major spikes in minimum wage are the same as a perpetual motion machine

What I'm talking about is two-fold on this thread
1) Minimum wage workers have the right to unite and protest and more power to them
2) and Seriously investing in your employees has proven to be effective (see Costco & Starbucks)
and the 25 articles in Forbes magazine about those companies strategies to take low grade wage workers and empower them and invest in them and gain positive corporate growth from that strategy

in stark contrast to McDonalds and Wal-Mart's strategy of paying as low as legally possible and reducing hours to reduce benefits

There are two strategies for low grade grunt work in America
1) Wal-Mart and the like
2) Costco and the like

Both strategies have proven to be very effective / I like one more than the other

Actually, I agree and agree.

Because you're a reasonable man (and I'm learning to be)

[Pwns]

I guess higher food prices don't have to be the end of a fast food chain. Five Guys has burgers that honestly IMO aren't any better than McDonalds' burgers (yeah, I said it ), but people eat that stuff up and they supposedly pay good wages. It's sort of like how you can fool people into thinking you've got a really good wine because it's expensive yet only people with the most sensitive noses will really be able to tell it's not really a fancy wine.

My question would be that if every fast food chain and retail store gets up to Five Guys and Costco prices will the minimum wage still leave people better off?

[Grizalltheway]

What? You don't agree?

No, I don't agree that a middle class is not needed. A middle class is absolutely essential for America.

Adjust your sarcasm detecter, Flaggy.

[houndawg]

I guess higher food prices don't have to be the end of a fast food chain. Five Guys has burgers that honestly IMO aren't any better than McDonalds' burgers (yeah, I said it ), but people eat that stuff up and they supposedly pay good wages. It's sort of like how you can fool people into thinking you've got a really good wine because it's expensive yet only people with the most sensitive noses will really be able to tell it's not really a fancy wine.

My question would be that if every fast food chain and retail store gets up to Five Guys and Costco prices will the minimum wage still leave people better off?

It will leave taxpayers better off.

[BDKJMU]

I guess higher food prices don't have to be the end of a fast food chain. Five Guys has burgers that honestly IMO aren't any better than McDonalds' burgers (yeah, I said it ), but people eat that stuff up and they supposedly pay good wages. It's sort of like how you can fool people into thinking you've got a really good wine because it's expensive yet only people with the most sensitive noses will really be able to tell it's not really a fancy wine.

My question would be that if every fast food chain and retail store gets up to Five Guys and Costco prices will the minimum wage still leave people better off?

It will leave taxpayers better off.

Not it won't because everything will cost more relatively, and you'll still have as many on the govt tit.

[Chizzang]

It will leave taxpayers better off.

Not it won't because everything will cost more relatively, and you'll still have as many on the govt tit.

Indeed, ^ this is the perpetual motion argument against BIG artificial wage hikes at the bottom...
And its a strong argument -but - one that we have never tested completely (to my knowledge)

The argument hinges entirely on one point
1) the absolute critical nature of the bottom wage earners ability to swing the entire economy

And if that is indeed true - that the lowest rung of the employment ladder can actually swing the entire economy / if they are indeed THAT IMPORTANT to the entire system then why are we so quick to dismiss them in all other discussions about the economy - and if they are that important why do we treat them so flippantly, so harshly..?

I'm still honestly trying to figure out which perspective is the most accurate

[BDKJMU]

Not it won't because everything will cost more relatively, and you'll still have as many on the govt tit.

Indeed, ^ this is the perpetual motion argument against BIG artificial wage hikes at the bottom...
And its a strong argument -but - one that we have never tested completely (to my knowledge)

The argument hinges entirely on one point
1) the absolute critical nature of the bottom wage earners ability to swing the entire economy

And if that is indeed true - that the lowest rung of the employment ladder can actually swing the entire economy / if they are indeed THAT IMPORTANT to the entire system then why are we so quick to dismiss them in all other discussions about the economy - and if they are that important why do we treat them so flippantly, so harshly..?

I'm still honestly trying to figure out which perspective is the most accurate

If the minimum wage is raised by several dollars an hr, then those making minimum wage will get a raise to match those making several dollars above old minimum wage. But then those that had been making several dollars above the old minimum wage, the same as the new higher minimum wage, will also want a raise to still be several dollars above the new minimum wage, say double the old minimum wage. Then those who had been making double the old minimum wage will want a raise so that they are still double the new minimum wage. And so on and so on and so on. Then at some places salaried who were making a little more than the highest hourly but are no longer so are going to want a raise. Then the salaried above them will want a raise. And many union wage scales are tied to the min wage. Raise the fed minimum, raise entire union wage scales. Course all of this will cost the taxpayers more $$ with higher paid govt employees and higher cost public works projects. And when the costs of most goods and services go up, the same people will be calling for another higher min wage, and around and around we go.

I got a better idea- just let the market dictate what wages will be.

[Chizzang]

Indeed, ^ this is the perpetual motion argument against BIG artificial wage hikes at the bottom...
And its a strong argument -but - one that we have never tested completely (to my knowledge)

The argument hinges entirely on one point
1) the absolute critical nature of the bottom wage earners ability to swing the entire economy

And if that is indeed true - that the lowest rung of the employment ladder can actually swing the entire economy / if they are indeed THAT IMPORTANT to the entire system then why are we so quick to dismiss them in all other discussions about the economy - and if they are that important why do we treat them so flippantly, so harshly..?

I'm still honestly trying to figure out which perspective is the most accurate

If the minimum wage is raised by several dollars an hr, then those making minimum wage will get a raise to match those making several dollars above old minimum wage. But then those that had been making several dollars above the old minimum wage, the same as the new higher minimum wage, will also want a raise to still be several dollars above the new minimum wage, say double the old minimum wage. Then those who had been making double the old minimum wage will want a raise so that they are still double the new minimum wage. And so on and so on and so on. Then at some places salaried who were making a little more than the highest hourly but are no longer so are going to want a raise. Then the salaried above them will want a raise. And many union wage scales are tied to the min wage. Raise the fed minimum, raise entire union wage scales. Course all of this will cost the taxpayers more $$ with higher paid govt employees and higher cost public works projects. And when the costs of most goods and services go up, the same people will be calling for another higher min wage, and around and around we go.

I got a better idea- just let the market dictate what wages will be.

That's a fairly convoluted little story... but okay "I'll bite" So if you really believe that
You say: if the minimum wage goes up 2 or 3 dollars the entire free market will go haywire

but do you then agree that minimum wage workers should be allowed to organize and fight for higher wages through acts of civil disobedience and protest..?

I'm curious...

[JohnStOnge]

Middle class wages have been stagnate for the last decade when adjusted for inflation.

So, your analogy doesn't really work.

Yes I know the left carefully chooses it's language and uses the term "wages" instead of using the term "income." It'd be interesting to see how they define "wages." But people earn money in ways other than wages.

Average income for each of the three middle quintiles increased over the final three 10 years of the period described in the most recent CBO report (2001 - 2010). Here's how it went in inflation adjusted terms:

Second quintile (20th - 40th percentile) 2001 $37,700, 2010 $41,000 (up 9%)
Third quintile (40th - 60th percentile) 2001 $53,800, 2010 $57,900 (up 8%)
Fourth quintile (60th - 80th percentile ) 2001 $73,500, 2010 $80,600 (up 10%)

Now, incomes did decline in inflation adjusted terms during 2008 through 2010. I don't think that should be a surprise to anyone given what was going on. But the fact remains that over the long term, when looking at things in the context of what people perceive as being the glory days of the American Middle Class, the trend has been towards the Middle Class having higher incomes as time when on and even with the 2008 - 2010 decline those incomes are still much higher than they were during those glory days.

[houndawg]

Middle class wages have been stagnate for the last decade when adjusted for inflation.

So, your analogy doesn't really work.

Yes I know the left carefully chooses it's language and uses the term "wages" instead of using the term "income." It'd be interesting to see how they define "wages." But people earn money in ways other than wages.

Average income for each of the three middle quintiles increased over the final three 10 years of the period described in the most recent CBO report (2001 - 2010). Here's how it went in inflation adjusted terms:

Second quintile (20th - 40th percentile) 2001 $37,700, 2010 $41,000 (up 9%)
Third quintile (40th - 60th percentile) 2001 $53,800, 2010 $57,900 (up 8%)
Fourth quintile (60th - 80th percentile ) 2001 $73,500, 2010 $80,600 (up 10%)

Now, incomes did decline in inflation adjusted terms during 2008 through 2010. I don't think that should be a surprise to anyone given what was going on. But the fact remains that over the long term, when looking at things in the context of what people perceive as being the glory days of the American Middle Class, the trend has been towards the Middle Class having higher incomes as time when on and even with the 2008 - 2010 decline those incomes are still much higher than they were during those glory days.

Incomes may be higher John, and that's nice and all, but the decline of the middle class is about much more than income. Its about kids having to take out a mortgage to go to college in spite of that increase in income. It's about the cost of daycare and how much it takes out of that middle-class income that requires both parents working full time all the time and not being home when school lets out. Stuff like that John. Under the numbers. Most folk here didn't experience the American middle class when it was the envy of the world and the sky was the limit even if your parents were school teachers and construction workers. As usual you've focused on the wrong metrics. It's about how you live, John, not your income. It really is.

[Baldy]

Yes I know the left carefully chooses it's language and uses the term "wages" instead of using the term "income." It'd be interesting to see how they define "wages." But people earn money in ways other than wages.

Average income for each of the three middle quintiles increased over the final three 10 years of the period described in the most recent CBO report (2001 - 2010). Here's how it went in inflation adjusted terms:

Second quintile (20th - 40th percentile) 2001 $37,700, 2010 $41,000 (up 9%)
Third quintile (40th - 60th percentile) 2001 $53,800, 2010 $57,900 (up 8%)
Fourth quintile (60th - 80th percentile ) 2001 $73,500, 2010 $80,600 (up 10%)

Now, incomes did decline in inflation adjusted terms during 2008 through 2010. I don't think that should be a surprise to anyone given what was going on. But the fact remains that over the long term, when looking at things in the context of what people perceive as being the glory days of the American Middle Class, the trend has been towards the Middle Class having higher incomes as time when on and even with the 2008 - 2010 decline those incomes are still much higher than they were during those glory days.

Incomes may be higher John, and that's nice and all, but the decline of the middle class is about much more than income. Its about kids having to take out a mortgage to go to college in spite of that increase in income. It's about the cost of daycare and how much it takes out of that middle-class income that requires both parents working full time all the time and not being home when school lets out. Stuff like that John. Under the numbers. Most folk here didn't experience the American middle class when it was the envy of the world and the sky was the limit even if your parents were school teachers and construction workers. As usual you've focused on the wrong metrics. It's about how you live, John, not your income. It really is.

Being home when school lets out? That's so...so...so...traditional.
Be careful houndy or they're gonna take away your "progressive" card.

It all goes hand in hand. It's the proliferation of the education industrial complex.

[houndawg]

Incomes may be higher John, and that's nice and all, but the decline of the middle class is about much more than income. Its about kids having to take out a mortgage to go to college in spite of that increase in income. It's about the cost of daycare and how much it takes out of that middle-class income that requires both parents working full time all the time and not being home when school lets out. Stuff like that John. Under the numbers. Most folk here didn't experience the American middle class when it was the envy of the world and the sky was the limit even if your parents were school teachers and construction workers. As usual you've focused on the wrong metrics. It's about how you live, John, not your income. It really is.

Being home when school lets out? That's so...so...so...traditional.
Be careful houndy or they're gonna take away your "progressive" card.

It all goes hand in hand. It's the proliferation of the education industrial complex.

Its the proliferation of all of the industrial complexes.

[BDKJMU]

If the minimum wage is raised by several dollars an hr, then those making minimum wage will get a raise to match those making several dollars above old minimum wage. But then those that had been making several dollars above the old minimum wage, the same as the new higher minimum wage, will also want a raise to still be several dollars above the new minimum wage, say double the old minimum wage. Then those who had been making double the old minimum wage will want a raise so that they are still double the new minimum wage. And so on and so on and so on. Then at some places salaried who were making a little more than the highest hourly but are no longer so are going to want a raise. Then the salaried above them will want a raise. And many union wage scales are tied to the min wage. Raise the fed minimum, raise entire union wage scales. Course all of this will cost the taxpayers more $$ with higher paid govt employees and higher cost public works projects. And when the costs of most goods and services go up, the same people will be calling for another higher min wage, and around and around we go.

I got a better idea- just let the market dictate what wages will be.

That's a fairly convoluted little story... but okay "I'll bite" So if you really believe that
You say: if the minimum wage goes up 2 or 3 dollars the entire free market will go haywire

but do you then agree that minimum wage workers should be allowed to organize and fight for higher wages through acts of civil disobedience and protest..?

I'm curious...

No, I say if you raise the min wage $2-$3 an hr it will add to inflation, above what it otherwise would have been, and it 6-8 years from later we'll be right back to where we started. But I wouldn't call it haywire.

[BDKJMU]

Yes I know the left carefully chooses it's language and uses the term "wages" instead of using the term "income." It'd be interesting to see how they define "wages." But people earn money in ways other than wages.

Average income for each of the three middle quintiles increased over the final three 10 years of the period described in the most recent CBO report (2001 - 2010). Here's how it went in inflation adjusted terms:

Second quintile (20th - 40th percentile) 2001 $37,700, 2010 $41,000 (up 9%)
Third quintile (40th - 60th percentile) 2001 $53,800, 2010 $57,900 (up 8%)
Fourth quintile (60th - 80th percentile ) 2001 $73,500, 2010 $80,600 (up 10%)

Now, incomes did decline in inflation adjusted terms during 2008 through 2010. I don't think that should be a surprise to anyone given what was going on. But the fact remains that over the long term, when looking at things in the context of what people perceive as being the glory days of the American Middle Class, the trend has been towards the Middle Class having higher incomes as time when on and even with the 2008 - 2010 decline those incomes are still much higher than they were during those glory days.

Incomes may be higher John, and that's nice and all, but the decline of the middle class is about much more than income. Its about kids having to take out a mortgage to go to college in spite of that increase in income. It's about the cost of daycare and how much it takes out of that middle-class income that requires both parents working full time all the time and not being home when school lets out. Stuff like that John. Under the numbers. Most folk here didn't experience the American middle class when it was the envy of the world and the sky was the limit even if your parents were school teachers and construction workers. As usual you've focused on the wrong metrics. It's about how you live, John, not your income. It really is.

The fault of the colleges for continually jacking up tuition, room & board faster than inflation, every time the govt raises subsidized loan and grant amounts, and people continuing to fork over the $$, going close to or over 6 figures in debt, esp for a liberal arts degree. Can't afford 4 years of college at a private school? Go public. Can'r afford 4 years at a public? Do 2 at a local CC while living at home with mommy & daddy CC & then transfer in. Or seek out another option like a stint in the military & have GI Bill or join AmeriCoprs & get $$ for education.

As far as both parents having to work, that is due to 2 things.
-Govt overtaxation
-Keeping up with the Joneses: big houses, multiple big screen HDTVs, high speed internet, smart phones, nice cars, nice clothes, eating out, vacations, lawn services, maid services, etc, etc, etc.

[houndawg]

Incomes may be higher John, and that's nice and all, but the decline of the middle class is about much more than income. Its about kids having to take out a mortgage to go to college in spite of that increase in income. It's about the cost of daycare and how much it takes out of that middle-class income that requires both parents working full time all the time and not being home when school lets out. Stuff like that John. Under the numbers. Most folk here didn't experience the American middle class when it was the envy of the world and the sky was the limit even if your parents were school teachers and construction workers. As usual you've focused on the wrong metrics. It's about how you live, John, not your income. It really is.

The fault of the colleges for continually jacking up tuition, room & board faster than inflation, every time the govt raises subsidized loan and grant amounts, and people continuing to fork over the $$, going close to or over 6 figures in debt, esp for a liberal arts degree. Can't afford 4 years of college at a private school? Go public. Can'r afford 4 years at a public? Do 2 at a local CC while living at home with mommy & daddy CC & then transfer in. Or seek out another option like a stint in the military & have GI Bill or join AmeriCoprs & get $$ for education.

As far as both parents having to work, that is due to 2 things.
-Govt overtaxation
-Keeping up with the Joneses: big houses, multiple big screen HDTVs, high speed internet, smart phones, nice cars, nice clothes, eating out, vacations, lawn services, maid services, etc, etc, etc.

The overtaxation of me and you is because we have to pick up more of the subsidies for the big boys.

Privatize the profits, socialize the costs.

[CAA Flagship]

Aaaaaaand, they're off!!!!!

Arrests start in fast-food worker strike

http://money.cnn.com/2014/09/04/news/co ... ahoo_quote" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ibanez]

It's begun, locally at a Taco Bell and a Burger King. They are sitting in the streets.

[Chizzang]

How could any red blooded American not love this..?
Frankly I find it exciting - it resides at the very foundation of our country
The right to organize and peacefully protest

[AZGrizFan]

I guess higher food prices don't have to be the end of a fast food chain. Five Guys has burgers that honestly IMO aren't any better than McDonalds' burgers (yeah, I said it ), but people eat that stuff up and they supposedly pay good wages. It's sort of like how you can fool people into thinking you've got a really good wine because it's expensive yet only people with the most sensitive noses will really be able to tell it's not really a fancy wine.

My question would be that if every fast food chain and retail store gets up to Five Guys and Costco prices will the minimum wage still leave people better off?

It will leave taxpayers better off.

Hows that? By having another 300k-400k on unemployment after they're fired because of wage inflation?

[CAA Flagship]

How could any red blooded American not love this..?
Frankly I find it exciting - it resides at the very foundation of our country
The right to organize and peacefully protest

Peacefully protest you say?

There were 19 arrests Thursday morning for obstructing traffic outside of a McDonald's in New York's Times Square.

But that number is expected to grow after a midday protest outside another McDonald's (MCD)a few blocks away.

"There have been more arrests since this morning," said Detective Marc Nell of the New York Police Department.

In Detroit, police said 30 people were detained outside a McDonald's, with 24 of them being ticketed for disorderly conduct and six people arrested for outstanding traffic warrants.

In Chicago, police said 19 people were detained and ticketed for standing in the roadway near a McDonald's.

In Milwaukee, police said 27 people were arrested and cited for disorderly conduct related to disrupting traffic outside a McDonald's.

[AZGrizFan]

The fault of the colleges for continually jacking up tuition, room & board faster than inflation, every time the govt raises subsidized loan and grant amounts, and people continuing to fork over the $$, going close to or over 6 figures in debt, esp for a liberal arts degree. Can't afford 4 years of college at a private school? Go public. Can'r afford 4 years at a public? Do 2 at a local CC while living at home with mommy & daddy CC & then transfer in. Or seek out another option like a stint in the military & have GI Bill or join AmeriCoprs & get $$ for education.

As far as both parents having to work, that is due to 2 things.
-Govt overtaxation
-Keeping up with the Joneses: big houses, multiple big screen HDTVs, high speed internet, smart phones, nice cars, nice clothes, eating out, vacations, lawn services, maid services, etc, etc, etc.

The overtaxation of me and you is because we have to pick up more of the subsidies for the big boys.

Privatize the profits, socialize the costs.

Yeah. It has nothing to do with the explosion of individuals on the government dole. It's all about the big bad corporations. We get it.