McDonald's Literally Cannot Imagine How Its Workers Would Survive On Minimum Wage (1 Viewer)

[Napoleon]

Well, that pretty much says it all. I'll take that as an acknowledgment that they aren't paying an adequate wage.

 

[Josie]

There's a solution - don't work at McDonalds if you're not a high school kid living at your parents' house.

 

[Fisher]

Well, that pretty much says it all. I'll take that as an acknowledgment that they aren't paying an adequate wage.

Looks like an acknowledgement that a person with big boy bills should not be working a McJob intended for teenagers and college students

 

[Napoleon]

Looks like an acknowledgement that a person with big boy bills should not be working a McJob intended for teenagers and college students

Apparently you missed the point. McDonalds doesn't want to pay its employees a living wage, so the rest of us have to do it via welfare and food stamps.

 

[Fisher]

Apparently you missed the point. McDonalds doesn't want to pay its employees a living wage, so the rest of us have to do it via welfare and food stamps.

No apparently you missed the point--I don't want to pay my employees anything whatsoever, but that is unrealistic. If people were not willing to work for minimum wage then McD's wouldn't pay minimum wage. BTW, Obama promised to raise the minimum wage every year he was in office and didn't even raise the issue for his first term. Why isn't this his fault for breaking his promise when he had both houses for 2 years?

 

[Napoleon]

No apparently you missed the point--I don't want to pay my employees anything whatsoever, but that is unrealistic. If people were not willing to work for minimum wage then McD's wouldn't pay minimum wage.

What people are willing to work for shouldn't drive the lowest end of the pay scale. It should be driven by cost-of-living.

BTW, Obama promised to raise the minimum wage every year he was in office and didn't even raise the issue for his first term. Why isn't this his fault for breaking his promise when he had both houses for 2 years?

I don't care what Obama said and I don't intend to watch this thread descend into partisan hackery.

 

[radcen]

Well, that pretty much says it all. I'll take that as an acknowledgment that they aren't paying an adequate wage.

Savings? What is this savings thing they speak of?

 

[Josie]

I don't know any teenager that wouldn't want to make $2,000 a month.

 

[dnsmith]

No apparently you missed the point--I don't want to pay my employees anything whatsoever, but that is unrealistic. If people were not willing to work for minimum wage then McD's wouldn't pay minimum wage. BTW, Obama promised to raise the minimum wage every year he was in office and didn't even raise the issue for his first term. Why isn't this his fault for breaking his promise when he had both houses for 2 years?

Minimum wage tends to be paid to beginners, kids, and untrained and unskilled people who in many cases cost the company more money than their work earns for the company. Minimum wage workers are a small minority of the labor force. "In 2011, 73.9 million American workers age 16 and over were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.1 percent of all wage and salary workers. Among those paid by the hour, 1.7 million earned exactly the prevailing Federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 2.2 million had wages below the minimum. Together, these 3.8 million workers with wages at or below the Federal minimum made up 5.2 percent of all hourly-paid workers." Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2011

 

[Fisher]

What people are willing to work for shouldn't drive the lowest end of the pay scale. It should be driven by cost-of-living.

Sure it should. It is what keeps prices affordable. Don't like it, don't eat at McDonalds, work at McDonalds, or buy McDonalds stock and stay out of the business of those who do.

I don't care what Obama said and I don't intend to watch this thread descend into partisan hackery.

Well if the "Liberal" President of the United States of America isn't interested in your "living wage" then you are going to lose either way.

 

[JayGatsby]

There's a solution - don't work at McDonalds if you're not a high school kid living at your parents' house.

Only about half of minimum wage workers are under 25, some of them even may be independent, so this idea that everyone who makes minimum wage is just a kid at a summer job is a myth.

A lot of people don't have a much of a choice between what type of job they can get, but I know you don't want to hear that of course.

 

[Captain Adverse]

I don't know any teenager that wouldn't want to make $2,000 a month.

I don't know of any teenager who'd want to work TWO jobs to make that kind of money. Cuts into their party and other leisure time. LOL

 

[Surtr]

Well, that pretty much says it all. I'll take that as an acknowledgment that they aren't paying an adequate wage.

Minimum wage isn't meant to be lived on, it's a supplemental wage, or for students who are still living with their parents.

 

[specklebang]

If you're single, this is probably pretty accurate in total. I can tell you that not 1/2 mile from my house, you can rent a room with a private bath and a shared kitchen for $350. That includes utilities. The car payment is a little low. A lot of the figures are nonsense figures like health insurance for $20.

Almost nobody pays less than $8 and most people don't work 2 jobs. But it's entirely possible to live on it and if you make $1211 you're not even eligible for food stamps.

When I was a kid, I worked for minimum wage which was $1. I lived on my own and saved about 1/2. How did I do this? I lived below my means.

Most minimum wage workers are not singles living alone. It's tough to be in your 40s or 50s and working minimum wage jobs. But I think most, not all, people rise above that.

Well, that pretty much says it all. I'll take that as an acknowledgment that they aren't paying an adequate wage.

 

[Deuce]

I don't know any teenager that wouldn't want to make $2,000 a month.

What you should try to grasp is that this is working 74 hours a week.

Dear libertarians: The majority of people working for minimum wage aren't teenagers. Jesus Christ what universe do you people live in?

 

[specklebang]

How about some links with that burger Sir.

What you should try to grasp is that this is working 74 hours a week.

Dear libertarians: The majority of people working for minimum wage aren't teenagers. Jesus Christ what universe do you people live in?

 

[Mycroft]

Well, that pretty much says it all. I'll take that as an acknowledgment that they aren't paying an adequate wage.

Get rid of cable.
Get a pay-as-you-go phone for $35/m
Find an apartment that includes utilities in the rent.
Consider not making car payments. Instead, buy a used car for cash.

Oh...and $800/m spending money isn't enough? Stop spending money on stupid stuff!!

 

[digsbe]

You aren't owed a high wage or a "living wage." Heck, you aren't even owed a job. If someone has to provide it for you then it isn't your right. If you need to work 2 jobs or 60+ hours during the week then that's just what you have to do.

 

[Verax]

What you should try to grasp is that this is working 74 hours a week.

Dear libertarians: The majority of people working for minimum wage aren't teenagers. Jesus Christ what universe do you people live in?

They live in fantasy land where reality bends to suit their ideals, just like conservatives. All problems are solved with self compliments and an ego stimulating tough guy attitude.

 

[Hatuey]

I don't know any teenager that wouldn't want to make $2,000 a month.

Get rid of cable.
Get a pay-as-you-go phone for $35/m
Find an apartment that includes utilities in the rent.
Consider not making car payments. Instead, buy a used car for cash.

Oh...and $800/m spending money isn't enough? Stop spending money on stupid stuff!!

Please tell me you two actually read the article.... PLEASE. Holy crap, I'll ask again, did you guys read? Because if you had actually read it, there would be no reason for those two posts to exist. Here, I'll make it REALLY simple for you too:

1. The McDonalds budget is based on a hypothetical - and I'm going to use that word liberally here - worker who is working 80 hours a week.
2. Those 80 hours are followed by the assumption that the worker is doing 40 hours at McDonalds i.e. they're full time, and also full time at 2nd another job.

Now if you had actually read the article, this part in particular would have stuck out to you:

McDonald's Literally Cannot Imagine How Its Workers Would Survive on the Minimum Wage - Yahoo! Finance

As Jim Cook at Irregular Times notes, the $1,105 figure up top is roughly what the average McDonald's cashier earning $7.72 an hour would take home each month after payroll taxes, if they worked 40 hours a week. So this budget applies to someone just about working two full-time jobs at normal fast-food pay. (The federal minimum wage is just $7.25 an hour, by the way).

What the article shows is how out of touch McDonalds is with its average employee. It has, as per its budget, assumed all these things:

1. A person can work 80 hours a week and not have serious health related side effects.
2. A person can work 80 hours a week both McDonalds and some other physically demanding job.
3. The average person working at McDonalds is working 40 hours a week.

With that said, did you guys read the article? Or just jump straight into free-market defending mode? Because if you read it, you would have also realized that the $2K figure assumes these five key things:

1. You have 2 full time jobs.
2. You work 40 hours/week at each of those jobs.
3. You are paying $600 for rent in a major American city where rent has magically stayed 40% bellow the rest of the country.
4. Your health is insured by a Chinese doctor who also sells fireworks on the side.
5. You somehow managed to save nearly 40% of your income.

I mean, are you guys reading the article? Or did you seriously not notice all the things which were wrong with the assessment made by McDs?

 

[tererun]

I don't know any teenager that wouldn't want to make $2,000 a month.

Work 80 hours a week at low end jobs, which is what the budget is based on, and then get back to us. Hell, just finding 2 jobs to work in tandem where you can get 80 hours of work in would be hard work.

 

[reinoe]

I don't know what I found more ridiculous, the $20 health insurance (I'd like to see the coverage for that) or the $0 heating (which means that the employee is in Socal, Southern Arizona, Texas, or Florida). There are some other ridiculous things on there but the heating and insurance were particularly laughable.

I don't have a problem with McDonald's paying the wages they do, but if they're going to present budgets they need to at least pretend they have a basis in reality.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

How about some links with that burger Sir.

Anyone?

 

[Hatuey]

Work 80 hours a week at low end jobs, which is what the budget is based on, and then get back to us. Hell, just finding 2 jobs to work in tandem where you can get 80 hours of work in would be hard work.

The problem with her post is that it presents such an easy solution to the issue. Hey! Don't work a minimum wage job! Well, hm - alright. Where are all the non-minimum wage jobs being created by companies making record profits? In India? Well, that seems reasonable from a Libertarian perspective. They can pay Indian workers a dime to do what blacks would do for a dollar and Mexicans would do for a quarter.

1. Pay American workers a pittance.
2. Make record profits.
3. Find workers in India willing to do what Americans do for less.
4. Sell goods to Americans who now have no jobs.
5. Make American workers accept even lower paying jobs in order to pay for goods.

Libertarians still have the gull to talk about how fond they are of the founders. Washington would have chopped Milton Freedman's head off for that type of bull****.

 

[tererun]

The problem with her post is that it presents such an easy solution to the issue. Hey! Don't work a minimum wage job! Well, hm - alright. Where are all the non-minimum wage jobs being created by companies making record profits? In India? Well, that seems reasonable from a Libertarian perspective. They can pay Indian workers a dime to do what blacks would do for a dollar and Mexicans would do for a quarter.

1. Pay American workers a pittance.
2. Make record profits.
3. Find workers in India willing to do what Americans do for less.
4. Sell goods to Americans who now have no jobs.
5. Make American workers accept even lower paying jobs in order to pay for goods.

Libertarians still have the gull to talk about how fond they are of the founders. Washington would have chopped Milton Freedman's head off for that type of bull****.

It is one of the reasons I cannot call myself a libertarian despite agreeing with many of their original views. It is obvious that you cannot let companies act without regulation. It has lead to some of the most disgusting and over the top abuses in our history. Greed does not have moral values, and there is no self correcting part of corporate america that allows for the correction of abuses. The reality is that the same drive that pushes the ambitious to the top is the same drive that demands abuse of the system to get ahead. This is why a hands off governmental approach is going to fail the people.

It is also not just as easy as going out and getting a job when the desire to work is not the requirement to work. Since jobs are finite and there are not enough positions for all to work even if we wanted to work there is no guarantee of just getting a job. Also, when you purt in the effort, as you do with low end jobs, you make the profit for the large corporation possible. The mittens romnifeller idea that every business owner does it themselves is WRONG! If you do everything yourself your business and it's profits will be limited to what you can produce. this is why we hire people, and for their effort to help you make your life and business better, they should also be allowed some of that same success and quality of life.

I would love to see every person in mcDonalds, or some other large visible chain, just not show up to work for a day. Just to show without them that business does not do a dime worth of business in a day. McDonalds could never fire all those people. the job may be somewhat simple, but there are policies and methods a untrained worker simply does not know and you just simply cannot hire your entire workforce brand new. You need people to train and corporate simply cannot do it because they are too far removed from the actual work. Could you imagine how quick people like libertarians would panic if there was a national day where no retail or low end worker came to work? That would wake some people up.