Post: #1

PR Fail.

Quote:http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arch...ge/277845/

McDonald's Can't Figure Out How Its Workers Survive on Minimum Wage

In a financial planning guide for its workers, the company accidentally illustrates precisely how impossible it is to scrape by on a fast food paycheck.

Well this is both embarrassing and deeply telling.

In what appears to have been a gesture of goodwill gone haywire, McDonald's recently teamed up with Visa to create a financial planning site for its low-pay workforce. Unfortunately, whoever wrote the thing seems to have been literally incapable of imagining of how a fast food employee could survive on a minimum wage income. As ThinkProgress and other outlets have reported, the site includes a sample budget that, among other laughable assumptions, presumes that workers will have a second job.
mcdonaldssamplemonthlybudget.jpg

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, but 19 states and DC set theirs higher).

A few of the other ridiculous conceits here: This hypothetical worker doesn't pay a heating bill. I guess some utilities are included in their $600 a month rent? (At the end of 2012, average rent in the U.S. was $1,048). Gas and groceries are bundled into $27 a day spending money. And this individual apparently has access to $20 a month healthcare. McDonald's, for its part, charges employees $12.58 a week for the company's most basic health plan. Well, that's if they've been with the company for a year. Otherwise, it's $14.

Now, it's possible that McDonald's and Visa meant this sample budget to reflect a two-person household. That would be a tad more realistic, after all. Unfortunately, the brochure doesn't give any indication that's the case. Nor does it change the fact that most of these expenses would apply to a single person.

Of course, minimum wage workers aren't really entirely on their own, especially if they have children. There are programs like food stamps, Medicaid, and the earned income tax credit to help them along. But that's sort of the point. When large companies make profits by paying their workers unlivable wages, we end up subsidizing their bottom lines.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #2

lulz

Not that I support idiotic policies like price floors on labor. I also don't support idiotic dietary habits like eating at McDonald's.

Post: #3

This is ironic.
A company that sells unhealthy food and pays their workers shit is having a major PR issue.
McDonalds should just not talk. It would be better if they didn't.


I remember when this was buzzing around the web a few years ago.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aMgsoAsLVWw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Post: #4

Saw this article floating around. The question is why should anyone be able to survive on a minimum wage job? Is that a human right?

It's like saying "Man can't get laid doing only 5 approaches a month." Well, he's going to have to do more, or change his approach. He's not entitled to getting laid from a certain amount of work.

Post: #5

I remember when it was all high school students and retirees working there.

Minimum wage is not meant to be a living wage.

Of course, the change from a manufacturing economy to service doesn't take this into account.

Post: #6

(07-17-2013 09:48 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Saw this article floating around. The question is why should anyone be able to survive on a minimum wage job? Is that a human right?

It's like saying "Man can't get laid doing only 5 approaches a month." Well, he's going to have to do more, or change his approach. He's not entitled to getting laid from a certain amount of work.

That's the wrong question and analogy. The right question is "why should anyone be able to survive on a minimum wage job? Are we better off socially without a wide swath of our labor force engaged in a working, but sub-subsistence existence?" The right analogy is how much more harmonious national life is when female impulse is controlled for beta males to be able to lead fulfilling sexual and family lives.

One of the basic facts of life is that, with a limited resource pool, not everybody can be a winner. One fundamental premise of creating a society is that even those who don't claw their way to the top can get their basic needs met. If you predicate survival on outright competition, you destroy the social contract.

Post: #7

(07-17-2013 09:48 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Saw this article floating around. The question is why should anyone be able to survive on a minimum wage job? Is that a human right?

It's like saying "Man can't get laid doing only 5 approaches a month." Well, he's going to have to do more, or change his approach. He's not entitled to getting laid from a certain amount of work.

This is interesting because if you take this back to the wage issue, maybe they should raise the bar for everyone and say, "ok, no more meaningless menial jobs. If you want to get paid at all, you are going to have to do a job that has more value to society."

And then we can get robots to tend the counters at McDonald's.. it's no so far fetched.

Post: #8

I have hear some bloggers argue (HalfSigma, now Lion of the Blogosphere) that we have too many people and not enough jobs due to efficiencies. There simply isn't enough for people of average or below average below average abilities to do.

Post: #9

Wow, McDonald's cashiers make more money than certain specialists here in Russia. Teachers, mechanics and programmers just to name a few.

Post: #10

Fast food is meant for a "first job" for high school kids and a time killer for retired old people.
I guess if someone is ambitious or smart enough they'll move them up to management.

I have a friend that works in the kitchens of places in the Outer Banks of NC. Yeah it's hard
work and shit pay but hey it's work and his options are limited living there. From what I hear
all the younger locals have moved away for the money. It's just not realistic to work for that
low wage and have any kind of life. He's just stuck. He has two kids and they all live with his
family and share a two family house. It's kind of sucky the shit he has to deal with.

What happens in places like this is the businesses import labor from abroad. There's some kind
of labor broker that brings in younger college students from the FSU and Ukraine, Moldova or wherever.

The kitchens, supermarkets and fast food joints are full of foreigners. They come here for the summer
under contract and work for a low wage. Housing is supplied and they live like 20 to a house.

For them it's a vacation in a cool American spot. They have a predetermined amount of money
at the end of the season and what they bring home is enough to live on for the rest of the year
in their homeland.

I also hear that the females end up doing some hooking on the side for extra money.

Post: #11

(07-17-2013 08:28 AM)Beyond Borders Wrote:  (At the end of 2012, average rent in the U.S. was $1,048).

Can that really be true?

Seems pretty high for Zanesville, OH.


-----

As a side note, I heard managers can make 100k there.

Any truth to that?

Also, what does an owner make?

Post: #12

(07-17-2013 09:48 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Saw this article floating around. The question is why should anyone be able to survive on a minimum wage job? Is that a human right?

It's like saying "Man can't get laid doing only 5 approaches a month." Well, he's going to have to do more, or change his approach. He's not entitled to getting laid from a certain amount of work.

Majority of the time people whom work minimum wage work more hours per week then average folks as they have no choice. They do work the hardest and see the least rewards of it. Most min wage work on average 60-70 hours per week.

In Canada at least you don't see fatties and harpies working in Mcdees. The people whom work here probably can't afford the food even.

I would say Mcdees isn't good value. It's cheap in price but true frugal people don't mess with it because it's more expensive the the big picture. 1 pond of Ground beef and buns to feed your four times over costs the same as one empty value meal at Mcdees.

America can't win the wage war. Other nations will always win with a lesser cost of living and services. America has been chasing the bottom wage method for 20 years now and keeps getting rape because of it. All it does is breed a base that can consume properly to grow the economy and it produces a next class of unstable children whom repeat the process. Americas golden age of production was when it's wars we're at the higher in the developed world. High incomes demand high quality service and products and a overall gain for the economy. It was corporations and unions whom both got to large that ruined it all.

Everybody whom puts in effort and works hard should be entitled to the basics of survival: Food, Shelter, an efficient means to move yourself (bike, bus, car, etc), clothing/warmth. It's a myth these people don't work hard. Men don't get each social assistance unless they are disabled (fat), they have to work. It's the upper-lower class/lower middle class whom are lazy, whine about working, eat tons of shitty food and get fat. It's then whom bogg down the economy not Jose at Mcdees.

Post: #13

(07-17-2013 11:13 AM)Parlay44 Wrote:  Fast food is meant for a "first job" for high school kids and a time killer for retired old people.
I guess if someone is ambitious or smart enough they'll move them up to management.

I have a friend that works in the kitchens of places in the Outer Banks of NC. Yeah it's hard
work and shit pay but hey it's work and his options are limited living there. From what I hear
all the younger locals have moved away for the money. It's just not realistic to work for that
low wage and have any kind of life. He's just stuck. He has two kids and they all live with his
family and share a two family house. It's kind of sucky the shit he has to deal with.

What happens in places like this is the businesses import labor from abroad. There's some kind
of labor broker that brings in younger college students from the FSU and Ukraine, Moldova or wherever.

The kitchens, supermarkets and fast food joints are full of foreigners. They come here for the summer
under contract and work for a low wage. Housing is supplied and they live like 20 to a house.

For them it's a vacation in a cool American spot. They have a predetermined amount of money
at the end of the season and what they bring home is enough to live on for the rest of the year
in their homeland.

I also hear that the females end up doing some hooking on the side for extra money.

Sounds just like where I live.

Most of the EE's have been replaced by Philipino's and Brazilians this season for some reason.

Years ago it was all kids from WI working the summers here. Now I'd guess it's less than 50% and it's more year round due to the indoor water parks.

A lot/most of the imported labor works multiple jobs as they have to work off the costs to bring them here, so they don't end up with a lot from their "main" job.

Post: #14

Good discussion.

Why should anyone be paid a minimum wage and what does the minimum wage represent?


The Harvester case of 1907 (concerning Australian labour law) held that an employer was required by law to pay a decent, fair wage to his workers. It was a landmark case.

Higgins J's judgment read as follows:

“One finds that the Legislation has not indicated what is meant by 'fair and reasonable,' what is the model or criterion by which fairness and reasonableness are to be determined.

...

The provision for 'fair and reasonable' remuneration is obviously designed for the benefit of the employees in the industry; and it must be meant to secure to them something which they cannot get by the ordinary system of individual bargaining with employers....

The standard of 'fair and reasonable' must therefore be something else, and I cannot think of any other standard appropriate than the normal needs of an average employee, regarded as a human being in a civilised community. If, instead of individual bargaining, one can conceive of a collective agreement - an agreement between all the employers in a given trade on the one side, and all the employees on the other - it seems to me that the framers of the agreement would have to take as the first and dominant factor the cost of living as a civilised being.

If A lets B have the use of his horses on the terms that he gives them fair and reasonable treatment, I have no doubt that it is B's duty to give them proper food and water, and such shelter and rest as they need; and, as wages are the means of obtaining commodities, surely the State in stipulating for fair and reasonable remuneration for the employees means that the wages shall be sufficient to provide these things, and clothing and a condition of frugal comfort estimated by current human standards.

Higgins J also said the following.

“I regard the applicant's undertaking as a marvel of enterprise, energy and pluck… he is allowed - if my view of the Act is correct - to make any profits that he can and they are not subject to investigation. But when he chooses, in the course of his economies, to economise at the expense of human life, when his economy involves the withholding from his employees of reasonable remuneration, or reasonable conditions of human existence, then, as I understand the Act, Parliament insists on the payment of the Excise duty."

Post: #15

Students can't find the work and retired aged folks aren't retiring. Swamp pit labour like this is a waste as it adds little value except to the worst elements of the economy (Big-Agra, Big-Pharma, Big-Gubmint', Big-Oil,etc). Money just gets sucked into those silos and does not work its way into the real economy.

And regards to average rents yeah Zanzeville is cheaper but there is no work there. It's the same reason Montreal or Halifax in Canada have way lower costs of living -- less availability of work forces living prices down. Fort Mac (oil patch) Canada has the highest costs of living and the lower unemployment rate in Canada.

Post: #16

Average rent is a meaningless number without reference to location. It's like asking what is the average of an orange, an apple, and a banana.

Post: #17

Could somebody live in NYC on that wage? I'm just curious to know.

Post: #18

Most of the people working at mcdonalds are either retirees with pensions who just want a 20 some hour a week food service job to interact with people and have something to do, highschool students who have to make phone and car insurance payments, people who live in Mom's basement or rent-share with a lot of people to the point where their rent is <300.00 monthly, military dudes who are sort of always on call to be sent out, and just part-timers in general.

I knew a guy who worked there part time to pay rent and get laid (huge coworker turn-over and it's mostly highschool aged girls) and was living off trust fund interest. He was like 26.

Not everyone needs to make a living wage. When shitheads in congress set labor price floors too high, it puts a lot of highschool kids and old people out of work and theoretically on welfare.

Post: #19

(07-17-2013 11:15 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(07-17-2013 09:48 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Saw this article floating around. The question is why should anyone be able to survive on a minimum wage job? Is that a human right?

It's like saying "Man can't get laid doing only 5 approaches a month." Well, he's going to have to do more, or change his approach. He's not entitled to getting laid from a certain amount of work.

Majority of the time people whom work minimum wage work more hours per week then average folks as they have no choice. They do work the hardest and see the least rewards of it. Most min wage work on average 60-70 hours per week.

In Canada at least you don't see fatties and harpies working in Mcdees. The people whom work here probably can't afford the food even.

I would say Mcdees isn't good value. It's cheap in price but true frugal people don't mess with it because it's more expensive the the big picture. 1 pond of Ground beef and buns to feed your four times over costs the same as one empty value meal at Mcdees.

America can't win the wage war. Other nations will always win with a lesser cost of living and services. America has been chasing the bottom wage method for 20 years now and keeps getting rape because of it. All it does is breed a base that can consume properly to grow the economy and it produces a next class of unstable children whom repeat the process. Americas golden age of production was when it's wars we're at the higher in the developed world. High incomes demand high quality service and products and a overall gain for the economy. It was corporations and unions whom both got to large that ruined it all.

Everybody whom puts in effort and works hard should be entitled to the basics of survival: Food, Shelter, an efficient means to move yourself (bike, bus, car, etc), clothing/warmth. It's a myth these people don't work hard. Men don't get each social assistance unless they are disabled (fat), they have to work. It's the upper-lower class/lower middle class whom are lazy, whine about working, eat tons of shitty food and get fat. It's then whom bogg down the economy not Jose at Mcdees.

The real issue, that most people ignore, is this: "at what point do workers start picking up guns, forming private armies, and killing rich people?"

People forget that, just 75 years ago, this is exactly what happened. That's how the Nazis started. That's how the Japanese militarists gained power and the Bolsheviks and the Chinese communists.

Really, do people think this won't happen again? What a bunch of fucking idiots the Boomer generation is. We are creating the next world war and we are totally in denial.

Post: #20

(07-17-2013 12:12 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  The real issue, that most people ignore, is this: "at what point do workers start picking up guns, forming private armies, and killing rich people?"

People forget that, just 75 generations ago, this is exactly what happened. That's how the Nazis started. That's how the Japanese militarists gained power and the Bolsheviks and the Chinese communists.

Really, do people think this won't happen again? What a bunch of fucking idiots the Boomer generation is. They are creating the next world war and they are totally in denial.

Don't forget the drug trade. Many poor dudes I know sell weed and coke to supplement their income.

Post: #21

(07-17-2013 12:05 PM)Hades Wrote:  Most of the people working at mcdonalds are either retirees with pensions who just want a 20 some hour a week food service job to interact with people and have something to do, highschool students who have to make phone and car insurance payments, people who live in Mom's basement or rent-share with a lot of people to the point where their rent is <300.00 monthly, military dudes who are sort of always on call to be sent out, and just part-timers in general.

I knew a guy who worked there part time to pay rent and get laid (huge coworker turn-over and it's mostly highschool aged girls) and was living off trust fund interest. He was like 26.

Not everyone needs to make a living wage. When shitheads in congress set labor price floors too high, it puts a lot of highschool kids and old people out of work and theoretically on welfare.

70-80% of min wage workers are over age 22. The old myth of HS kids and old geezers is gone. People whom have to live are trying to live off those jobs. HS aged unemployment is almost 65%, those kids aren't working.

I'm just trying to put it in reality for folks here.

Low dominator folks used to work factories and build things, while places like Youngstown and Zansevile provided cheaper places for people to live and build thier lives up.

Post: #22

I (briefly) worked in a casino once.

And management wouldn't allow staff to be members of the casino.

Not for security reasons.

But because they thought that any one employed by the casino wouldn't have enough cash at the end of each month to waste in a casino.

Post: #23

(07-17-2013 09:48 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Saw this article floating around. The question is why should anyone be able to survive on a minimum wage job? Is that a human right?

It's like saying "Man can't get laid doing only 5 approaches a month." Well, he's going to have to do more, or change his approach. He's not entitled to getting laid from a certain amount of work.

I think that anyone who is willing to work deserves to earn enough to support themselves at a reasonable standard of living. The fact that so many of these low-level jobs pay such a pittance is a major reason we have so many people seeking government handouts. If people were actually able to support their families decently through wages, they wouldn't have the incentive to rely on the government.

Encouraging a race to the bottom for wages ends up harming everyone eventually. People who don't have a little extra money in their pocket can't spend it. The result is a reduction in aggregate demand that hampers economic growth, which results in economic stagnation across the board. Our economy is based on consumption, and when people don't have the purchasing power to consume beyond the bare minimum, the economy doesn't function correctly.

The major economic problem of the 21st century will be figuring out how to manage an economy which is not able to employ the entire working-age population. As technology has increased, the need for labor input has decreased. This trend will only continue in the future. Eventually, nearly all human labor will become obsolete. Then what?

Now we are able to sneer at minimum wage workers, and look down on their lack of skills as being the reason for their inability to earn a high wage. But what about when everyone's skills are obsolete? When houses and buildings are able to be 3D printed on-site, how valuable are the skills of carpenters and masons? When computers are able to extrapolate physical laws themselves, how many scientists and programmers will we need? Eventually, anything that can be theoretically done by a machine, will be done by a machine. At that point, if we don't have some kind of mechanism that distributes purchasing power by a means other than wages, we will be living in a world where the vast majority of people live in poverty, simply because they have no economic usefulness.

Ultimately, we must remember that the economy is an invention meant to serve human needs. Human beings are not meant to serve the economy.

I think that the situation will ultimately be resolved by some sort of national dividend or guaranteed minimum income. Essentially, imagine if everyone in the country suddenly received a Social Security check each month. What would happen? Consumer demand would increase across the board, as suddenly people would be spending a lot more money. This would allow for entrepreneurs to create thousands of new businesses to meet this demand. Employers would be forced to increase their wages, since people would be less reliant on taking any job to pay the bills. Older workers would be more likely to retire early and make way for younger workers to take over. This dividend money could also be created by the government itself rather than lent into existence by the Federal Reserve, so there would be no interest owed. This is all getting into fairly advanced economic territory at this point though, so I will end it here. I think something like this will inevitably be the future, however, regardless of how it may rankle our "individual responsibility" attitudes, simply because there is no other alternative assuming technology continues to advance and human labor becomes increasingly obsolete.

Post: #24

(07-17-2013 09:48 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Saw this article floating around. The question is why should anyone be able to survive on a minimum wage job? Is that a human right?

It's like saying "Man can't get laid doing only 5 approaches a month." Well, he's going to have to do more, or change his approach. He's not entitled to getting laid from a certain amount of work.

Society would be better if we guaranteed a beta who put in, say, 40 approaches a week, a date with 5 or semi-fatty every two weeks. It would keep his frustration level at an acceptable level and reduce his annoying behaviors--cockblocking, lashing out in violent outbursts, acting pussy, or turning to the feminist cause. If he's satisfied with that very basic existence (which most won't be over time), he'll stay there. Otherwise, he'll have to improve his status (beta) or up his hours (approaches).

The 5s, not content with being mere wages for weak beta dudes, will try to up their own game--losing weight, growing their hair out, taking out their ugly piercing, and improving their attitudes.

When you live in a society, you have to account for the weaker, less successful members--like it or not--to a certain extent. It's like living with roommates and refusing to pick up a piece of trash off the floor or do a dish because you "didn't put it there." You may win the argument, but you'll live in a shithole.

You can't do all the work for your roommate, but you also can't just kick him out--he's on the fucking lease.

Post: #25

If you set the bar too low, society will stagnate.

If McDonald's paid the same as jobs that are more valuable to society, less people would end up in those other jobs and we'd all lose out. Minimum wage is one of those policies that slowly saps the vitality out of a society. It rewards failure and weakness.

Full disclosure: I worked at McDonald's in high school.