How Much Fast Food Workers Earn In Every State

because they are responsible for many school childrens lives everyday, how much are your children worth.... I want a good bus driver for them, not a min wage driver, how about you

.

 

You're saying that just because someone works for minimum wage they are not good drivers?



​

 

I was responding to the 5 bucks an hour flipping burgers figure given and the comment above. Even at 1200 a month the scenario you painted is a joke. "Eating out" 5 nights a week is going to cost more than 1200/month

As per your signature line .. "Math is not hard"

Dear

 

Unfortunately many of the folks we are discussing are not kids living with their parents ?

 

What does that have to do with anything. For many that is the only Job they can get.

I outlined some of the socioeconomic and political aspects of the min wage in a previous post. There is an obligation on the part of corporations to pay for labor, just like they pay for every other resource. There is also an obligation to pay for their fair share of the tax burden for things such as roads, sewage, infrastructure - without which they would not be able to function.

Currently Corps are not meeting this obligation .. raising the min wage at least helps make up part of that gap.

 

did not say that, you said that, I want to pay good drivers a good wage, so we keep the good drivers

 

the "scenario" you quoted is not mine

but it is what people think a job is supposed to "provide" them............

it is not............

- - - Updated - - -

this makes the bus driver paid more that the teachers................GG

 

It, being my sentiment that people shouldn't try to live on a minimum wage job, is at the core of the issue. If that's the best they can do then that's their life and it's not my responsibility to compensate for that with higher taxes and it's not an employers responsibility to increase wages past normal market inflation. The reason this has become such a huge taking point for liberals is because your party has converted half the country to being dependent on government.

And exactly what obligation is it they should meet? What exactly is a "fair wage"? Put a dollar amount to it because liberal leadership sure won't dare to. And why? Because they know damn well if Walmart is forced to pay $20hr to the janitor then they will pass the cost on to us. You'll see milk raise to $10 a gallon overnight, along with everything else, and there won't be anything you could do to stop it other than stop buying milk. Liberal overlords know this so they taunt you minions with the class warfare battle cry then head off to their $50,000 a plate fundraiser so they can scam another four years worth of managing your decline.

 

no it doesn't, the take home from a teachers paycheck is more, and should be a lot more, if not than your underpaying the teachers...


.

 

If our communities aren't putting most of their people into a situation where they are able to support themselves, then the community has failed.

Is the problem not enough jobs available that pay a living wage? Why aren't there enough jobs? What controls this?

Are jobs available but not enough people qualified? Is adequate education available? Is there a pervasive problem with lack of parental education?

If there aren't enough jobs, there aren't enough jobs people still got to live. Societies who allow too many to feel hopeless begin to experience unrest.

 

There plenty jobs available. One big problem is the spoiled, entitled mentality of our society. Some people think they are too good to flip burgers. I dont know we fix that problem.

 

ok.



.​

 

People. A job is just solving someone else's problem. As long as there are problems, there are jobs.

Somewhere along the line people started to believe that it was someone else's responsibility to turn their efforts into things of value.




​

 

A society owes it's people the opportunity that, with reasonable effort, they can support a family at a standard or living acceptable to that society.

If a society fails to do this it will face unrest.

We owe people a chance to do better than what they are born into. If fewer people do better, it's not because more people are lazy. It's harder to make it today for most people, the number of people who feel its near impossible is growing. The result of this is everyone's problem.

 

I respect your right to have an opinion but my question is how informed is that opinion. It is not that simple. It is unfortunate that these things are not taught to our children, and I think they should be, but there is a whole range of social and political philosophy that comes into play.

I will try and briefly explain. The world has finite resources and there are various questions in relation to how those resources should be distributed.

Back in the day people were mostly rural and they lived off the land. Who got the good land (or land at all), was central to keeping the peace. When the distribution of land got too unequal there was war and that was that.

The question we face is "Who" has the right to these limited resources and why ?

A hypothetical will help illustrate. Suppose there was one large monopoly who owned all the land and means of production and monopoly was owned by one person. Everyone who worked for this company was given $1/hr. If you did not like it too bad because there is nowhere else to work. If you do not work you don't eat. In essence this is a form of slavery without whips. You do not get whipped if you do not work but you will die of starvation.

Your argument (just get a better Job) only holds if there are better Jobs to get.

Back when folks lived off the land corporations could not function simply because they could not get any workers. The Corporations had to attract workers. In order to attract those workers they had to provide housing, sewage, and so on. Later on the cities that formed around these business enterprises would tax the businesses in order to pay for the expenses involved in maintaining a large population.

The companies were willing to pay these taxes in order to have a readily available workforce at their disposal. Historically it was a 50/50 split. In the 1950's the split was still 50/50.

Today Corporations are only paying around 10-15% and the workers are paying the rest. These companies could not exist without roads, sewage, infrastructure. They get the benefit of these things, as well as a readily available workforce but they no longer pay much for this benefit.

If there was a fair and free market economy "theoretically" we would not have to be forcing companies to pay a fair wage. Competition for workers would keep wages up and prices down. The fact of the matter is that our economy is largely controlled by Oligopolies (the slightly less obscene version of the Monopoly described above).

There is a big difference between 7.50 and 20. Nor do I think that all companies should be included. As for the Oligopolies and large multinationals ? Indeed they should be forced to pay a minimum wage.

These companies are allowed to operate in our large urban centers and receive the benefit of "someone else" paying for all the costs of maintaining such a population. I am getting tired of subsidizing McDonalds thanks. Aren't you ? Does it not (*)(*)(*)(*) you off that you are paying McDonalds Bills for them ?

Walmart engaged in anti competitive practices to get where they are. When they first came in they would sell stuff at a loss until they put the competition out of business. When the competition disappears (especially in smaller centers where competition is less) prices go up. The competition was forced out of Business and so folks are forced to shop there regardless of the price.

 

Who ever told you you are entitled to some standard of living lied to you.

You don't deserve anything and nobody owes you a thing.

Either go through life crying like a little (*)(*)(*)(*)(*), or get off your ass and contribute to society in sine meaningful way.

You only have to answer to yourself when on your death bed. I frankly don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) what decision you make.

Time to grow up.

 

Since when does the community the ownership of the failure of its citizens to command skills and be productive members?

 

Good job at removing all incentive for people to gain skills necessary and useful for society.

 

It's harder every year. Because people want more every year.



​

 

I actually agree, but with one small caveat: A society owes the people who contribute or have contributed to the society an opportunity to support a family. A society owes nothing to anyone who is not or has not tangibly contributed to that society. Additionally, anyone who has been a net drain on a society owes that society sufficient contribution to repay what that person received from the society.

 

I'm wondering if a business was struggling and the owner wasn't making a living wage would the liberal employees take a cut in pay so the owner could get a raise?

 

People are anxious to put resources in the hands of folks who demonstrate they can solve problems and we all have resources. Solve a small problem with the resources you have (your mind, your body, your time), then show that to the folks around you and describe a bigger problem and offer a reasonable solution, even if it takes more resources.

There are infinite problems of all sizes and if your presentation is compelling, investment happens. Continue the process with bigger and bigger problems. It's not easy and don't expect folks around you to risk the resources they've accumulated without that demonstration. That would be an unreasonable expectation. But there are more problems that solutions right now, there are infinite opportunities.



​