An $8 increase is not just an $8 increase. Add the employer's portion of taxes to it, workers comp costs, State UI. Roughly, that's an additional 12-15 percent on that 8 dollars, for no additional production. Multiply by the number of employees that receive a raise. Your assumption of 20-30 cents a burger assumes the production rate of...what? Labor costs in a limited service restaurant normally run about 30% of income. COGs excluding labor run about 30-45%. Add in overhead. What do you consider an acceptable profit margin and ROI?
It does not mean an employer get to exploit the work of others. If the employee can't do the job, then fire them. But don't exploit them. I see. So you are advocating for the exploitation of minors in child labor. In any case, employers are NOT ALLOWED to hire a 15 year old for full-time employment!
Only reasonable assumptions. Like assuming that people who work two or three jobs do so because they have to. You, on the other hand, make unreasonable ones like the assumption that any significant portion of them do so because they like it, or because they want to buy a Tesla... or something of the kind. You are digging yourself deeper and deeper into the hole. THIS statement is correct. They don't say it because it's a reasonable assumption that any rational human being would make that people work multiple jobs because they can't get by if they only worked one (i.e., they have to) You, on the other hand, actually EXPECTED them to explicitly say something that is obvious. Or course there are exceptions, like somebody working two jobs because they want to buy a Tesla. But it's also reasonable to assume that they are so few that they are not even worth commenting on. So you have contradicted yourself. And, at this point, you are tying yourself into a knot that I don't know.... nor am I interested to know, how you'll get out of it. So you're on your own...
You are repeating what is already stated on the OP (which you quoted). Did you have a point different than the one I already made there about this? I don't know what caring about you has to do with anything I wrote. A boss needs employees. And today, if they want to get them, they're going to have to pay them a living wage. If they don't, the employee know has the option to participate in The Great Resignation. Which means employees who used to have to work two or three jobs before, can now do just as well with just one. Even when you take the inflation into account.
I don't know what "question" you're talking about. You claimed I did not factor in the cost of living. And that is addressed on the OP. You claimed I was making a prediction, and I showed that it's NOT....and so on. So every time I debunk one absurd statement, you come up with a different one. I'm done with your strawman nonsense.
It's all relative, especially when we're talking about fiat currencies. Wages go up, prices go up, burger flippers make $50,000 and still can't support a family or buy a home.
So you mean that, since these dollars are earned, they shouldn't be considered inflation. I think that makes sense, if I interpreted it correctly. But it would probably be difficult to convey that message to many here.
Nope. You're the one who focused only on those who work multiple jobs (a.k.a. a "strawman", BTW.) The OP is about EVERYBODY who participates in The Great Resignation. And the major categories (probably not all) are explicitly listed. Don't blame me just because your strawman failed.
I have read almost every post in this thread, and everyone is talking about how prices will increase because of increased production costs due to wages, and inflation will kill america...blah,blah,blah Not one post (unless I missed it) addresses the real solution. At some point there will need to be a right sizing in the distribution of profits. Today we do everything to maximize profits, including keeping wages low, and deflating the value of work so that profits rise. Profits dont go to the working class, they go to the investor class. So while everyone is talking about prices raising and how that going to kill profits, ask yourself this simple question......as profits raise every year for most corporations, and if those profits drive pay for the investor class, how come wages haven't been growing at the same rate ? Well, thats because we falsely deflate the value of work, thus driving wages down. Probably the biggest driver in the growth of profits, is keeping wages low. A GREAT example of that is John Deer. In 2013 they declared $4.2 billion in profit, this year they declared $6 bilion in profit......and they wont pay their workers more. Think about that for a second. Deer made $6 billion, and wont pay their workers more money. The guys that actually make the products dont get a thing, but the one guy in the front offcie will get a $10 million dollar bonus. Now put that into perspective. Deer has 10,000 workers on strike, their CEO gets a $10,000,000 bonus........but they "can't" pay their workers another $1 an hour. That in a nutshell is whats wrong with america today.
The dictionary definition suffices, in this case: "the action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work."
Do you believe it's better for 20 people to have a job that pays less than your $15/hr minimum or to have 20 people making nothing because those jobs don't exist?
Yes really. Your example is a lateral move if we ignore the increasing cost of the expenses not mentioned. When your neighbor takes whats left to buy groceries from businesses also paying more for labor due to our gov placing their thumb on the scale, your neighbor is worse off. Also, obesity was at record levels prior to government paying people to sit on the couch. While they are growing fat, they are not gaining experience to advance their careers, and studies show that unemployment disrupts relationships and leads to more break ups. Unemployment also leads to depression. Paying people to sit home equals poor health, loneliness, and depression. Manipulating wages equals inflation and only benefits the tax man.
Your assumptions are not neutral, they are definitely biased, and you have yet to provide anything that supports it. You link very clearly states 'because they want more money' as one of the reasons. They use the word want, not need. If they had used the word need, then you would be at least partially correct. But they didn't, therefore you are coloring the statement to fit your bias. You came up with this Tesla thing, do not attempt to make it my words. Your assumptions are clearly based on your bias, and not on the information provided in the link you posted. Why you can't admit that, or even find a link that supports your bias, the world only can guess at that. I'm in no hole. If they mean for someone to believe it is for the reason you believe, they would have stated it. It has nothing to do with what you believe is a 'reasonable' assumption. I'm in no knot. You cannot support your assumption, and attempting to act like I'm the one with the misunderstanding isn't supporting anything you have said so far.
Please specify what you define as 'unfairly'. People are being paid for their time and labor, at a rate they have agreed to.
All due respect Par, but it's a false equivalence. A better one would be: Do you believe its better for one person to make $1,000,000 and 200 people to make so little that taxpayers need to subsidize them so they can eat
The Great Resignation, from an historical perspective, will probably be that people saw the craziness of this world we live in and resigned themselves to the fact that society can never rise above it's human failings. Sincerely, Eeyore. Anyway, I keep seeing Help Wanted signs all around. People going from one job to the next will certainly cause employers to offer more in order to keep employees. Of course, a big recession might reverse all that. Long ago in a lifetime far, far, away, I worked in a steel mill for a while. When I started, the pay was amazing. But things turned around and the company started cutting the wages. I found it quite odd that when the wages were cut, many of the workers actually worked harder and took all the hours they could get.
