Restaurant Recession Hits NYC Following $15 Minimum Wage

Well done, all that legible information and not a single obfusatory sentence.. Nicely done and done with confidence too!

 

What pie are we addressing? In socialist countries, the pie is sized by the ruler class and divided up by the military class, based on decisions made by the ruler class to prevent an uprising. In the US, only you determine the size of your piece of the economy.

Increases in capital gains tax rates almost always result in decreases in revenue. Decreases in rates almost always result in increases in revenue. The data is available, but narrative skewed by those who want you to feel someone is taking your piece if the pie.

The only inequity is the result of artificial inflation caused by Democrats in Democrat cities. When those people retire, they sell their homes well above the value in a real market and drive the prices of everything through the roof in retirement places like Florida. Because of Democrats, I am retiring in place, which I guess is OK.

 

I've already referred to the difference between the minimum wage and living wage: the former is a minor correction for the impact of monopsonistic power (those fake libertarians who are against it are ultimately supporters of coercion in the labour contract); the latter is a deliberate attempt to structurally shift the economy from a low skilled equilibrium.

You should focus on why your country is so reliant on low wage labour.

 

Just giving you content as you throw peanuts at the right wing corporate lackeys

 

I'm discussing the day to day essentials of getting ahead of poverty. Not a corporate thought has crossed my tiny mind.

 

Discussed? Such lofty heights. Not one comment about the effectiveness (or lack of) of the minimum wage as a poverty alleviation device mind you. Gives the game away somewhat.

 

I'm not sure what the **** you just typed, but I suggest you study up on grammar, primarly sentence structure and just the English language in general.

From the context, I'm guessing you are saying that the higher minimum wage would hurt private franchise owners, but those only make up about 5% of McDonald's restaurants. McDonald's as a corporation has been doing away with their franchise system for the last 20 years, and has been buying out all of the small scale, single owners. The ones who are still franchise owners are usually owned by millipnaires who own multiple franchise locations. And they raised the costs of owning a franchise so high that most people cant accord to own one. So for the most part, even private franchise owners can afford to pay $15 an hour. I do agree that some other restauants like Subway, which are 100% franchise owned, could have trouble, but even then they hire only a handful of workers,and even at $15 per hour they wouldn't even put a dent in their profits if they are in a good location, and running their business the right way.

 

Yes, I dropped out of school after tenth grade. I do realize that my writing skills are deficient.

On the other hand, I do know how to spell 'lose' and 'you're'.

That wasn't, at all, what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.

What I was attempting to say is that your favorite Mexican, Asian, or steakhouse restaurant will go out of business. Those will be replaced by the chain outfits.

 

The minimum wage is as effective as the recipient makes it. The dollar amount isn't the issue, the expenditure is.

PS: this is just another way of saying 'it's not what you earn, it's what you spend'.

 

Sounds like you don't even understand the definition of poverty.

 

Which definition do you have in mind? The First World definition? Or the global definition? Because you know, they could not be more different. The poorest American is still vastly more wealthy that a poor Bangladeshi. The poorest American can afford fast food, an iphone, tattoos, a big tv, an air-conditioned home, steak dinners, etc.

So yeah, which definition are you going with?

 

Getting any content from you would be sweet. Relative, absolute and modern absolute (via consensus definitions of making ends meet)? All up to you (I'd assume, mind you, you would choose one to fit with right wing ideology). Try at least refer to the topic. That would require some reference to the empirical evidence into poverty alleviation effects...

 

Well, I ran that through my Reivs-o-matic Babel Fish, and it came out loosely as:

Stop making me look silly with your logic!

 

Still no content! Not a surprise. Choose your preferred poverty methodology and use it to refer to the effectiveness of the minimum wage as a poverty alleviation device.

I'm beginning to think that you can only throw peanuts at the right wingers...

 

Here 'tis:

Spend less than you earn, don't have bad habits (smoking, drinking, gambling, drugs, crime), don't buy anything new, share your accommodation with family or whoever will pull their weight to lower costs for the group, and .... spend less than you earn.

If that methodology is too icky and boring, perhaps you can post a string of la-di-da words which make it seem 'impossible'? After all, we wouldn't want people being called on their refusal to abide by the fundamentals of escaping poverty. Think of their fee-fees!

 

So you have no actual poverty methodology and no means to assess the poverty alleviation effectiveness/efficiency of the minimum wage? Who'd have thought....

 

That's sweet, Reivs. But what does it even mean? You know all the 'program' stuff is already in place, and makes little difference when people are determined not to get ahead. Ergo you must have some fancy new scheme in mind, so please share! What clever-trousers mechanism will magically make people want to strive?

The ONLY fair, equitable, and decent approach is to give the 'poor man' his $500pw (or whatever amount works where you live), and leave it to him to decide what he'll do with it. Anything beyond that is controlling, an intrusion, and a complete waste of time and money.

 

Clearly not true. A lump sum payment, without any consideration of its pact on the wage distribution, is likely to reduce wages and therefore initiate even greater corporate welfare. Think it through!