Restaurant Workers Lose Their Jobs Over Newsom’s $20 Minimum Wage

I explained to you what the quote means. Yiu have no answer.

It doesn’t change the fact that California has the highest poverty rate in the nation based on the Census Supplemental Poverty Rate Calculation which takes into account the cost of living. It’s probably higher now with gasoline at ~ $6 per gallon.

 

So am I……..

The fact that you don't see that is everything….

 

HUH ?

You need to show the math on that one….

 

It 1000% DOES.

When you have a finite supply of product, or income in an organization, it absolutely does

WOW man….just wow !!!!!!

 

ummm ooookaaaay. If you say so. Pats on head.

 

Ya know, I'm not particularly wealthy. I guess I wouldnt have to pay workers anything.

 

That is not possible. Either greedy corporations only care about money, or they are willing to pay more for the same work. Placing the heavy government thumb on the scale does not improve the lives of min wage workers. They just take their paycheck and buy their needs from businesses paying their own employees the higher wage and end up no better off. Only the tax man gets a raise.

 

I provided you with an answer, the actual quote from Lincoln as opposed to your spin which misstates what he said.


Poverty rate by state or territory, 2016-2020
Number 26 California 38,589,882 4,853,434 12.58%
Back to the concept of supply and DEMAND. For many reasons, the DEMAND to reside in California is greater than other states which drives the cost of housing upward.

 

I explained exactly what he said. Your choice of that quote refutes your point. Production always precedes consumption.

California has the highest poverty rate based on the cost of living. The data is clear.

The reason that housing is so expensive is lack of supply. I have lived in California since 1971. I witnessed exactly what has happened.

 

Supply vs demand curve.

 

You clearly do not understand the supply demand curve.

 

Because of what we have become, they do have to.

We have a capitalist economic system, but we are consolidating that capital into fewer and fewer hands every year. And Government has to dictate the value of labor because they have to set a minimum income requirements for people to survive in a first world country.

If you owned a company, and there wasn't a minimum wage you would set your labor rate at 10cents because you then know that your employees would be getting paid that living wage thru government subsidies. Why wouldn’t you want to pay them 10C when you know that the government is now subsiding YOUR COMPANY.

Look at Jeff Besos FFS. He knows the government will subsidize his employees so they can eat, and thats why Jeff Bezos fights paying a living wage. We, as a country, did this before in our history, and those that benefited from that are to this day known as ‘The Robber Barons”. Leland Stanford and John Rockefeller were some of the worst human beings on the planet at the time. They literally made their fortunes letting people die so they could make more money.

We are currently in one of those periods IMHO, and it wont end well because sadly, in 2024 America, the majority of the Republican Party actually thinks it’s a good thing. Eventually they will realize that the consolidation of income into fewer and fewer hands is a bad thing, but they wont realize that until the accept that the economy isnt an infinite pool.

 

Total income as well as wealth is not zero sum. Ghat fact destroys you argument.

 

WHAT ?

YES, greedy corporations will only pay what they HAVE TO PAY for labor. Hence, a minimum wage that hasn’t changed in 15 years. Answer yourself a very simple question: Would you be better off today, if you had not had a raise in 15 years ?

To grow the economy, you need people that will be spending their money in the economy. The best way to do that is to give more money to those who will spend it. Thats minimum wage workers because a much larger percentage of their check gets spent every week. “WEALTH” is bad for an economy because “wealth” stagnates an economy.

 

What greedy corporations? Corporations are responsible for the huge increases in the standard of living that we have enjoyed in the US and globally.

Wealth fuels investment in the future. You have just revealed your lack of economic understanding. To grow an economy production must be increased. The measure of an economy is GDP. What does the "P" stand for? ECON 101.

 

They can't. If they set minimum wage above the value of Labor that's just means no work for anybody.

No that's not capitalist that's corporatist. Corporatism requires government to set standards that no one else can meet other than the huge corporations. Essentially it's a form of price fixing.

Looking to why in a number of states manufacturers of automobiles can't sell their product directly to consumers
[QUOTE[
And Government has to dictate the value of labor because they have to set a minimum income requirements for people to survive in a first world country.[/QUOTE] they can't dictate the value of Labor if they dictate it too high there's no more labor.

What you have to do if you want to dictate the value of Labor is dictate what people must spend their money on.

If I have to pay $30 for a meal at Jack in The box I'm not doing it so all the employees of Jack in the box just don't have a job anymore.

no you couldn't. Would you work for anyone for $0.10 an hour? Nobody would so if that's what you're offering everyone says f off.

Employers hat dictate the value of Labor either. The market does that's why a minimum wage is pointless.

the government can't subsidize anything they don't have any money. I think they're negative 21 trillion right now so they need 21 trillion dollars before they have a penny.

It's taxpayer subsidized. Tax payers shouldn't be paying anyone's wages. If the taxpayer does have to pay the wage then the job doesn't need to exist.

where does he get his slaves because in the US that's illegal. Here in the US employment is voluntary so if you agree to get $15 an hour that's how much you're worth. If it's not a living wage and you think you need more than negotiate for more. If you're worth more someone else will pay you more if you're not they won't.

actually Rockefeller at the time was paying his employees more than anyone else was. That's how he managed to keep employees that was after slavery so you couldn't make someone work for you you had to get them to agree and the only way they agreed is he paid them more than what they were making.

the consolidation of income to fewer and fewer hands is an artifact of government corporatism.

The only way Mark Zuckerberg is able to get lots and lots of money is because he has special deals with the government same with Jeff bezos. And needless to say that these modern-day rubber bands that you're complaining about they're all Democrats.

Jeff bezos Mark Zuckerberg the clown that runs Google the only one that's not and it's very recent is Elon Musk.

So I think you need to think about things before you start whining about partisan crap that has nothing to do with it.

Democrats dress like in the 1920s are helping Robber barons.

 

This is prime facie misinformation. You shouldn't be so gullible to believe such nonsense. A twist of statistics designed to give a false preconceived impression which you should have seen right through if not for your confirmation bias.

 

How California's Minimum Wage Hike is Worsening College Food Insecurity (msn.com)
Recent studies highlight a harsh reality on California's college campuses—students are skipping meals to afford books and other fees.

The struggle is real, with food insecurity rates swinging wildly from 25% to over 50% across different schools.
The era of fast food chains in the golden state may be coming to an end due to minimum wage increases and inflation.


The implementation of a $20 minimum wage for most fast-food workers in California has disrupted this traditional business model. Franchise owners can no longer sustain their operations with minimal wages, as the burden of increased labor costs looms large.

Furthermore, the challenge of inflation is driving up the prices of essential ingredients such as beef, poultry, and vegetables. Fast food giants, heavily reliant on these key ingredients, are faced with a dilemma: absorb the rising costs and risk financial instability, or pass on the expenses to consumers, potentially alienating their price-conscious customer base.
Automated ordering kiosks and robotic kitchen assistants have transitioned from the realm of science fiction to a tangible reality. While these advancements promise increased efficiency, they also signal a future where human workers are becoming less essential.
The significant capital investment needed to shift to a fully automated system may not be enough to save the industry, especially with shrinking profit margins. The appeal of fast food lies in its speed and affordability. If the affordability aspect is compromised, does the business model remain sustainable?
Additionally, consumer preferences are evolving towards healthier options, with health-conscious Californians opting for fresher alternatives over traditional fast food. Chains that fail to adapt to this shift risk losing customers to home-cooked meals with better nutritional value.
Given these challenges, the future of the fast food industry in California is uncertain. Layoffs, reduced hours, and closures loom for those unprepared to navigate the changing landscape.
However, amidst the turmoil, there is a glimmer of hope for those willing to embrace and adapt to change.
Progressive chains will shift their focus towards innovation by expanding their menu offerings to meet changing preferences and utilizing technology to enhance operational efficiency.
They will take advantage of the chance to redefine fast food for a generation of health-conscious consumers.
Although the traditional fast food model is showing signs of weakness, the decline of the industry in California may not happen overnight.
Chains that resist change face the risk of financial ruin, while those that embrace innovation have the opportunity to establish a significant presence in the evolving dining landscape. The scene is set, and the challenges have never been greater.

There you have it. This can and probably will affect college students, there are some college students that use food stamps just to get by. There will also be sheltered workshop workers that make low wages to do real hard work harder than white collar workers out there.and those down and outers that will be affected and dig into the garbage cans for their meals. It's going to be hard and there will be a lot of people that will make it to the soup kitchen for their meals and more than places like McDonalds and other fast food places. It will ba a shame for this to happen. That's all for now.

 

So you completely moved the goalpost to cover yourself ?

Show me where I said anything about production levels ?

But since you did bring this up, please show us the current GDP, and its growth over the last 10 years……….OH, wait, Illl just get that for you to show that you tried to move the goalposts but shot yourself in the foot.

GDP 2010: 15.05 Trillion
GDP 2022: 25.44 Trillion

Minimum wage 2010: $7.25
Minimum wage 2024: $7.25

Top 1%:

 

I haven't moved anything.

 

Your claim is that corporations are “responsible” for the increased standard of living, yet I just showed you that the increase was 90% at the top, and 10% to the bottom……

 

Corporations have produced the products and services responsible for our increased standard of living.

 

Your being beyond obtuse here. I literally just showed you that 90% of the gains went to 10% of the population, and you keep claiming an increased "Standard of living"

 

Compare the standard of living today with the standard of living 100 years ago.

 

That "Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics......" thingy exposed once again!