Discussion
  • Read More
    econdaveHamilton Nolan
    4/13/15 4:45pm

    I prefer to pay the difference between what fast food workers earn and what they need to live myself, rather than making their employers pay it.

    Yes, I do prefer to pay the difference myself, through taxes. The truth is, a lot of these folks wouldn't be employed if their employers were forced to pay them higher wages. And for those who did keep their jobs, a lot of the difference would be made up by charging higher prices to customers at Wal-Mart and McDonald's, and I'm better able to weather that hit than those customers. And the shareholders end up paying for it through taxes as well (although it would be better if we didn't have the lower tax rate on capital gains and dividends compared to labor income).

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Dan Seitzecondave
      4/13/15 4:54pm

      "The truth is, a lot of these folks wouldn't be employed if their employers were forced to pay them higher wages."

      Of course they would. It's not like your average fast food joint is overstaffed; they've spent billions working out how to have the absolute minimum number of workers. This is an empty threat, just like insisting robots will replace fast food workers. It should be treated as such.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Hamilton Nolanecondave
      4/13/15 4:55pm

      I am very interested in the "you are paying this money rather than the Walmart Corporation" angle as a political line. I feel it could resonate pretty well with anti-tax conservatives who don't, inherently, give a shit about low wage workers as human beings.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    potatogamineHamilton Nolan
    4/13/15 4:39pm

    I'll never understand the, 'You want more money? Get a better job!' argument. Are you not using any services provided by minimum wage workers? You need someone to get you a god damned hamburger! You don't get to tell the person that is serving you to work somewhere else while simultaneously relying on their labour.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Bon-bonpotatogamine
      4/13/15 4:55pm

      EXACTLY. I've heard people imply or outright say to retail/ service employees that their jobs aren't important WHILE they are enjoying the service that person provides. I think people who say shit like that should be completely denied the ability to use the services that all these supposedly "unimportant jobs" provide. At least for a little while, or however long it takes for their brains to kick in.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Whymepotatogamine
      4/13/15 5:08pm

      What's not to understand, these minimum wage jobs were meant to be worked by teenagers just getting into the workforce, not adults. Problem is that due to liberal progressives, unions and government that support unions, service oriented jobs are the only jobs America has left. The whole goal of the liberals is to make society depend on government for their mere existence. If you look at the numbers the are achieving those goals.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    twerqyHamilton Nolan
    4/13/15 4:47pm

    This is such an illogical and absurd line of thinking. Look, I'm pretty liberal, and I even agree with most of the silly things that Gawker tries to promote, but this is nonsense.

    There are people who get paid minimum wage and receive no public assistance. There are people who get paid $15/hour and receive public assistance. There is no one-size fits all. It is not the responsibility of your employer to ensure you have enough money to pay for everything without receiving benefits.

    Simple math: if the Wal-Mart and McDonalds employees were to all suddenly become jobless, would these employees require more public assistance or less? They would require more public assistance. Therefore, Wal-Mart and McDonalds are reducing, not increasing, people's reliance on public assistance programs by employing them.

    It's easy to sit back, externalize, and blame large corporations for all the evils of the world. It's hard to admit that people make poor choices and are unable to provide for themselves.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Joshua Davidtwerqy
      4/13/15 4:56pm

      "Look, I'm pretty liberal, but it's not McDonald's or Walmart's fault that their employees are lazy slobs who can't take personal responsibility. Also, who is John Galt?"

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Hamilton Nolantwerqy
      4/13/15 4:57pm

      The fact is that we have a minimum wage in this country. The minimum wage is a moral law. It is not based on the market. It is not based on pure capitalism. It is a moral judgment that to pay anyone would less would be a moral outrage. All we're really discussing here is where that line should be. Unless you're prepared to advocate the position that there should be no minimum wage, you have to be open to justifying why it should be so low.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    cbabgeaeHamilton Nolan
    4/13/15 4:43pm

    The problem is so much bigger than even this, though: the United States (aka the taxpayer) also sends trade reps to foreign countries to protect these corporations' interests, enforces intellectual property rights and criminal law, maintains shipping lanes, safety inspections, computer security, backstopping financial institutions and banks, utilities, healthcare, roads, education, and on and on and on...and just recently I've heard calls for taxpayer-funded employee training programs—so basically the taxpayer is essentially footing the bill for the entire cost of the business, but I keep hearing that corporate taxes are too high...what I would like to see is a full study of US corporations to determine cash inflows (taxes paid) vs. outflows (tax dollars received)—I have a feeling most of these companies aren't even close to breaking even

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Hamilton Nolancbabgeae
      4/13/15 4:59pm

      http://gawker.com/we-need-an-int…

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      cbabgeaeHamilton Nolan
      4/13/15 5:05pm

      I missed that article when you wrote it, and it's a nice idea, but WTO obligations probably wouldn't allow for it.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Rom RombertsHamilton Nolan
    4/13/15 4:42pm

    This makes sense if your starting point is that all people deserve a shot at making a living wage and living a healthy life.

    Problem is, if you take that assumption out of the equation, you get the broken, heartless logic that says people don't deserve anything at all. They don't deserve better pay if they have "lower-rung" jobs. They certainly don't deserve any help from the taxpayer if they are on that "lower-rung" of the job market because they should try harder. The solution on this side of the equation is, I guess, for people to just fall over and die of exposure and hunger a lot more frequently.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      The Alvin Greene DreamRom Romberts
      4/13/15 4:47pm

      Until you explain that not aiding people on the lower rungs will lead to increases in crime, which will necessitate more spending on law enforcement, courts, and the prison system. None of this stuff happens in a vacuum.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Badass McFisticuffsRom Romberts
      4/13/15 4:47pm

      That's the solution to most money problems in this Greedy Capitalism live in... "Profits Before People" should be our new national motto.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    BobKennerHamilton Nolan
    4/13/15 4:58pm

    No one is forcing those people to work there. It's a free market economy, not a socialist one, as much as you wish it were. If they weren't employed there, they would probably be making less elsewhere or not be working at all. The same people who complain about low wages at McDonald's and Walmart are the same people who would complain about price increases at both those establishments and not shop there if they raised prices to compensate for the higher wages. So, basically, you're hypocrites! You also forget about the millions of dollars both those companies contribute to the communities in which they operate. Just remember, the problem with socialism is you always run out of other people's money. Businesses have a right to make a profit. They have a responsibility to their shareholders to do so. Time to get out of your mom's basement and make a decent living so you can see how the world REALLY operates!

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      IkerCatsillasBobKenner
      4/13/15 5:08pm

      "The same people who complain about low wages at McDonald's and Walmart are the same people who would complain about price increases at both those establishments and not shop there if they raised prices to compensate for the higher wages."

      There are plenty of people on this post who are complaining about low wages at McDonald's and Walmart, and many of us have expressed a willingness to pay slightly more in order for that to happen.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Arctic16BobKenner
      4/13/15 5:27pm

      1) You don't understand what a "socialist economy" is and 2) not all of us shop at Walmart.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    HashtagsAndHashish2Hamilton Nolan
    4/13/15 4:41pm

    Fucking A. Will the American public ever wake up??? Sam Walmart's family has enough wealth to live like kings for 6 generations and we're picking up the tab for him paying his workers non-living wages. And don't get me started on the fact that a good percentage of their products are made in neo-slavery sweatshops in Asia. I don't care if stocking shelves isn't "skilled" labor. We shouldn't be paying that family a god-damn dime. And no, Hilary Clinton is not the answer. Her connections to Wall Street and her acceptance of their donations signals that we'll continue to answer to the share-holder class.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ManchuCandidateHamilton Nolan
      4/13/15 4:39pm

      "Hey, that's OUR scam!"

      -Pro Sports Teams

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        aynrandfullfrontal1ManchuCandidate
        4/13/15 7:16pm

        "That's OUR scam, and you stole it from us!"

        -The Confederate States of America

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      killjoyhaveitHamilton Nolan
      4/13/15 4:42pm

      Here in my state (New MOTHERFUCKING SHITHOLE Jersey) $15/hr is just about right as a minimum wage. Fast food/retail employees might not merit top dollar but they certainly merit more than the minimum wage from 1994. If Mickey D's and Sprawl-Mart can't stay in business anymore, oh well, someone else will fill the gap.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        Haighakilljoyhaveit
        4/13/15 5:00pm

        I had family in town (northern Jersey) from New Hampshire and Massachusetts (just over the border from Nashua). They were shocked at what things cost down here. When a new store from another state comes to New Jersey, I always check to see if they've "Jerseyed" the prices. Some don't, most do.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      SiphanHamilton Nolan
      4/13/15 4:43pm

      This is capitalism at its finest. Separation of production from consumption. Hiding the real exploitation in the back side of the economic system. This is how capitalism works at its finest. That profit has to come from somewhere and it turns out its you and me. As it always was.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        bluetileSiphan
        4/13/15 5:34pm

        Spot fucking on.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        KingoftheNorthwaySiphan
        4/14/15 4:16am
        Reply
        <