McStrike

#26
#26
you claim they're unqualified for a better paying job at 22yo yet you hope they get a raise. Do you hand out raises to your employees simply because they show up daily and ignore the impact of their contributions to the company?

hoping a worker gets their wages doubled for doing absolutely nothing extra is absurd


We pay above the average for staff people. As a consequence, none has ever quit. There is value to continuity for us and we pay for that. The two situations really are not very comparable.

But if the employees are there and see the cost of living go up, corporate profits skyrocket, but their salaries stay the same, I don't see why anyone would be surprised if they start to resent it.

They can ask for a raise. The only difference between doing it one at a time versus doing it together is that together they are more likely to succeed.
 
#27
#27
And if they either cannot geographically do that, or are unqualified at 22 years old for other things, they are obligated to be homeless?

You people are cruel. Hope they get a raise.

Also, you do realize that if they raise the minimum wage, that means there's a good chance some workers are let go.

So going by your logic, I'm going to say YOU are cruel because you obviously hope some lose their jobs.
 
#28
#28
We pay above the average for staff people. As a consequence, none has ever quit. There is value to continuity for us and we pay for that. The two situations really are not very comparable.

they absolutely are. Do you give raises and bonuses based on nothing but showing up? That is what these workers are requesting

But if the employees are there and see the cost of living go up, corporate profits skyrocket, but their salaries stay the same, I don't see why anyone would be surprised if they start to resent it.
then do something about it besides whining you aren't being paid enough to count change out of a drawer. Get a skill, ask how to advance in your location or find one nearby that offers better opportunities. This isn't secret info it's common sense. Something that is obviously lacking in someone who believes the only effect of every min wage worker being jacked up to $15/hr is they will get bigger paychecks.
 
#29
#29
We pay above the average for staff people. As a consequence, none has ever quit. There is value to continuity for us and we pay for that. The two situations really are not very comparable.

Correct. They aren't comparable. I assume your staff has some level of appropriate education and experience. I assume your interview consisted of more than "Are you able to tell the difference between fish and beef?"

But if the employees are there and see the cost of living go up, corporate profits skyrocket, but their salaries stay the same, I don't see why anyone would be surprised if they start to resent it.

And if they resent it they can quit.

Employment is a supply-and-demand market just like any other. If an employer offers such low wages that no one wants to work for him, he will eventually raise his wages if he wants to stay in business.

They can ask for a raise. The only difference between doing it one at a time versus doing it together is that together they are more likely to succeed.

They are also more likely to "negotiate" themselves out of employment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#30
#30
Cannot geographically do that?? Rent a ****ing Uhaul and move to Mississippi where they arent paying 1300 a month in rent.....Jesus, so many ****ing excuses. Also being unqualified is a problem that isnt my problem and one that all of us have had at one time. Are you suggesting we all came out of high school qualified to work on rockets or something? If you think that we are cruel, why dont you march your happy ass down to your local McDonalds and hire these people at 15.00/hr to work at your office..............oh thats right, you wont because they arent qualified to do that, only qualified to fill a 16oz cup for $15.00/hr. Ridiculous

Agree with all of this but I have questions and concerns. So Basically as of the past hundred years each of our lives depends on our own individual investment to our worth in relation to current job markets.

Makes sense.

What happens when less and less jobs are out there. Due to technology and thousands lost due to lower wages outside of America. It shifts the traditional job market from even twenty years ago in a different direction.

Eventually more people will suffer and more people will be in poverty. Reguardless of individuals own choices.

We have created an economy that removes the ability of individuals to live a "simple" life. We all have to now invest heavily at the earliest years of our lives to maximize our learning capacity in order to live like our parents generations for the most part.

So I'm asking, is the point of our short human lives on this earth to invest all of our time and energy into a job?
 
Last edited:
#31
#31
They are also more likely to "negotiate" themselves out of employment.


Possible. But if they see strength in numbers as far as collective bargaining and think it's worth the risk to try, then that's, you know, perfectly legal.

Good for them.
 
#32
#32
Agree with all of this but I have questions and concerns. So Basically as of the past hundred years each of our lives depends on our own individual investment to our worth in relation to current job markets.

Makes sense.

What happens when less and less jobs are out there. Due to technology and thousands lost due to lower wages outside of America. It shifts the traditional job market from even twenty years ago in a different direction.

Eventually more people will suffer and more people will be in poverty. Reguardless of individuals own choices.

We have created an economy that removes the ability of individuals to live a "simple" life. We all have to now invest heavily at the earliest years of our lives to maximize our learning capacity in order to live like our parents generations for the most part.
So I'm asking, is the point of our short human lives on this earth now to invest all of time and energy into a job?

I agree with much of this. The job market today is vastly different from even 20 years ago, and it will only continue to shift in the direction you describe.

But the investment you speak of isn't simply a result of the job market shrinking, it's a result of the false idea that we have developed when it comes to higher education. Mind you, I'm not opposed to higher education, but there are jobs that still exist in our country that have not changed in 50 years. Those jobs might have required little more than a high school diploma, and now we're being told that at least four years of college is a must.

I know that part of that is the fact that, with more educated people in the market, employers can be pickier. But we've also allowed ourselves to be convinced of things that simply aren't true. You don't need a finance degree to be a bank teller.
 
#34
#34
Possible. But if they see strength in numbers as far as collective bargaining and think it's worth the risk to try, then that's, you know, perfectly legal.

Good for them.

So, if your employees collectively banded together to force a 80% raise in salary over what they were already being paid for their skills and education, you would happily fork over that additional payroll? Are you going to eat this, or are you going to pass it on to your "clients"? These individuals pay is not illegal nor is it sweatshop-like to where they are being so opressed into poverty. The wage that they are being paid is driven by the job market and demand for that skillset.
 
#35
#35
Agree with all of this but I have questions and concerns. So Basically as of the past hundred years each of our lives depends on our own individual investment to our worth in relation to current job markets.

Makes sense.

What happens when less and less jobs are out there. Due to technology and thousands lost due to lower wages outside of America. It shifts the traditional job market from even twenty years ago in a different direction.

Eventually more people will suffer and more people will be in poverty. Reguardless of individuals own choices.

We have created an economy that removes the ability of individuals to live a "simple" life. We all have to now invest heavily at the earliest years of our lives to maximize our learning capacity in order to live like our parents generations for the most part.

So I'm asking, is the point of our short human lives on this earth to invest all of our time and energy into a job?

The job market has always had swings in different directions of marketable skills. When we go to everything being tech jobs, simply take your ass to Devry and get a degree in working on this gizmos. As far as jobs moving OCONUS, I will agree that is an issue.
 
#36
#36
And if they either cannot geographically do that, or are unqualified at 22 years old for other things, they are obligated to be homeless?

You people are cruel. Hope they get a raise.


Is everyone else's wages gonna increase as well? The $10 an hour isn't much but there are jobs that pay that wich require some skill & it's in the neighborhood what a lot of temp agencies pay. If this happens with no overall increase who's to say people with actual skills don't decide to take the easy way & flood the fast food industry looking for employment knocking all these skill-less folks out of a job. So $10.10 an hour or whatever it is means nothing if you're unemployed.
 
#37
#37
Doubled wages will come with significantly higher prices. Much fewer people will pay ridiculous prices for fast food. They're shooting themselves in the foot. Everything will increase. They'll still not afford rent until they do something worth a crap.

I wouldn't mind slightly higher prices as I could simply change my spending habits. I'd be more concerned about folks on fixed incomes having to pay higher prices on necessities because a group of people want to make $15.00 instead of $10.00 an hour.
 
#38
#38
I agree with much of this. The job market today is vastly different from even 20 years ago, and it will only continue to shift in the direction you describe.

But the investment you speak of isn't simply a result of the job market shrinking, it's a result of the false idea that we have developed when it comes to higher education. Mind you, I'm not opposed to higher education, but there are jobs that still exist in our country that have not changed in 50 years. Those jobs might have required little more than a high school diploma, and now we're being told that at least four years of college is a must.

I know that part of that is the fact that, with more educated people in the market, employers can be pickier. But we've also allowed ourselves to be convinced of things that simply aren't true. You don't need a finance degree to be a bank teller.

Yep college has become a huge business. We can just leave it at that. I'm just not sure that I want to live in a world that requires it's humans to devote their lives to a job. If you don't bust your ass and achieve the best for yourself, chances are that you will be poor in the next thirty years. Unless your parents or grandparents did that and left you a large sum of wealth.
 
Last edited:
#39
#39
Yep college has become a huge business. We can just leave it at that. I'm just not sure that I want to live in a world that requires it's humans to devote their lives to a job. If you don't bust your ass and achieve the best for yourself, chances are that you will be poor in the next thirty years.

Lol
 
#42
#42
Let me state the side of this that I see. It is a failure of economic policy. Fast food jobs used to be for high school students. There were adult jobs for adults. There are fewer adult jobs for adults, so adults are taking high school jobs.

Go ahead and strike for higher wages at fast food cashier and burger flipper positions. You'll likely find out that the picket line won't stand up very well. That high schooler that hasn't been able to find an entry level job because they're taken by adults? Yah. He'll fill out the application and start tomorrow.
 
#43
#43
Yep college has become a huge business. We can just leave it at that.

sure but many issues arise because people can't change their way of thinking about it. Getting education post-HS doesn't have to mean immediately going to a 4yr school. Why are more not utilizing less expensive and local community colleges to get prereqs done? Why aren't trade schools and apprenticeships viewed in the same light as a college degree? It's not just about the schools getting more expensive it's about people not taking the time to understand their options
 
#44
#44
His first part is dead on IMO

Oh yea college is a big business. There's not many jobs that require a degree that couldn't be done without one. It's more about the individual than how long a person went to a school. You could probably cut 4 year degrees in half & achieve the same results. The medical field is about the only thing that actually requires extensive education. Jmo
 
#47
#47
Oh yea college is a big business. There's not many jobs that require a degree that couldn't be done without one. It's more about the individual than how long a person went to a school. You could probably cut 4 year degrees in half & achieve the same results. The medical field is about the only thing that actually requires extensive education. Jmo

Yep you're right. Why then aren't we setting up our high schools in a way that promotes apprenticeships?

I think it's our culture that has created this false hope for young children under the age of 18.
 
#49
#49
Oh yea college is a big business. There's not many jobs that require a degree that couldn't be done without one. It's more about the individual than how long a person went to a school. You could probably cut 4 year degrees in half & achieve the same results. The medical field is about the only thing that actually requires extensive education. Jmo

Not really, this area hires medical assistants by the droves and it only requires a two-year education that is provided by a couple of the local community colleges at less than $150 a semester hour.....of which that is largely covered by scholarships provided by the State. After a two-year degree in this area in that field, a person would normally start out at around 26,000-30,000 a year, which isnt a bad salary to earn in this area of the country.
 
#50
#50
Yep you're right. Why then aren't we setting up our high schools in a way that promotes apprenticeships?

because the govt doesn't understand how to work a system with that many moving parts and prefers the cookie-cutter approach. It also might hurt Johnny's feelings if he's told he might not be college material.


where exactly is vocational training allowed as a substitute for other HS classes? A school offering woodshop isn't the same as one taking a student after 10th grade and teaching them a trade
 
Advertisement





Back
Top