If a business can buy a machine that is cheaper and more reliable than a worker to do a job it is going to. It is that simple. Fast food workers getting paid far more than they are worth will be replaced by kiosks, automated ordering and check out machines, then the kitchen will get automated.The auto industry did that. Grocery and home improvement stores did it.Wages in excess of the worth of labor generally result in more unemployment.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/13/apologies-but-welfare-payments-to-employees-are-not-subsidies-to-walmart-and-mcdonalds/^http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-15/mcdonalds-low-wages-come-with-a-7-billion-side-of-welfare^http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-13/how-mcdonald-s-and-wal-mart-became-welfare-queens.html^These were three of a dozen articles on how US Taxpayers are subsidizing companies by supplementing employee income with food stamps, housing assistance, earned income credit, and other “social welfare programs.” At least 7 billion dollars a year goes to people who work full time for minimum jobs, yet the CEOs of these companies have compensation packages worth as much as 8 figures. Why are we subsidizing these companies when all they need do is raise prices for their products and/or take a 1 to 5% cut in executive pay in order to pay their people a living wage.Perhaps we should call for Congress to ban food stamps and other aid to people who work for these companies. Then we avoid raising the minimum wage, we cease subsidizing the businesses, and we’ll stop giving money to people who will be forced to look for jobs that make it possible for them to feed their families, live in some kind of dwelling, and maybe get medical attention once in a while.Since Congress and conservatives believe that raising the minimum wage will destroy our nation, I’m not sure what else we can do.7 Billion dollars a year to help companies underpay workers? Is that a viable plan?Respectfully,C.
You are correct but missing a wee bit. The only jobs that are available are very low paying jobs that could never support a family (unless you take a half dozen).
It didn’t help that the UAW by the 80’s had pushed worker’s wages for simple assembly work in those plants to in excess of $70 an hour with benefits.That created a huge incentive to automate.Toyota and Nissan having built new US plants in Right to Work states had about half that wage so they remained less automated at the same time.
Oh, what was the name of that book…. Anyway, there was a volume written on this back at the time. GM went far heavier into automation faster than its competetors to reduce work force costs.One negative side result of that masterskrain pointed out: GM’s quality plummetted compared to other manufacturers. That was the era of such loser vehicles as the Fiero, a poster child for lousy built vehicles.
Yep. O’Reilly fell for the feel-good crap about “giving everybody a Living Wage”.I agree with many things he supports, but this position (much like Warren Buffet) is from a Super-rich person that is not just barely keeping their small business alive.Those small business owners will have no choice, but to either layoff workers or go out of business.
If we really want to talk about income inequality we need look no further than our elected public servants. The average salary on capitol hill is $173000. Out in the real world it is around $35000. That does not even take into account their retirement and other benefits, such as automatic raises even when the economy is in the tank. Ex presidents get a pension of a few hundred grand a year. Since when is it our reponsibility to keep these people wealthy?
ConserveGov over 10 years ago
Why not just give every 16 year-old burger flipper $25 bucks an hour? Maybe unicorn rides over the rainbow would be nice too.
Enoki over 10 years ago
If a business can buy a machine that is cheaper and more reliable than a worker to do a job it is going to. It is that simple. Fast food workers getting paid far more than they are worth will be replaced by kiosks, automated ordering and check out machines, then the kitchen will get automated.The auto industry did that. Grocery and home improvement stores did it.Wages in excess of the worth of labor generally result in more unemployment.
chazandru over 10 years ago
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/13/apologies-but-welfare-payments-to-employees-are-not-subsidies-to-walmart-and-mcdonalds/^http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-15/mcdonalds-low-wages-come-with-a-7-billion-side-of-welfare^http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-13/how-mcdonald-s-and-wal-mart-became-welfare-queens.html^These were three of a dozen articles on how US Taxpayers are subsidizing companies by supplementing employee income with food stamps, housing assistance, earned income credit, and other “social welfare programs.” At least 7 billion dollars a year goes to people who work full time for minimum jobs, yet the CEOs of these companies have compensation packages worth as much as 8 figures. Why are we subsidizing these companies when all they need do is raise prices for their products and/or take a 1 to 5% cut in executive pay in order to pay their people a living wage.Perhaps we should call for Congress to ban food stamps and other aid to people who work for these companies. Then we avoid raising the minimum wage, we cease subsidizing the businesses, and we’ll stop giving money to people who will be forced to look for jobs that make it possible for them to feed their families, live in some kind of dwelling, and maybe get medical attention once in a while.Since Congress and conservatives believe that raising the minimum wage will destroy our nation, I’m not sure what else we can do.7 Billion dollars a year to help companies underpay workers? Is that a viable plan?Respectfully,C.
echoraven over 10 years ago
Damn brilliant sir. Damn brilliant.
echoraven over 10 years ago
You are correct but missing a wee bit. The only jobs that are available are very low paying jobs that could never support a family (unless you take a half dozen).
Enoki over 10 years ago
It didn’t help that the UAW by the 80’s had pushed worker’s wages for simple assembly work in those plants to in excess of $70 an hour with benefits.That created a huge incentive to automate.Toyota and Nissan having built new US plants in Right to Work states had about half that wage so they remained less automated at the same time.
Enoki over 10 years ago
Oh, what was the name of that book…. Anyway, there was a volume written on this back at the time. GM went far heavier into automation faster than its competetors to reduce work force costs.One negative side result of that masterskrain pointed out: GM’s quality plummetted compared to other manufacturers. That was the era of such loser vehicles as the Fiero, a poster child for lousy built vehicles.
ConserveGov over 10 years ago
Yep. O’Reilly fell for the feel-good crap about “giving everybody a Living Wage”.I agree with many things he supports, but this position (much like Warren Buffet) is from a Super-rich person that is not just barely keeping their small business alive.Those small business owners will have no choice, but to either layoff workers or go out of business.
eugene57 over 10 years ago
The data I have seen shows when minimum (not minimm) wage was increased, unemployment went down.
eugene57 over 10 years ago
@ConserveGov“On what actual data are you basing this “opinion”?”
Data, surly you jest.
Brutatowski over 10 years ago
If we really want to talk about income inequality we need look no further than our elected public servants. The average salary on capitol hill is $173000. Out in the real world it is around $35000. That does not even take into account their retirement and other benefits, such as automatic raises even when the economy is in the tank. Ex presidents get a pension of a few hundred grand a year. Since when is it our reponsibility to keep these people wealthy?