Post deleted by User.
Wages In The US |
||
|
Wages in the US
Asura.Kingnobody said: » Cerberus.Pleebo said: » Not likely since the cost of their food is not determined by labor costs but rather by their competition and what their customers are willing to pay. Any increased production costs, if substantial enough, would probably be offset by changes in labor. Since everyone's costs are going to go up, everyone's prices are going to go up, all at the same time. The amount that will go up will vary, and then cap at a specific amount due to, as you said, competition and consumer. But since everyone's costs are going to go up (not just fast food, but everyone), and everyone's prices are going to go up, that is called (gasp!) artificial inflation! Labor changes will also occur, but it will still be minor compared to the artificial inflation that arises. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Phoenix.Amandarius said: » No one said they are worthless. That is straw man, brah. Bahamut.Milamber said: » That actually isn't the purpose of a business. The purpose of a business is to provide a service or product. Ideally, the business will want to maximize its profits for a given set of variables; but that isn't the point of the business. This seems to be something which is forgotten or misunderstood. Asinine. The service or product is the means to make profit, which is the goal of business. Don't forget, profits are evil and we should arrest anyone who is trying to make money, for they are evil and should be punished/killed. Edit: Sarcasm is hard. Exactly who is saying profits are evil? For a business to thrive, it needs to make a profit. Most mission statements (where you try to define the goal of your business) read somewhat differently than the following: - Make money. - Make more money. - Make all the money we can possibly make. brb while i play the minimum wage card to inflate 'income' and increase tax 'revenue'.
everyone should make 1,000 dollars an hour then everyone in the USA will be rich!
that's how economies work, right? Sylph.Systematicchaos said: » Bahamut.Milamber said: » Ragnarok.Azryel said: » Minimum talent nets you minimum wages. I’ve seen several mentions of the fast food industry in this thread, and if McDonald’s has come to be considered as a “career option” in this country, then we, my friends, have far bigger problems at hand. Such as looking down on people for the jobs that they perform? Is there something particularly wrong with being a farm hand? A shoe salesman? A plumber/electrician/carpenter/general contractor? A welder? A rancher? An electronic component assembler? A seamstress/tailor? A photographer? A fast-food worker? A doctor? A lawyer (all jokes aside)? A janitor? I'm in no way saying that you have to pay all of the above equally. But you shouldn't be essentially stating that these people are worthless, or bring little to no value to the table. Some of those are worthy career options, but some jobs are not careers. They are jobs better suited to high-school age workers, or older people simply working for health insurance or to supplement what they already have. Working for McDonalds should in no way, shape, or form, be able to feed a family of 4, or 2 for that matter, unless they are ordering from you. Why shouldn't it? Real minimum wage: To equal the purchasing power of the minimum wage in 1968 ($10.69), the current minimum wage’s real value ($7.25) would have to increase by $3.44 (or 47%).
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42973.pdf Moving away from only minimum wage workers: The majority of the workforce in the US is paid on an hourly basis, 59% in 2012. This has varied +/- 2% since 1979. Table 10: http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2012.pdf Median income of wage earners in 2012 was $27,519.10. http://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2012 Median household income 2012 was $51,017.00 Figure 1: Real median household income 1967-2012 (highest peak was in 1999) ![]() https://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p60-245.pdf Real GDP per capita growth vs. real median family income ![]() There are many issues that have to be addressed dealing with wages in the US that goes far beyond the minimum wage question. The workforce trends salary/hourly ratio has basically remained unchanged, even with an increase in workforce and a shift in employment sectors. Real median household income peaked in 1999 but Real GDP per capita continues to increase. fonewear said: » Did I see the class warfare signal? I'm calling Batman right now. No, contribute or go away. Shiva.Gib said: » everyone should make 1,000 dollars an hour then everyone in the USA will be rich! that's how economies work, right? Not enough, the evil rich emuch over there is making $10,000 an hour and thus everyone should make as much. It's just a form of socialism. Force everyone to have the same net income / disposable income level via wage control and a progressive tax system which puts further power into the government to shape and mold society. And yes these people here are actually arguing for unskilled labor to make as much as semi-skilled and skilled / professional labor. That's what the talk about a "living wage" is. The cost of living in any particular location isn't some random number, it's based on the sum of the average incomes of the local population. So there can never be a "living wage" as a minimum, any attempt to create one just raise's the averaged cost of living of that location as long as there are other people making more then that living wage. This is the reason I refuse to take positions in the Virginia / Maryland area even though they pay 2x my current salary. The cost of living in those area's is astronomical and it would be a lot of stress / hassle for barely any increase in disposable income. Disposable income is what people should be discussing here, not absolute wage. A clever way to force everyone to make about the same wage would be to fine employers for forcing people to work over 25 hours a week. Also maybe they should fine people for making over X amount of dollars by offering them less of a subsidy for mandatory health insurance. They should probably pass a law that does that.
What I don’t understand is how Beyoncé can make $50 million a year and no one seems to care, but when someone who runs a company that employs hundreds, if not thousands of people, that actually makes a contribution to driving the economy makes a fraction of those earnings people grab their torches and pitchforks chanting a mantra of inequality… What is the standard by which we condone and/or scorn another's success?
Ragnarok.Azryel said: » What I don’t understand is how Beyoncé can make $50 million a year and no one seems to care, but when someone who runs a company that employs hundreds, if not thousands of people, that actually makes a contribution to driving the economy makes a fraction of those earnings people grab their torches and pitchforks chanting a mantra of inequality… What is the standard by which we condone and/or scorn another's success? Last I checked, Beyonce wasn't making 50M a year stripping American companies and shipping jobs overseas. She also employs hundreds or thousands of people all across the industry directly and indirectly. That said, I agree, but public figures aren't on the same level for hatred that faceless CEO's are. ._.
It's not the fact that people make a lot of money. It's that some people make money in ways that are detrimental to society while skirting any kind of repercussions that earns people's scorn. yes lots of positive role models in Hip Hop none promoting anything detrimental to society.
I wouldn't condone any of that either. What's your point?
Seemed like you were replying to the Beyonce post who is married to a Hip Hop mogul who made his fortune promoting and glorifying a lifestyle detrimental to society.
Who cares who she's married to? The post was about an ill-perceived double standard using Beyonce as an example, and I'm saying it's incorrect.
Hip Hop has destroyed more homes than any CEO ever did and her fortune is a direct result.
and we've hit level retard, I wonder when we'll hit full retard again.
I'm sorry you seem to disagree with me. You do not believe Hip Hop influence has destroyed households?
The comment from you doesn't deserve an in depth response.
Bahamut.Kara said: » Graphs and stuff I find your chart of real median familiy income vs productivity interesting. I would assume the increase in productivity is due to automation? Phoenix.Amandarius said: » I'm sorry you seem to disagree with me. You do not believe Hip Hop influence has destroyed households? I don't, not any moreso than reality tv, alcohol, economic hardship, etc. Hip Hop is a red herring to try and drag this thread off of wages and skills gaps and into radical right la-la land. Only in LaLa Land has hip hop not had an enormously detrimental effect on society. What were those felony statistics Eric Holder was going on about the other day?
If you cannot handle this discussion I understand. Got any data showing ANY correlation between hip-hop music and the pathetically ambiguous idea of "detriment effect on society"?
Odin.Jassik said: » Got any data showing ANY correlation between hip-hop music and the pathetically ambiguous idea of "detriment effect on society"? An unexpected derail appears.
Hip hop is a broad term, but the more extreme elements of that genre are a symptom of a larger problem very much related to the subjects discussed in this thread already. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Hip Hop has destroyed more homes than any CEO ever did and her fortune is a direct result. I wouldn't say just hip hop, but I would agree that music in general does. Jetackuu said: » Sylph.Systematicchaos said: » Bahamut.Milamber said: » Ragnarok.Azryel said: » Minimum talent nets you minimum wages. I’ve seen several mentions of the fast food industry in this thread, and if McDonald’s has come to be considered as a “career option” in this country, then we, my friends, have far bigger problems at hand. Such as looking down on people for the jobs that they perform? Is there something particularly wrong with being a farm hand? A shoe salesman? A plumber/electrician/carpenter/general contractor? A welder? A rancher? An electronic component assembler? A seamstress/tailor? A photographer? A fast-food worker? A doctor? A lawyer (all jokes aside)? A janitor? I'm in no way saying that you have to pay all of the above equally. But you shouldn't be essentially stating that these people are worthless, or bring little to no value to the table. Some of those are worthy career options, but some jobs are not careers. They are jobs better suited to high-school age workers, or older people simply working for health insurance or to supplement what they already have. Working for McDonalds should in no way, shape, or form, be able to feed a family of 4, or 2 for that matter, unless they are ordering from you. Why shouldn't it? Because 16 year olds can do it and there is no way I am going to spend 30 dollars for a cheese burger so everyone can make 50k a year.... I will agree with have major income issues. It is cheaper where I live to be on welfare than it is to drive 25 miles to work each day for 32 hours a week and have to pay for a car, insurance, and gas at 7.50 an hour, however that being said the issue is not easy to solve. |
||
|
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|
||