UK fast-food workers get US lesson in protesting against poverty wages

[Cone]

American fast-food workers who protested in September over their wages are in the UK to help prepare British employees to launch a similar campaign.

If she has that much energy and motivation, why is she working at McDonalds?

 

[JimmyG88]

I’m sure they all pay some taxes. I’m sure they also use the system to avoid paying as much taxes as they can. I’m not sure how that’s relevant though. As I said in another post, “The current inequities of corporate crony-capitalist America are another issue and really irrelevant to the minimum wage debate. Forcing a higher minimum wage will hurt local business just trying to scrape by, while corporate conglomerates will just fire people.”

Maybe businesses that cannot pay a living wage aren’t viable. Victims of the market

 

[madtom]

Maybe businesses that cannot pay a living wage aren’t viable. Victims of the market

not every business is Google or Starbucks. what about a hard-working waiter who wants to fulfill his dream of running his own restaurant, so he quits his job and uses his life-savings to start his own business. can he afford to pay all of his employees a “living wage” and provide healthcare benefits from day one? and forget all that, you keep ignoring my point that minimum wage, like welfare, does more harm than good.

 

[JimmyG88]

not every business is Google or Starbucks. what about a hard-working waiter who wants to fulfill his dream of running his own restaurant, so he quits his job and uses his life-savings to start his own business. can he afford to pay all of his employees a “living wage” and provide healthcare benefits from day one? and forget all that, you keep ignoring my point that minimum wage, like welfare, does more harm than good.

But the waiter has no business opening a restaurant if he can’t treat pay up.

 

[Suudy]

I see. You choose your vocabulary in order to antagonise. We come from different perspectives and cultures.** I believe that all work is of equal value**, and I am happy to live in a country where the poorest are supported by the state as of right. I do however object to employers shirking their duty to pay workers justly and leaving the state to pick up the bill

I don’t think are of equal value, but of equal dignity. There is a difference. What a doctor does is far more valuable than what an auto mechanic does. What a midwife does is far more valuable than what an electrical engineer does. But all are of equal dignity.

 

[madtom]

But the waiter has no business opening a restaurant if he can’t treat pay up.

well then we can have no common ground. why promote an economy that inhibits entrepreneurs from taking a chance, which ultimately creates more jobs? virtually no business can start off fulfilling your requirements. even Google and Starbucks started off as a pipe dream. we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[estesbob]

I am an employee

Always easy to be generous with other peoples money.

 

[Suudy]

Maybe businesses that cannot pay a living wage aren’t viable. Victims of the market

You seem to be missing the connection between minimum wage and who actually receives them. Most businesses do NOT pay minimum wage. Look at the numbers. And of those receive minimum wage, most (nearly 2/3) are not primary earners and cannot reasonably be assumed to need a “living wage.”

 

[JimmyG88]

I don’t think are of equal value, but of equal dignity. There is a difference. What a doctor does is far more valuable than what an auto mechanic does. What a midwife does is far more valuable than what an electrical engineer does. But all are of equal dignity.

It’s subjective.

 

[JimmyG88]

You seem to be missing the connection between minimum wage and who actually receives them. Most businesses do NOT pay minimum wage. Look at the numbers. And of those receive minimum wage, most (nearly 2/3) are not primary earners and cannot reasonably be assumed to need a “living wage.”

Why should the rate for the job be dictated by if the worker is the primary earner. Illogical

 

[Suudy]

Why should the rate for the job be dictated by if the worker is the primary earner. Illogical

YOU are the one talking about “living wage.” Does a 16 year old living at home need the same wage as a 30 year old single mom with 2 children?

 

[Suudy]

It’s subjective.

If everyone has their own standard, then there is no standard.

 

[JimmyG88]

YOU are the one talking about “living wage.” Does a 16 year old living at home need the same wage as a 30 year old single mom with 2 children?

But wages aren’t earned at a rate dictated by need are they.

 

[JimmyG88]

But wages aren’t earned at a rate dictated by need are they.

If everyone has their own standard, then there is no standard.

But if you think it through what if a child was born thanks to a skilled midwife but then died as a result of the midwife’s inability to fix an incubator. What if all post operative patients died from infection because the cleaners did a bad job.

 

[ucfengr]

I’m sure they all pay some taxes. I’m sure they also use the system to avoid paying as much taxes as they can. I’m not sure how that’s relevant though. As I said in another post, “The current inequities of corporate crony-capitalist America are another issue and really irrelevant to the minimum wage debate. Forcing a higher minimum wage will hurt local business just trying to scrape by, while corporate conglomerates will just fire people.”

Corporate conglomerates tend to support a higher minimum wage and increased regulation for this very reason. It makes it harder on their smaller competitors who can’t absorb the increased costs. When you say that a business shouldn’t start unless it can pay a “living wage” you’re essentially setting up a quasi feudal system in which the established players are able to act as virtual lords and princes over their employee serfs because nobody can afford to compete with them.

 

[madtom]

Corporate conglomerates tend to support a higher minimum wage and increased regulation for this very reason. It makes it harder on their smaller competitors who can’t absorb the increased costs. When you say that a business shouldn’t start unless it can pay a “living wage” you’re essentially setting up a quasi feudal system in which the established players are able to act as virtual lords and princes over their employee serfs because nobody can afford to compete with them.

exactly

 

[JimmyG88]

Corporate conglomerates tend to support a higher minimum wage and increased regulation for this very reason. It makes it harder on their smaller competitors who can’t absorb the increased costs. When you say that a business shouldn’t start unless it can pay a “living wage” you’re essentially setting up a quasi feudal system in which the established players are able to act as virtual lords and princes over their employee serfs because nobody can afford to compete with them.

But surely that is the nature of free market capitalism, which is the very system some posters are using in order to defend poor pay

 

[ucfengr]

But surely that is the nature of free market capitalism, which is the very system some posters are using in order to defend poor pay

That’s the nature of “crony capitalism”, not free-market. In “crony capitalism” big players like WalMart and Amazon are able to advocate for increased regulation on them, and their smaller competitors, to make it harder for their smaller competitors to compete with them. Why do you think Amazon supports collecting sales tax on internet sales or WalMart supports increasing the federal minimum wage? It’s because to them, the cost of compliance is trivial, while for the start-up it’s prohibitive.

 

[JimmyG88]

That’s the nature of “crony capitalism”, not free-market. In “crony capitalism” big players like WalMart and Amazon are able to advocate for increased regulation on them, and their smaller competitors, to make it harder for their smaller competitors to compete with them. Why do you think Amazon supports collecting sales tax on internet sales? It’s because to them, the cost of compliance is trivial, while for the start-up it’s prohibitive.

But advocates of the free market usually favour total laissez faire where the strongest in the market battle with the weaker and winner takes all. If anyone espouses free market capitalism they cannot then say it shouldn’t be a free market if it damages my business or complain when the government refuses to intervene in the market to make it better for them. That would only be a bit free when it suited. At best it would be a mixed economy with some social control and that control would per force involve regulation of income

 

[Dawnia]

But if you think it through what if a child was born thanks to a skilled midwife but then died as a result of the midwife’s inability to fix an incubator. What if all post operative patients died from infection because the cleaners did a bad job.

Pay is not determined by how valuable the work is, but rather by how many people can perform said work. (I personally think garbage haulers have pretty important jobs, but nearly anyone can do that job)

Low skill jobs pay low wages because almost anyone can do the job. Being a Walmart cashier (having been one) takes the skills most 9 year olds possess. You just have to know how to use a scanner and count money.