![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
This post got me thinking.
I am firmly in favor of:
A) A higher minimum wage in the whole US, and my home state of NY
B) Honesty in politics
While the OP I linked to is not exactly dishonest, it's not exactly honest either.
And this is not to put flak upon the poster there, but it's an example of political rhetoric that is used to leverage one side of a conversation, ignoring nuance.
the graphic in the linked to OP:
1) Doesn't seem to take into account state laws that raise min wage over fed laws
2) Doesn't take into account the vast difference in housing throughout a state
My objection is more with 2 than 1. 1 is easy to take care of, but 2 is not easy.
New York City is WAYYYY more expensive than Rochester or Buffalo, NY; or a large number of other places within the state I could name. Yet, this graphic gives us a number, presumably an average. But that average is way skewed. But how else should they do it? Give us on graphic for NYC and another for the rest of NY State? That wouldn't work either, because then you'd need to break it down for other cities and so on. So what do we do?
We must talk about things in the big picture without getting bogged down in details, otherwise we will have to talk for eons before we can understand what needs to be done. So while I agree that the min wage needs to go up, across the US, I have a problem with the info-graphics created to support that argument. They lack nuance, and as such, are deceiving. Even if they don't mean to be, and are honestly doing the best they can to compile and sort the data, the inevitability of misleading data is going to doom us all.
That said.
Happy saint patty's day.
Was I drunk when I wrote this? You decide.
I am firmly in favor of:
A) A higher minimum wage in the whole US, and my home state of NY
B) Honesty in politics
While the OP I linked to is not exactly dishonest, it's not exactly honest either.
And this is not to put flak upon the poster there, but it's an example of political rhetoric that is used to leverage one side of a conversation, ignoring nuance.
the graphic in the linked to OP:
1) Doesn't seem to take into account state laws that raise min wage over fed laws
2) Doesn't take into account the vast difference in housing throughout a state
My objection is more with 2 than 1. 1 is easy to take care of, but 2 is not easy.
New York City is WAYYYY more expensive than Rochester or Buffalo, NY; or a large number of other places within the state I could name. Yet, this graphic gives us a number, presumably an average. But that average is way skewed. But how else should they do it? Give us on graphic for NYC and another for the rest of NY State? That wouldn't work either, because then you'd need to break it down for other cities and so on. So what do we do?
We must talk about things in the big picture without getting bogged down in details, otherwise we will have to talk for eons before we can understand what needs to be done. So while I agree that the min wage needs to go up, across the US, I have a problem with the info-graphics created to support that argument. They lack nuance, and as such, are deceiving. Even if they don't mean to be, and are honestly doing the best they can to compile and sort the data, the inevitability of misleading data is going to doom us all.
That said.
Happy saint patty's day.
Was I drunk when I wrote this? You decide.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/12 15:32 (UTC)It is unfair to assume that labor costs cannot go up--or if they do, it's somehow BAD for everyone.
Meanwhile:
A) Most min wages increases aren't that dramatic, or, they are phased in over a number of years. e.g. the 5.15 to 7.25 federal min wage increase took place over three years. So it's not a sudden hit like that.
B) You forget that your new workers now might spend more money at your food-shop. They gotta eat too; but now, instead of cooking rice and beans at home, they might just buy a meal from you. This applies to both the workers in your shop who you pay more, and the countless others in other stores who make min wage.
I bet that the McDonalds employee who wants some food is sick of the same old McDonalds, but with their min wage salary, cant quite afford your food.
BUT! If their wage goes up 33% and your food cost goes up 10%, well, they are still more likely to be able to afford it and thus purchase it.
C) If any other good that was required for business went up in cost, then what? OMG they're charging me more for my X or Y! I cant allow that to happen!
Except, if it's a supplier of something other than labor, you cant always do something about that.
but for some reason, labor is expected to remain very cheap while other goods get more expensive. that doesnt make sense.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/12 18:21 (UTC)You speak as if it's an option. If labor costs go up, you either bring in more money or cut expenses. Cutting expenses is immediate. Bringing in more money is a crap shoot -- if it wasn't, it would be easy to make money hand-over-fist for no reason whatsoever.
And if you are a corporate store, or a franchise, it's in the contract that you will meet their expectations for labor and COGS, or eventually they'll find someone more ruthless than you to run their store, or your franchise fee will go up accordingly. Counter-productive in my eyes, but hey, that's those evil corporations for you. Bottom line, nothing more.
A) That's a forty percent increase over three years. As I cited in my example to rick, labor expectations from corporate were lowered from a doable 22% to a much tougher 18%. That dishwasher makes more money, but now he works alone during lunch rush instead of having a little help now and then that makes it bearable. In case you haven't done it, that's a really shit job and I wouldn't do it five days a week.
B) Employees get one free meal on shift as in incentive. Would I actually pay for this food if I'm working there, company-store style? Maybe once a month. And the burger place down the road also raised their prices. An increase in minimum wage won't increase business at minimum wage places -- it make it possible to pay living expenses (I'm not discounting that). Eating out is a luxury item on those wages.
C) Labor isn't really "expected" to be cheap while other costs go up. It's one of the few areas that an owner/manager actually has some control over. If costs go up, you either increase income or decrease expenses. Fixed expenses are fixed, and some go up over time (rent, insurance, taxes). Never down. COGS (Cost of Goods and Services)
fluxuate (ha! I wondered why that wasn't in my spell check, lolfluctuate and the only control you have there is either finding new vendors, changing what you offer (not an option with a franchise), or controlling waste/portions. A very difficult task if you're already pretty efficient. So that leaves labor. However you end up cutting those man-hours, the effect is immediate. Run a shift on four people instead of five and you've cut your labor for that shift by 20%. Period. More money in the coffers that day.It sucks. I'd LOVE to pay people a living wage if and when I have my own store. Love love love to. But if I have to pay my bills in order to actually open my doors and remain open... there are only so many areas I can juggle. So we'll see how it works.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/12 18:29 (UTC)You speak as if it's an option. If labor costs go up, you either bring in more money or cut expenses. Cutting expenses is immediate. Bringing in more money is a crap shoot -- if it wasn't, it would be easy to make money hand-over-fist for no reason whatsoever.
You speak as if every penny that a company has is already spoken for.
Wal-Mart could pay it's employees more, keep it's prices the same, if only they cut how much their CEO's make.
Also, if your provider of item X ups their price, what do you do? The increase in the cost of labor should be viewed the same way. Labor is just as valuable a commodity as the other items you need to run a business.
And yes, I have been a dishwasher. It was my first job outta college, actually. I get my BA and the next day I travel to Fire Island (resort island off Long Island) and worked as a dishwasher for a summer. The pay was 8/hour. It sucked.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/12 18:37 (UTC)In small business (retail/food especially), the "CEO" is often times not even taking home a paycheck for years so that he can meet payroll and stay open.
Eight bucks an hour for washing dishes? Nice. Not happening in much of America, because most small business haven't reached their tipping point in sales (where making more money is really that, making more instead of costing more), and some never will. But if everyone closed shop that isn't at that paradigm yet, we'd probably have 75% less businesses open.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/12 18:40 (UTC)The majority of minimum wage employers ARE big-box stores.
(no subject)
Date: 18/3/12 21:35 (UTC)I would have thought it would be manufacturing?
(no subject)
Date: 19/3/12 03:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 19/3/12 03:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 18/3/12 23:35 (UTC)