Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
Honestly, consumers don't want to pay what things are actually worth and that is a big issue. The cost of the product or service would be passed on to the consumer, and suddenly the new minimum wage is no different than the old minimum wage.
|
This isn't really true, though, it's just a lie people are told to convince them some people need to stay poor for the betterment of everyone.
Put it this way. In a restaurant, food costs should be about 30% (of which, about 40% is labour costs down the line) and labour costs should be about 30%.
So for every dollar of revenue, right now, 42 cents is labour. If labour costs doubled (pretending everyone was at $7.50 minimum wage and they're now at $15), it would go up to 84 cents. So to cover the labour increase, a $10 meal would have to be $14.20 (a 42% increase).
Say all the customers are minimum wage earners. Previously, at $60 per day ($7.50 x 8) they were spending 17% of their day's salary on that meal. Now, with the increase they're making $120 a day and spending 12% of their salary on that meal. They can buy that meal and still have $6 more in their pocket than they would've had if they bought the meal when everyone was making $7.50. Almost a whole hour's worth of income at their previous wage.
So even with the increased cost of food, they are spending a lower percentage of their income on it. Obviously those are rough numbers, but no, it is not true that there is no difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
That's a push from the left, which is good so I can't see how you're saying that social upward mobility is declining. The right could care less about any of this, they would keep a 12 white man boardroom if they could.
But it can create other problems as not 100% of the people can socially move upward and leftist policies want to protect those left behind too. However, there still has to be competition, business still have the hire the best.
|
Because I'm not using my own personal anecdotes as evidence? Just because you're doing well (in Canada) doesn't mean the
American Dream is working as intended. That doesn't even make sense. Upward social mobility is also not restricted to people in minority populations.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...rd-mobility-us
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the...-in-one-chart/
https://equitablegrowth.org/the-amer...-peer-nations/
And "there needs to be competition, businesses have to hire the best" would be compelling if it weren't for the fact that hiring decisions are almost always completely subjective and the idea of "the best" is based entirely on nonsense.
https://www.businessinsider.com/mana...mselves-2014-5
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/myth-...ug-livingston/
https://medium.com/small-business-st...e-7860519b2003
As usual I'm a little confused about what your point is because you seem to be contradicting yourself and offering up random corporate platitudes that I don't really know how to respond to. You seem to accept the status quo. That's fine. Most people who have done well for themselves in a completely different country usually do.