|
|
| Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF (925523) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 7 |
||
|
| (925901) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 17:56:37 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 09:27:14 2012. Why you put them in charge of the place, give them 300 times what those who DO produce get paid, give them a corner office and send them to conferences. That's how it works now. :) |
|
|
| (925902) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 17:57:53 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 17:53:07 2012. It keeps prices from being too high, but there might still be some other constraint on supply. |
|
|
| (925903) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 18:02:33 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by gp38/r42 chris on Sat Mar 31 11:41:20 2012. Heh. LOVE republican math! :)No ... if burger dude was making more, he'd be able to buy what YOU are selling. It's how many times that sawbuck gets "circulated" that determines "spending power" and the economy as well. Wow ... even Henry Ford figured that one out. |
|
|
| (925912) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 18:35:52 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 18:02:33 2012. Heh. LOVE republican math!And got to love leftist math. No ... if burger dude was making more, he'd be able to buy what YOU are selling. But what he is buying would COST MORE. |
|
|
| (925917) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 18:41:50 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 18:35:52 2012. That's real math. |
|
|
| (925919) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 18:45:52 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 18:35:52 2012. Yup. It's not just one business here, since it's a government regulation it is EVERY business! |
|
|
| (925924) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Sat Mar 31 18:59:27 2012, in response to No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Mar 30 18:23:50 2012. That's how it works in First World countries.I'm sure you can get a footlong for $2.49 in Sri Lanka. |
|
|
| (925932) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 19:11:25 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SMAZ on Sat Mar 31 18:59:27 2012. No, it's how it works in socialist countries. I don't mind at all (as my first post implies) if the cost of doing business causes high prices. It's another thing entirely if it's through useless government intervention. |
|
|
| (925934) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 19:14:12 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 18:35:52 2012. So then once again, we fall back to the republican solution. He can get a third job. Sleeping is for wimps anyway. :)Let's test republican dogma then, shall we? Go to your employer and demand that your salary be cut in half so that you can afford to buy more. I'll wait ... |
|
|
| (925939) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 19:22:15 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 19:14:12 2012. So then once again, we fall back to the republican solution. He can get a third job. Sleeping is for wimps anyway. :)It's not "republican dogma", it's fact. If you raise the wages through government intervention, that raises if for all businesses, not just the one the worker is in. That means a raise in goods, the same goods that the worker is buying along with everyone else. So that increase in salary will be spent on the more expensive goods he has to purchase. Since prices will be higher, his buying power won't be any higher than before the government meddled. He will still need your "third job" suggested. |
|
|
| (925945) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 19:26:24 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 19:22:15 2012. So how much are you asking to cut your salary back by? You know ... for the "cause?" And putting your dogma where your feet are and all? |
|
|
| (925948) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 19:28:03 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 19:11:25 2012. Good post. |
|
|
| (925960) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 19:36:26 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 19:26:24 2012. Depends on the job. No one is advocating anyone's pay be cut, not even the minimum wage positions. But the market should decide who gets paid what, along with the skills of the job requirement. If I don't live up to what I am paid by my employer, I will be fired, as he will find someone else to fill my position.If the job I then wind up having to take is "flipping burgers", there will be a corresponding drop in pay to go along with that, as the skills required are less. Why are you asking people to quit their jobs, and take a lower paying job? That's what your absurd post implies. |
|
|
| (925964) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 19:40:31 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 19:36:26 2012. The reason why I'm saying that is that for most jobs as companies start to hire again, the NEW wages offered for the same job you're doing now is averaging about 20 to 40% lower than what you're getting paid. Obviously since that's now what "the traffic will bear" it means that companies would sure like to toss YOUR ass out and replace YOU with someone at that new wage level ... that's going on now.That's my point ... |
|
|
| (925970) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 19:45:07 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 19:40:31 2012. And that happens. But that is not what you said. You said I should ask my boss to pay me less because of the way economics work. There may come a point where my salary or anyone else's would be a drain on a business. If that happens, either the business eventually dies, or they rework how people are paid, or do other cost saving measures. If the company dies, I or anyone else is also out of a job.I know an old company that had been in business for over 50 years. But economics change. The owner was a great guy. He kept workers he probably should have fired years earlier. The building is now empty with a for sale sign on it. |
|
|
| (925972) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Sat Mar 31 19:49:06 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SMAZ on Sat Mar 31 18:59:27 2012. 1st off, as usual, you even got the name of the country wrong.Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka Secondly, your ideal of 1st world countries is needless regulations driving people into starvation? This is making me hungry also. |
|
|
| (925979) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Sat Mar 31 19:57:19 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by orange blossom special on Sat Mar 31 19:49:06 2012. Apparently cost of combo at McDonalds is 5.64 US in that country too per one stat I found |
|
|
| (925980) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 19:57:55 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 19:22:15 2012. It's worse than that. Because demand will not sustain higher prices in certain markets, the resultant higher costs will result in economic contraction and an overall loss of jobs. Price fixing doesn't work. Why is it that people who accept it doesn't work against sellers still try to impose it on buyers? |
|
|
| (925981) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 19:59:01 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 19:26:24 2012. Bad analogy. He's not asking that the government force his employer to raise his salary for him. |
|
|
| (925983) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:02:43 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 19:45:07 2012. Actually, you seem to be getting my point, but you're not connecting it up the same way. It all comes down to the particular owners of a company and their own social contract with their employees. Publicly traded companies are forced by their shareholders to play the game of diminishing returns and what I describe IS happening among those.Privately held companies are under far less pressure to be brutal like that. And this whole hoohah is coming from the banker mindsets who insist on maximizing their payouts at the expense of the employees. There is nowhere else on this planet where management earns over 300 times what floor workers earn and they're not dropping THEIR paychecks to make product more affordable. And if you hold to this theory, you really should consider doing the right thing and voluntarily cutting your employer's costs so they can compete better. But then we all know you'll fight to the death to avoid that and therefore what I'm saying here is why shouldn't anyone else? Try parking in San Fran or renting an apartment. Like Manhattan (outer boroughs don't apply) San Fran is a high cost city. IF you want to live "downtown" ... it's EXACTLY like NYC out there and so shouldn't come as a surprise. But you can always live in Oakland or Heyward or Daly City where this isn't a problem. Those places are like Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn in the SF realm ... therefore, apples and apples ... |
|
|
| (925986) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 20:06:27 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 19:57:55 2012. Exactly correct. |
|
|
| (925990) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:08:36 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by orange blossom special on Sat Mar 31 19:49:06 2012. Secondly, your ideal of 1st world countries is needless regulations driving people into starvation?All libs want to turn first-world countries into second-world countries . . . |
|
|
| (925993) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:09:35 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:08:36 2012. But it takes republicans to make it happen. :) |
|
|
| (925994) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 20:09:56 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:02:43 2012. No, because I am not asking my employer to raise my pay. If however, the point comes where my work isn't worth what I am paid, I will be fired.Contrary to leftist dogma you are shoveling, I am not owed a job. Companies don't exist to provide "work". A business is a business to make money not to provide jobs. The jobs are a result of the business being in business to make money. |
|
|
| (926001) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:17:27 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 19:59:01 2012. Bad analogies R us! :)My point though is that there is heavy downward pressure on wages, and those re-entering the workforce are taking it in the ear. Whenever employers are able to shrink salaries, they go for it. Ask the rustbelt how that works ... |
|
|
| (926005) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:19:59 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 20:09:56 2012. You should be though ... if you were making a decent wage, you'd only need ONE job ... used to be that way for just about everybody except the financially obsessed. Back in the fabulous 50's that republicans love so much, mommy stayed at home because she didn't NEED to work. Thus, kids got surpervised, taught manners, ate their vegetables and didn't grow up to wear hoodies. :)Now, we have day care and after hours schools and kids being brought up by their peers. Oh ... and owners maybe made two or three times as much as their employees although in small business, often the employees made more money than the boss ... seriously. |
|
|
| (926009) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:24:05 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 17:44:16 2012. the employer would be forced to raise wagesOf course, there's something rather disheartening when the market set wage is still too low to pay for housing and other basic needs but I reek of dirigiste gin. |
|
|
| (926010) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:24:38 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:24:05 2012. Skoal! :) |
|
|
| (926013) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:27:37 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:24:05 2012. the solution is welfare benefits not price controls. |
|
|
| (926015) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:29:33 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:27:37 2012. I thought it was manufacturing jobs, myself. Did you know that the average manufacturing wage from the 50s was equivalent to well over $13/hour in 2012 dollars? |
|
|
| (926016) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:30:38 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:24:38 2012. Skoal! :)I'd have less problems with no minimum wage if we had a robust social welfare state, especially one that's basically rigged toward single mothers and not actual singles. Try getting EITC, Medicaid, or public housing when you're single, and then try with a baby in tow and you'll see the difference in how one is treated by the state. |
|
|
| (926017) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:31:24 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:29:33 2012. manufacturing jobs will never return to the numbers they had in the past. |
|
|
| (926018) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:31:46 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:30:38 2012. You're really that much anti-family, eh? That kind of "society" turns anarchic rapidly. |
|
|
| (926019) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Sat Mar 31 20:31:57 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:24:05 2012. Right, that is a problem and it's affecting more people as the cost of living has been outpacing wages.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (926020) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:32:16 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:31:24 2012. Well then, it's time to move out of the USA, ain't it? |
|
|
| (926021) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:32:16 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:27:37 2012. the solution is welfare benefits not price controls.And Americans are against welfare benefits for poor people, so let's try again. :-) |
|
|
| (926022) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:33:27 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:32:16 2012. are residents of SF against them? |
|
|
| (926024) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:34:10 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:30:38 2012. I know full well from decades ago. "Go live in a tree" ... never could understand why the "welfare system" can't arrange for a LOAN for those who are down on their luck temporarily so they can go get a suit, cleaned up, and go get a job and pay it back when they're working again. Such a simple solution would solve so many problems without an outright grant that never gets repaid. Shit happens sometimes, and we're in no way able to deal with it. :( |
|
|
| (926025) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:34:20 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:32:16 2012. it'll be the same way everywhere. progress can't be stopped. |
|
|
| (926027) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:35:47 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:34:20 2012. Where is the manufacturing going to be done then? Gotta be done somewhere. Manufactured goods aren't going to materialize out of thin air. |
|
|
| (926029) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:37:01 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:35:47 2012. it will be done but it won't provide as many jobs as it once did. |
|
|
| (926030) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:38:49 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:35:47 2012. Nope ... it takes robots ... meatbags be damned. |
|
|
| (926031) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Mar 31 20:38:57 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:37:01 2012. You're foreseeing automation beyond what exists now, then? Not any use if nobody can afford to buy what's churned out. And some powerful countries would still possess the machinery . . . |
|
|
| (926032) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Mar 31 20:40:51 2012, in response to No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Mar 30 18:23:50 2012. How long does it take to make and sell a hero? 10 minutes including all the steps? At $10/hour vs. $8/hour, we're talking about an extra 33 cents.Besides, how do you find people to work in San Francisco to work for minimum wage? Where are they going to commute from? The BART from Oakland is expensive. The big "extra cost of doing business in San Francisco" is that the rents are higher because landlords can find people who are willing to pay more. |
|
|
| (926035) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by AEM-7AC #901 on Sat Mar 31 20:44:03 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:33:27 2012. are residents of SF against them?Given the restricted financial nature of municipalities, no municipal government should be involved in financing welfare provision. To pay for said provision, you'd need to increase taxes, and that ends up playing into the hands of businesses who rent seek and move their businesses to places that have low welfare provision and low taxes, while residents move to avoid paying increased property or income taxes. So you get to attract the poor who need the services, while chasing out those who can pay for it. |
|
|
| (926036) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 20:44:42 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sat Mar 31 20:02:43 2012. Social contract. LOL! |
|
|
| (926038) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 20:45:26 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 20:09:56 2012. +1 |
|
|
| (926039) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Sat Mar 31 20:46:59 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by AlM on Sat Mar 31 20:40:51 2012. It takes less than 5 minutes to make and ring up a Subway sandwich, even if toasted.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (926042) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Sat Mar 31 20:49:04 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Sat Mar 31 20:09:56 2012. That's true and that's why they should open the borders so we can profit by cheaper labor.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (926043) | |
Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Mar 31 20:49:11 2012, in response to Re: No more $5 footlongs at Subway in SF, posted by DAND124 on Sat Mar 31 20:27:37 2012. +1 |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 7 |
||