Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ...
4
5
6
7
8
... LastLast
  1. #101
    The Insane Kathandira's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ziltoidia 9
    Posts
    17,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    I’m starting to think if workers were plywood or some other inanimate object, they wouldn’t care about price going up and it driving movie business out. Where is the demand for cheaper steel from China, to make theater infrastructure cheaper? Why it totes cool that prices in general are going up, without pay going up, but it only being a problem when it comes to paying people?

    Just pretend people are advertising...
    I'm sure if we broke it ALL down, there are many reasons why the employees are paid so little, not just CEO's pocketting it all. And yes, it should all be audited and figured out. The employees should get paid more. But that is not my responsibility, nor the ground floor workers at the theaters or any business to figure out how. It is those who are in the financial and executive positions to make it happen.
    RIP Genn Greymane, Permabanned on 8.22.18

    Your name will carry on through generations, and will never be forgotten.

  2. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Y'all threatened supermarket workers with this nonsense during the wage hike push in Seattle and guess what - supermarkets still employ actual people.
    the thing is... supermarkets seem to employ a lot fewer actual people and the ones that they still employ, have increased workload to compensate for higher salaries. every supermarket has self checkout with one harried employee running around, assisting people with issues. registers are still there. but most of them are closed most of the time and half the time the only reason they are still there is because it costs too much to remodel. there is starbucks with a single barista in one of the supermarkets in my area where some of the registers used to be.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkel...-minimum-wage/

    and here is the thing. we are NOT doing universal income here. had this been implementation of universal income, fine, that would actualy fix the poverty. but we are not doing that. we are just raising minimum wage without making sure there is a proper safety net for people who will inevitably lose their jobs. (before welfare and unemployment gets brought up, those systems... have issues themselves. and are NOT a substitute for universal income or living wage in any way shape or form)

    https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/202...nimum-Wage.pdf

    honestly, my opinion is... work on universal income first or at least better unemployment and THEN fuck around with that degree of flat increase.

  3. #103
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    It Was Capitalism All Along
    Posts
    53,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Witchblade77 View Post
    the thing is... supermarkets seem to employ a lot fewer actual people and the ones that they still employ, have increased workload to compensate for higher salaries.
    I'm curious why you think lean staffing is a result of higher wages and not just like, an inevitable result of prioritising profit.

    "Seem" isn't evidence and you're going to have to demonstrate a causative relationship, to boot.

    honestly, my opinion is... work on universal income first or at least better unemployment and THEN fuck around with that degree of flat increase.
    And again, your opinion is wrong because it's not borne out by any real world evidence besides hypotheticals mostly pulled out of the arse of the Heritage Foundation.
    "Multiculturalism has failed!" angrily types a person of European descent living in the Americas in a Germanic language using Roman characters on a device coded with Arabic numerals before leaving in a huff to go watch cartoons made in Japan.

  4. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    I'm curious why you think lean staffing is a result of higher wages and not just like, an inevitable result of prioritising profit.

    "Seem" isn't evidence and you're going to have to demonstrate a causative relationship, to boot.




    And again, your opinion is wrong because it's not borne out by any real world evidence besides hypotheticals mostly pulled out of the arse of the Heritage Foundation.
    underline - its literally one and the same. one causes the other. companies prioritize profits, therefore ANYTHING that cuts into those profits? will be adjusted until profits are back.

    higher wages cut into profits. therefore, they compensate by employing fewer people. mandatory medical insurance cuts into profits. therefore - full time hours are cut so that they no longer have to provide insurance.

    are you expecting for profit companies to develop conscience now? is THAT what this is?

    what real world evidence YOU have to show that companies just gird their loins and NOT fire people so they end up with NO salaries whatsoever?

    that hypothetical is non partisan study the link for which i got from a very left leaning news source, btw. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/con...ckage-n1257077

  5. #105
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    It Was Capitalism All Along
    Posts
    53,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Witchblade77 View Post
    underline - its literally one and the same. one causes the other. companies prioritize profits, therefore ANYTHING that cuts into those profits? will be adjusted until profits are back.

    higher wages cut into profits. therefore, they compensate by employing fewer people. mandatory medical insurance cuts into profits. therefore - full time hours are cut so that they no longer have to provide insurance.

    are you expecting for profit companies to develop conscience now? is THAT what this is?
    Not really, no.

    It's just mildly hilarious how you don't see that all of your complaints are literally the arguments people use for minimum wage. The profit motive incentivizes wages going to zero in the absence of regulation.

    what real world evidence YOU have to show that companies just gird their loins and NOT fire people so they end up with NO salaries whatsoever?
    I dunno, the fact that every minimum wage hike in history hasn't been followed by a spike in unemployment? Zzzz.
    "Multiculturalism has failed!" angrily types a person of European descent living in the Americas in a Germanic language using Roman characters on a device coded with Arabic numerals before leaving in a huff to go watch cartoons made in Japan.

  6. #106
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    66,566
    Quote Originally Posted by Witchblade77 View Post
    underline - its literally one and the same. one causes the other. companies prioritize profits, therefore ANYTHING that cuts into those profits? will be adjusted until profits are back.

    higher wages cut into profits. therefore, they compensate by employing fewer people. mandatory medical insurance cuts into profits. therefore - full time hours are cut so that they no longer have to provide insurance.

    are you expecting for profit companies to develop conscience now? is THAT what this is?
    The point is that this is just capitalism in action and really doesn't have anything to do with minimum wage increases.

    what real world evidence YOU have to show that companies just gird their loins and NOT fire people so they end up with NO salaries whatsoever?
    https://cepr.net/documents/publicati...ge-2013-02.pdf

    That's my go-to source. A lot more available here; https://www.businessforafairminimumw...cause-job-loss

    Basically, it comes down to whether you want to believe the hypotheses of people with an Econ 101 grasp of theory and who thus believe they know EVERYTHING, or if you want to look at actual data, actual economies, and see if there's a correlation.

    Because there isn't one. Unemployment doesn't dip when minimum wages rise, not in the long term at least; there's sometimes a short-term blip as business owners fuck around and don't adapt to the wage increase in their business model appropriately.

    If minimum wage increases led to unemployment, you'd see a correlation between the two, and there is no such correlation in the data. Some of the lowest unemployment levels have occurred at the points where the minimum wage was the highest.

    That's the thing with hypotheses. You've got to test them, against data, and if the data doesn't bear them out, you need to discard them as faulty.

  7. #107
    Movie theaters are already hurting like all entertainment businesses from the pandemic, so it's kind of a loaded title. You could say, movie theaters fear popcorn suppliers will increase wholesale prices to theaters 5%, that would kill us.

    Be more upfront that it's a conservative attack on any minimum wage increase, rather than cherry-picking the hardest hit industry from a 100-year pandemic to try to make a weak argument.

  8. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    The point is that this is just capitalism in action and really doesn't have anything to do with minimum wage increases.



    https://cepr.net/documents/publicati...ge-2013-02.pdf

    That's my go-to source. A lot more available here; https://www.businessforafairminimumw...cause-job-loss

    Basically, it comes down to whether you want to believe the hypotheses of people with an Econ 101 grasp of theory and who thus believe they know EVERYTHING, or if you want to look at actual data, actual economies, and see if there's a correlation.

    Because there isn't one. Unemployment doesn't dip when minimum wages rise, not in the long term at least; there's sometimes a short-term blip as business owners fuck around and don't adapt to the wage increase in their business model appropriately.

    If minimum wage increases led to unemployment, you'd see a correlation between the two, and there is no such correlation in the data. Some of the lowest unemployment levels have occurred at the points where the minimum wage was the highest.

    That's the thing with hypotheses. You've got to test them, against data, and if the data doesn't bear them out, you need to discard them as faulty.
    I have actualy found data - more then one study but i'm going to link MIT one https://economics.mit.edu/files/9497. "not significant" amounts to about 0.7% increased unemployment primarily among low skilled and/or younger workers (number from another study that specifically covered increases of 2000) - your cashiers etc - which also happens to be people working at movie theaters, your concession workers, your ticket sellers. might not seem like much - less then 1%, but when you convert it into actual people its over a million.

    is it overall worth it? depends on how you look at it. is the whole world going into preventive measures to reduce covid deaths which are relative to total population ALSO less then 1% - worth it? absolutely, yes. that less then 1% is millions of people. which is why I'm iffy on federal minimum wage increase, even spread through the years - without decent provisions for those who ARE going to be negatively affected.

    moreover... even if we assume that the net of jobs gained vs jobs lost is going to be neutral (which it won't be, not entirely as history shows)? it will still likely result in a loss of most of the movie theater industry. again, are you ok with it? you have a right to be. I'm just saying that industry being concerned about dying due to last straw of increased wages - is not coming out of nowhere. it WILL affect them negatively it WILL very likely kill finish the job that combination of streaming and covid related changes like entire slate of blockbuster movies going directly to streaming services - started.

    also, and this is from personal experience in NYC, so your mileage may vary. but I remember response of small businesses I've encountered and worked for back in those days to higher wages. under the table pay. my experience is primarily with small scale retail, cause that's where my first jobs were, but back then? I did take lower paying jobs, cause they were under the table, off the books. I wasn't the only one. only reason I even knew it was an option was because this was the information given to me as to how to get some extra money for my family to help us get on our feet - without losing welfare benefits, which were crucial for us at that time, but also still not enough to actualy cover all of the expenses and feed a family of 4.

    I know i'm rambling, I've been thinking about this the entire day, and I almost decided not to respond because person I was linking data to - wasn't even reading it. but here we are anyways. there will be people who will benefit from minimum wage increase. there WILL be, absolutely. there will ALSO be people who will be hurt by it. some of those people will be business owners. and some will be workers. the data is there. if you think that its worth it for its net benefit? that's fine. I'm just reminding that there IS also a cost there.

    P.S. capitalism in action has EVERYTHING to do with wages. because for time being, we are living in a capitalist society so it will respond in a capitalist fashion.
    Last edited by Witchblade77; 2021-02-17 at 02:45 AM.

  9. #109
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    66,566
    Quote Originally Posted by Witchblade77 View Post
    P.S. capitalism in action has EVERYTHING to do with wages. because for time being, we are living in a capitalist society so it will respond in a capitalist fashion.
    And here's the big caveat;

    Not everyone can work. There's non-zero unemployment as it is.

    Thus, society can do one of two things;

    1> Plan to support those who do not work financially, such that they do not suffer hardship, or
    2> Insist that human suffering is a necessity of the societal system.

    I lean towards #1, and don't have any problem pointing out that #2 is pretty much just nakedly evil. And yet, that's capitalism, baby.

    Edit: And here's a tip; those "hurt" by any reduction of employment wouldn't actually be hurt by that lack of employment, they're hurt by the lack of support from society. The idea that one must work is pretty much exactly what the term "wage slavery" means. A system whereby capitalists get all the benefits of a slave system without having to take any of the responsibility for the maintenance of the enslaved workers.

  10. #110
    Pandaren Monk
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Witchblade77 View Post
    the thing is... supermarkets seem to employ a lot fewer actual people and the ones that they still employ, have increased workload to compensate for higher salaries. every supermarket has self checkout with one harried employee running around, assisting people with issues. registers are still there. but most of them are closed most of the time and half the time the only reason they are still there is because it costs too much to remodel. there is starbucks with a single barista in one of the supermarkets in my area where some of the registers used to be.
    I live in Sweden. We do not have this discussion. And our worst paid employees are paid far more than US minimum wage.
    Even here self-checkouts have been springing up. Mostly because of popular demand. In a lot of cases many stores haven't even dropped that many employees. Most of their employees do stuff more efficient than sit at the check-out all the time, even if one of the service check-outs is always open.

    Self-check out isn't a minimum wage thing. It's a development thing. And a store that fully goes self-check out and removes service check out will probably lose some customeers.
    - Lars

  11. #111
    The Insane Glorious Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In my bunker leading uprisings
    Posts
    17,891
    Quote Originally Posted by Ayirasi View Post
    Mike Stoklasa will be pleased.
    And Jay baumann

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Witchblade77 View Post
    underline - its literally one and the same. one causes the other. companies prioritize profits, therefore ANYTHING that cuts into those profits? will be adjusted until profits are back.

    higher wages cut into profits. therefore, they compensate by employing fewer people. mandatory medical insurance cuts into profits. therefore - full time hours are cut so that they no longer have to provide insurance.

    are you expecting for profit companies to develop conscience now? is THAT what this is?

    what real world evidence YOU have to show that companies just gird their loins and NOT fire people so they end up with NO salaries whatsoever?

    that hypothetical is non partisan study the link for which i got from a very left leaning news source, btw. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/con...ckage-n1257077
    No one expects for profit companies to develop a conscious. Ergo capital should be disciplined by regulation if need or by any sort of counter veiling force unions for example. Yea they have to take a hair cut and their gonna have to take it voluntarily or be forced into it.
    The hammer comes down:
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmeric View Post
    Normal should be reduced in difficulty. Heroic should be reduced in difficulty.
    And the tiny fraction for whom heroic raids are currently well tuned? Too bad,so sad! With the arterial bleed of subs the fastest it's ever been, the vanity development that gives you guys your own content is no longer supportable.

  12. #112
    Gaming arcades aren't so much of a thing any more since home entertainment is what it is today. Same, to at least some degree, will likely bite the cinemas too, or should it be said that the jaws are closing quite well already. Minimum wage hikes as the scapegoat is what you'd expect to hear from the owners.

    On a purely subjective side note, comparing the quality of mainstream movies to whatever non-movie content available today, I'm not surprised the appeal is fading, regardless of the pandemic. Would I rather watch a 1.5 hour montage of special effects, and/or a masterpiece whose only achievement was to have a previously horrendously discriminating (for whatever reason, artificial ones included) cast replaced with whatever was the FotM this time, was filmed in Xinjiang to lick CCP's arse when there's the option of tuning in for another episode of a series from Netflix, Amazon Prime, whatever stream service you use, or even some free content from YouTube?
    Not saying there wasn't crap movies back in days, because there was - lots of them, but back then the alternatives were limited to say the least. Cinema worthy releases have never come in numbers, and the threshold for that worthiness is climbing.

  13. #113
    All these businesses claiming it's not affordable lol. Then you check the markups against their overhead.

    What is really being said is, our executives can't take a paycut to just be slightly richer than god rather than richer than 10 gods put together if we raise minimum wage by 6 goddamn dollars.

    Just another bullshit scare tactic by people refusing to lower profit so that people don't have to struggle to live.

  14. #114
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    19,893
    Quote Originally Posted by prwraith View Post
    All these businesses claiming it's not affordable lol. Then you check the markups against their overhead.

    What is really being said is, our executives can't take a paycut to just be slightly richer than god rather than richer than 10 gods put together if we raise minimum wage by 6 goddamn dollars.

    Just another bullshit scare tactic by people refusing to lower profit so that people don't have to struggle to live.
    They can't cut executive pay because then the executives would leave for other better jobs and theaters would only be able to hire second-rate business leaders at a lower pay rate.
    Optimism! (HumanProgress.org)

  15. #115
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    It Was Capitalism All Along
    Posts
    53,526
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    They can't cut executive pay because then the executives would leave for other better jobs and theaters would only be able to hire second-rate business leaders at a lower pay rate.
    Any executive that refuses to pay their workers a living wage is second rate by default. Sorry sweaty.
    "Multiculturalism has failed!" angrily types a person of European descent living in the Americas in a Germanic language using Roman characters on a device coded with Arabic numerals before leaving in a huff to go watch cartoons made in Japan.

  16. #116
    Herald of the Titans TigTone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Westfall
    Posts
    2,735
    A bit off topic.

    Companies complain about paying fair wages but they still have the horrible practice of hiring just enough part timers and a few managers on salary and squeeze them to run a store until they burn out. Then rinse and repeat.

    How would that problem be solved?

  17. #117
    The Insane PC2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    19,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Any executive that refuses to pay their workers a living wage is second rate by default. Sorry sweaty.
    The living wage wage doesn't mean anything because the living wage is always the current wage plus 3-5 more dollars. It literally wouldn't matter if everybody was getting $15 per hour because then they'd immediately say "I'm not truly living, gimme more".
    Optimism! (HumanProgress.org)

  18. #118
    Herald of the Titans TigTone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Westfall
    Posts
    2,735
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    The living wage wage doesn't mean anything because the living wage is always the current wage plus 3-5 more dollars. It literally wouldn't matter if everybody was getting $15 per hour because then they'd immediately say "I'm not truly living, gimme more".
    So what ? If they want that then they need to get better jobs.

    The point of a living wage is to make sure people can have housing and water/food without having to work more than one job.

    And it’s not a living wage if you are also on state/fed benefits.

  19. #119
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    It Was Capitalism All Along
    Posts
    53,526
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    The living wage wage doesn't mean anything because the living wage is always the current wage plus 3-5 more dollars. It literally wouldn't matter if everybody was getting $15 per hour because then they'd immediately say "I'm not truly living, gimme more".
    You're correct, because if the minimum wage had actually kept pace with productivity it would be in the realm of $24 an hour.

    Moreover, living wage is in fact calculable, so shove of with that "the living wage doesn't mean anything" nonsense.
    "Multiculturalism has failed!" angrily types a person of European descent living in the Americas in a Germanic language using Roman characters on a device coded with Arabic numerals before leaving in a huff to go watch cartoons made in Japan.

  20. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    The living wage wage doesn't mean anything because the living wage is always the current wage plus 3-5 more dollars. It literally wouldn't matter if everybody was getting $15 per hour because then they'd immediately say "I'm not truly living, gimme more".
    I think the point is to have giant corporations pay their workers enough to get by, you do realize that we spent trillions in welfare because of this right? Your tax money is basically subsidizing Amazon well I should say even more since we pay them with the tax code some more.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •