That's exactly what I think when I read this clown's posts. In Uni I was fed all this ivory tower nonsense, read Ayn Rand's The Virtue of Selfishness and The Fountainhead but then I got into the real world and woke up really fast. This dude's obviously part of the tete carree, redneck brigade that's kept this empty land the glorified third world backwater that considers going to timmies 'experiencing culture'.
Timmies fights min wage hike
- Thread starter poker
- Start date
...when we all know that true culture involves sniffing feet.
Just razzin' ya. Totally joking. It was an obvious shot that had to be taken. No harm intended and all that.
Nobody profits on work in exchange for wages. It is a trade of things of equal value.
The value of a person's work can not be increased through minimum wage legislation.
Minimum wage legislation makes it illegal for people (whose work is worth less than the minimum wage) to work.
The value of a person's work can not be increased through minimum wage legislation.
Minimum wage legislation makes it illegal for people (whose work is worth less than the minimum wage) to work.
Split the difference
Look, there's no definitive answer to this question. On the one hand, you have to have a minimum wage in any state where you provide social assistance. The minumum wage has to be a decent amount above the welfare line, or a lot of people just wouldn't work. If you abolish minimum wage, you're also assigning a lot of people to state-supported poverty, and they'll be stuck there for a long, long time. Exactly where you set it doesn't make a huge difference, but you've got to make it high enough so people have some incentive to work. Like most things related to government, it's a necessary evil.
Tim Horton's has seen the minimum wage jump by about 50% since 2004, with another on the way. Their revenues haven't kept up, they're in an oversaturated market, and when you have that many minimum-wage employees, that quickly becomes a whole lot of red ink. They're just doing typical corporate stuff when an election's on the horizon - trying to buy influence.
But the Liberals aren't about to stop a minimum-wage hike when they're facing so much opposition against the HST; remember, they're about to ram a tax down our throats. So, whatever they spend on Liberal lobbying will be wasted.
The OP didn't provide a source specifying discussions within the Liberal to actually do this; "various gov't officials" could be practically anyone. We can assume that Tim's is meeting with as many MPPs as they can, and a lot of them are probably from the PC party. They're gearing up for 2011, and think that Dalton's vulnerable. They're more than happy to receive some additional campaign funds from Tim's, and they'll probably promise anything to get it - perhaps, no more raises to the minimum wage in the future?
So, Tim Horton's is spending money on political lobbying... and? It doesn't mean it'll actually change the minimum wage, and the lobbying costs are a drop in the bucket for them; they file it under marketing and claim it on their taxes.
I'm just not sure why it collapsed into insults... it was fun to read until it got nasty. Seriously, all that over a short discussion of economic theory and a bit of banter. Geez, can't we all play nice in the sandbox?
Look, there's no definitive answer to this question. On the one hand, you have to have a minimum wage in any state where you provide social assistance. The minumum wage has to be a decent amount above the welfare line, or a lot of people just wouldn't work. If you abolish minimum wage, you're also assigning a lot of people to state-supported poverty, and they'll be stuck there for a long, long time. Exactly where you set it doesn't make a huge difference, but you've got to make it high enough so people have some incentive to work. Like most things related to government, it's a necessary evil.
Tim Horton's has seen the minimum wage jump by about 50% since 2004, with another on the way. Their revenues haven't kept up, they're in an oversaturated market, and when you have that many minimum-wage employees, that quickly becomes a whole lot of red ink. They're just doing typical corporate stuff when an election's on the horizon - trying to buy influence.
But the Liberals aren't about to stop a minimum-wage hike when they're facing so much opposition against the HST; remember, they're about to ram a tax down our throats. So, whatever they spend on Liberal lobbying will be wasted.
The OP didn't provide a source specifying discussions within the Liberal to actually do this; "various gov't officials" could be practically anyone. We can assume that Tim's is meeting with as many MPPs as they can, and a lot of them are probably from the PC party. They're gearing up for 2011, and think that Dalton's vulnerable. They're more than happy to receive some additional campaign funds from Tim's, and they'll probably promise anything to get it - perhaps, no more raises to the minimum wage in the future?
So, Tim Horton's is spending money on political lobbying... and? It doesn't mean it'll actually change the minimum wage, and the lobbying costs are a drop in the bucket for them; they file it under marketing and claim it on their taxes.
I'm just not sure why it collapsed into insults... it was fun to read until it got nasty. Seriously, all that over a short discussion of economic theory and a bit of banter. Geez, can't we all play nice in the sandbox?
yes thats nice ,, it does not mean I amnot allowed to defend the workers against narrow minded people
How does credit work its way into this discussion?
The discussion is about corporations being forced to pay a wage which is not related to the value of the services they receive.
Its not at all about credit
Where the fuck did that come from?
I have seen your act before & its wearing thin
Yeah , I get that you do like me because I do not buy into the union BS
You call me a clueless wonder, yet in the same sentence you also assume that everyone else is credit stupid like yourself.
Talk about clueless!!
No we are not all like that.
Not everyone buys into the pressure of capitalist marketing
Some of us are able to judge value and save for the items we want.
Perhaps you could save up and buy a clue
However I suspect you will go to your boss & tell him that you need a raise because the price of clues has risen and since you do not have a clue, you need one
Oh, so you read a book & understand it all now do you?
This is not about Ivory Tower thinking, its about common sense.
If a company is forced to pay more to its employees, then somethings has to give
a) lower profits
b) higher prices
c) fewer employees
Its amazing how you can read a book & then be able to describe me with such confidence while getting it so wrong.
FYI, I hardly ever visit Timmie's, I do not drink coffee
I am kinda surprised you did not know that fact since you seem know everything else about me
Know-it-all
Know-it-all? Hardly. But I'm thankful that I'm not a know-nothing.
First of all, people who work should earn a living wage. I personally don't even think our pathetic government should be levying an income tax on people earning less than 30,000/year, but that's another matter.
If you say that's any increase mandated by the government to the minimum wage is 'arbitrary' and therefore unjustifiable, then obviously you haven't been following the practices of CEOs, who stack compensation committees of boards with their cronies so they will in turn hire the right kind of compensation consultants, the kind that will recommend outlandish 'tails I win, heads the shareholders lose' pay deals. You'll have to tell me why those machinations of the 'fee' market, which has raised, in my mind just as arbitrarily as any increase to the minimum wage, compensation to the upper echelons of public companies from 50x the average wage in the 60s and 70s to 300x in our time.
Larue..our parents and their parents, knew the value of delayed gratification, but again,because you didnt get my point...our society.. a capitalist one at that..stresses buy now pay later..get what you can now..dont bother waiting...believe me commies and labour unions arent the only ones....oh and just like you went on a rant because i dared assume that you knew who Tim Hudak was..i take exception to the assumption that you know my credit history...and that i have a boss....Larue go back to blowing your buds at the Fraser Institute or the CD Howe Institute
I'd like to say I have it in me to stop going to Timmies.... but eventually I'll go back. And every time I do, I'll kid with every counter person I see that they need a union..... badly! I'll write it on their comment cards too!
I may even include phone numbers of the local chapters to help them organize...
Organization, that is the key!
Cheers!
I may even include phone numbers of the local chapters to help them organize...
Organization, that is the key!
Cheers!
So you take offense when some makes an assumption about you ?
Perhaps you will take note next time you assume something about another person.
BTW it was not that I did or did not know who Tim Hudak was, that was offensive, it was your assumption that he was my hero & I thought just like him. Then as now, you do not have a clue about my thought process
As I mentioned before, our societies marketing efforts, which you say drives buy now, pay later, does not justify excessive wages relative to the value of an employees service.
A strange and very illogical conclusion
An employer owes an agreed upon wage to an employee, an employer does not owe an employee a certain standard of living. If people can not maintain what they feel is inadequate standard of living on a wage, they need to upgrade their skills & seek a wage that will meet their expectations
The cocksucker reference is usually the insult of last resorts when a mental midget like yourself runs out of intelligent things to say
A real class act. Grow up
CEO compensation is a hot topic right now & there are pros & cons to both augments
Are CEOs paid to much now?
Perhaps, but that is between them & the owners of the company.
If you do not like become an owner & change it.
I personally do not care what a CEO makes if I own the stock and he is able to drive the price up through his performance.
If he doubles the share price & increase the dividend, then I say "give him an extra bonus & thank you very much"
If his performance results in lower earnings and a dividend cut, then all of his compensation was too much & I want him replaced
What the Bovine Betty behind the counter at Timmie's gets paid is between her & the franchise.
Thats is none of my business unless it affects over-all inflation
Is a minimum wage hike inflationary?
Yes
I know if the government gets involved, they will fuck it up.
Their decisions are often short term in vision as they seek re-election & play politics with our economies health
So you would rather leave companies free and unimpeded to fuck it all up, as they HAVE DONE, with nobody to police these greedy selfish myopic pompous self-centered crooked bastards, eh Johnny?
You know you really come across as the ultimate lap-puppy with even a bigger brown nose than bottie, another consummate under the desk artist from Ohio! Both of you corporate lickspittles should get together and trade notes on the best ways to pleasure your CEO masters for they are truly the only ones you(s) apologize and care for!....
Take Mexico for example, an annual salary based on minimum wage is 11% of average per capita earnings versus 42% in Canada. So if I'm in Mexico with no skills and few prospects, those drug cartel jobs are looking pretty good. Why try to play by the rules of a system that offers you no chance when you could take a chance to strike it up, even though it is detrimental to 'normal' society?
So maybe you say "lock them all up". Assuming you get honest peace officers to do it, what are you going to end up with? A situation like in the US with over ONE percent of the population incarcerated? I hear it takes quite a toll on the budget. Or perhaps cut the level of funding to those prisons and get a Brazil like situation where the prisoners seem more in control.
People take those jobs because they need to survive. The amount they make leaves virtually no disposable income to "learn new skills", aka pay for education. The cost of living here, even for just a small apartment rent can take a large chunk out of their pay cheque.
So what is going to give? The pay is shit, the employer may be "under-employing" them to keep their status as part time, or lay off the workers every six months and re-hiring. But these jobs require little or no skill, so is the employer really going to have no choice but to increase the pay rate? Why not just import temporary workers from abroad! Call them what you want, they are willing to accept lower pay, fewer or no benefits, and do so because the value of our currency means they can send home an amount that goes a lot farther where they come from.
The CEO only needs to convince others that he has created value so that they will pay more for equity in the company. I don't think anyone will ever see a CEO tell investors he believes the company is being overvalued.
Always makes me think of guys like John Roth, knew that they were severely and irrationally overvalued, but just quietly cashed out and left the ball to fall on average joe investor (which wasn't me because I was still in highschool).
"CORPORATION, n:
An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility"
I thought I politely asked you to go away.So you would rather leave companies free and unimpeded to fuck it all up, as they HAVE DONE, with nobody to police these greedy selfish myopic pompous self-centered crooked bastards, eh Johnny?
You know you really come across as the ultimate lap-puppy with even a bigger brown nose than bottie, another consummate under the desk artist from Ohio! Both of you corporate lickspittles should get together and trade notes on the best ways to pleasure your CEO masters for they are truly the only ones you(s) apologize and care for!....
How can I make this clear to you.
What you have to say is irrelevant as you have proven time & time again that
a) you have nothing positive to say ever
b) You constantly seek to blame others
c) you are well over due for your medication at the mental institution
d) your a commie who's net contribution to society is that you never reproduced. (hopefully)
e) you lack any sense of compassion for others if they oppose your twisted views on life. I truly dispose a lowlife like you who cheers when some else dies (Robert McNamara).
f) you make assumptions without any basis. Your a loudmouth waste of Oxygen
g) you always revert to cocksucker insults when you have nothing intelligent of relevant to add. (Perhaps there was an incident in your past that constantly brings that image of male on male oral into your tiny tiny mind)
Do everyone on this board a favor and find another hobby
Now go away
Hello
The law in question is in Ontario not Mexico
If you search far and wide enough I guess you can always find an example to back up an irrelevant point.
The cost of living is not the question, it is the value of the service employees are trading for mini mun wage
A good employer will recognize the value a good employee brings & reward him or her.
It is sound business sense to retain good employees and one must reward them to keep them.
A minimum wage increase forces business to reward mediocre and bad employees as well
Example
Three employees Good, Bad, & Average all at $10 / hr
The boss want to reward Good with a $5 hr raise, figures Average could use a boost by a $1 / hr & Bad employee gets no increase as he was rude to customers on several occasions
So his cost for all three working at the same time is $36 / hr, which he can budget for, if all goes well
The govt comes along and tells him that he has to pay all of them $12 at a minimum.
So he can either
a) keep all three @ $12 / hr hoping Good & Average stick around at that wage.
b) let Bad employee go & pay the other two more & hope they can also do his work.
i am a class act..but i do take liberties...i enjoy ruffling the feathers of self important , know it all nobs like you...i think i suceeded in your case...give you one more shot at me, because im through with you..
Sorry to drag this thread back up.... was giving it a re-read.
The problem with this point here about executive salary and bonus structure is CEO's take full credit when companies do well..... and find excuses for when the company does not do so well. They get those massive bonus's regardless. Every time... Good performance, poor performance.... massive bonus!
GM was a prime example.... The CEO there drove that company into the ground, and still insists it was not his fault. If the Obama Admin's task force had not asked him to step down, they would not be restructuring so well.
Cheers!
