Fernandes, 32, worked for years at three separate Dunkin Donuts, in Harrison, Newark and Linden. Between jobs she would pull her 2001 Kia Sportage off the road into parking lots and take naps.
On Monday, after working an overnight shift in Linden, she pulled into a corner of a WaWa convenience store parking lot off Routes 1 & 9 about 8:30 a.m. to sleep. She was found about eight hours later, apparently overcome by fumes from the vehicle, police said.
Once again Sarah Palin gave us some of her word salad. In response to Elizabeth Warren suggesting that we raise the minimum wage for everyone including people who work at fast food restaurants she had this to say. See if everything she said makes sense to you.
Now I would argue that technically liberals also usually regard minimum wage jobs as “stepping stones” as well, and the fact that we support minimum wage laws doesn’t change that. I would also argue that just about no one besides the folks at PeTA and other extreme “animal rights” organizations would ever regard someone as evil for not going vegan or working at a restaurant that serves meat. However, I think someone else could do better explaining what she said. Here’s some brilliant analysis from the world’s smartest cat.
One fast-food CEO has a message for the workers toiling away in his industry: The minimum wage hike you’ve been clamoring for will only hurt you.
The consequences of raising the minimum wage include more youth unemployment, higher prices and increased automation, says Andy Puzder, the head of CKE restaurants, the parent company of Hardees and Carl’s Jr.
“Government needs to get out of the way,” Puzder told Yahoo! Finance in an interview Monday. “If government gets out of the way, businesses will create jobs and wages will go up.”
So far, the federal government has largely stayed out of the way. Congress has not taken up President Barack Obama’s call to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour from $7.25. And with the exception of a few companies, like Costco, In-N-Out Burger and Boloco, businesses haven’t taken the initiative to create higher paying jobs.
Puzder made $4.4 million in 2012, according to Forbes. That’s about 291 times what a minimum wage worker makes in a year, if they’re earning the federal minimum and working full-time. The average fast food CEO made 721 times what minimum wage workers took in in 2013, according to a recent report from the Economic Policy Institute.
Puzder doesn’t address this imbalance. Instead he argues that raising the minimum wage would price teens and young adults out of a job because more experienced adults will want to flip burgers and make these higher wages. In states that have already raised the minimum that’s what’s happening, he said. More experienced workers are “willing” to take these higher paying fast food jobs, particularly after seeing their hours cut because of Obamacare.
Well let’s say all the fast-food joints install automatic burger making machines to replace their minimum wage burger flippers. Do you know what that means?
1. These machines cost about what 6 minimum wage workers make in an entire year.
2. These machines require maintenance—by trained professionals who make about $90K/yr
3. When one of these machines breaks down (as it inevitably will, because the fast-food CEO’s will want to cheap out on the maintenance in #2), who’s going to fix it? You can’t just fire the machine and replace it with another automatic burger machine.
4. That’s right, a highly trained robotics professional who charges $200/hr.
5. Automatic burger machines don’t even exist except for this one prototype which is not on the general market.
The median CEO pay package hit $10.5 million last year, according to the Associated Press, cracking eight figures for the first time since the wire service began calculating the statistic.
The median compensation number rose by 8.8 percent from 2012 and has now climbed by more than 50 percent over the past four years. By contrast, average weekly wages for working Americans rose just 1.3 percent last year, the AP notes. That disparity is all too typical of the modern U.S. economy. CEO compensation has increased 127 times faster than worker pay over the past three decades.
According to the wire service’s figures, the ratio of CEO pay to worker pay now stands at 257 to 1. That is a slightly more optimistic portrait of the relationship between earnings at the top and middle of the income distribution than other recent analyses. The real ratio of CEO to worker pay is more like 273 to 1, according to the Economic Policy Institute, and in some sectors of the economy it is as high as 1,200 to 1.
There are a variety of different methods for determining what a typical CEO earns, and the AP’s estimate confirms some other recent analysis of 2013 compensation for the top officers at large public companies. A USA Today review earlier this year found the same $10.5 million median figure. But that earlier analysis was based on a smaller pool of companies — 200 of the S&P 500, as opposed to 337 of those companies captured in the AP study — so Monday’s figures strengthen the evidence that median CEO pay has breached the $10 million mark.
Corporations can afford to reduce the gap between top earners and frontline employees. Even after taxes, corporate profits hit a record $1.68 trillion last year. These companies are holding about $2 trillion in profit offshore to avoid U.S. taxes. Big business icons like Walmart and McDonald’s could start paying their workers enough to escape poverty with only negligible 1 to 2 percent increases in their prices.
HURR HURR!!!! TEH CEO’S WORK SMARTER NOT HARDER!!!! THEY DESERVE ALL TEH MONEYS, NOT TEH LAZY MOOCHER WORKERS WHO HAVE MINIMUM SKILLS, MINIMUM MOTIVATION & MINIMUM VALUE!!!!!!!!
Fox News accused jobseekers of “laziness,” hyping a survey showing more unemployed American workers becoming detached from the labor force while complaining that unemployment insurance has removed the motivation to take low-paying jobs.
On the May 22 edition of Fox News’ Outnumbered, co-host Sandra Smith claimed that “part of the problem” with lingering unemployment in the United States is “laziness” on the part of unemployed workers. Smith claimed that choosing to collect unemployment insurance was evidence that potential jobseekers are “not incentivized” to accept positions that might they might refuse otherwise:
Smith used a survey from Express Employment Professionals as evidence of her claim that unemployment benefits breed “laziness,” but her statements distort the actual survey findings. While 47 percent of respondents did agree with the statement “I’ve completely given up on looking for a job,” they often cited the lack of available work as the reason for giving up hope. According to the survey results, “46 percent say there are no available jobs,” and one respondent even stated, “After searching for four years and being unsuccessful, I am tired of trying.”
Smith’s implicit argument, that cutting unemployment benefits would urge workers to find new jobs, has already been disproven at the national level. In December 2013, the House of Representatives refused to pass a Senate extension of Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) for millions of Americans. More than 1.3 million Americans lost EUC benefits in the past several months. Of those, only 24 percent were currently employed as of March — 49 percent remained engaged in unsuccessful job searches, and 26 percent had dropped entirely from the labor market.
I can’t even begin to describe how this meme fills me with rage. By keeping unemployed people destitute and desperate, the JRRB CREEYATERZ hope that more of them will take minimum wage shit jrrbz at Walmart or McDonald’s instead of continuing to search for better, high-paying positions for which they are qualified. Then they can point to the minimum wage workers as “unskilled” “minimum motivation” “lazy” “moochers” and other denigrating stereotypes as shown in this sickening right-wing meme:
WASHINGTON — Is a family with a car in the driveway, a flat-screen television and a computer with an Internet connection poor?
Americans — even many of the poorest — enjoy a level of material abundance unthinkable just a generation or two ago. That indisputable economic fact has become a subject of bitter political debate this year, half a century after President Lyndon B. Johnson declared a war on poverty.
Starkly different views on poverty and inequality rose to the fore again on Wednesday as Democrats in the Senate were unable to muster the supermajority of 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster of a proposal to raise the incomes of the working poor by lifting the national minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.
House Republicans, led by Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, have convened a series of hearings on poverty, including one on Wednesday, in some cases arguing that hundreds of billions of dollars of government spending a year may have made poverty easier or more comfortable but has done little to significantly limit its reach.
Indeed, despite improved living standards, the poor have fallen further behind the middle class and the affluent in both income and consumption. The same global economic trends that have helped drive down the price of most goods also have limited the well-paying industrial jobs once available to a huge swath of working Americans. And the cost of many services crucial to escaping poverty — including education, health care and child care — has soared.
“Without a doubt, the poor are far better off than they were at the dawn of the War on Poverty,” said James Ziliak, director of the University of Kentucky’s Center for Poverty Research. “But they have also drifted further away.”
The current incarnation of the GOP is not your father’s Republican Party. These people are not fiscally responsible, and certainly not conservative. They’re really not that bright when it comes to economics. For some reason, they have convinced themselves that low wages are necessary for most companies to survive, and that is just insane. If it’s necessary to survive, then consider the example of Costco. They makes a higher profit per store than Walmart, and have for many years. Here’s another: the Washington, DC City Council proposed a minimum wage of $12.50 last year, and Walmart killed plans for three stores. There was no mass exodus of companies from the District; just Walmart. (By the way, they settled on $11.50, and there is still no mass exodus.) If low wages are so necessary to compete, why do so few companies pay the minimum wage? Fewer than 15 percent of all workers make less than $10 per hour, and small businesses that pay the minimum wage or less are actually at higher risk of failure. Most companies that pay at or around minimum wage are in the discount retail and fast food industries. Yet supermarket chains, which have a much higher union membership and pay higher wages against a much tighter profit margin, seem to do quite well.
Many minimum wage workers have no bank account, and rely on check cashing offices to get cash, pay bills and wire money to relatives abroad. Contrary to what social scientists believe, these workers prefer check cashing services over banks, because banks do not offer them the services they need, a researcher at The New School in New York City has found.
For example, if a worker deposits her paycheck on Friday in a checking account, she can’t spend that money until Monday or Tuesday. If she instead visits a check cashing service, the money is available immediately, and she can pay her bills at the same time.
The video is about 15 minutes long. Toward the end, Prof. Lisa Servon notes that the spending power of low-wage workers has declined dramatically since 1968, which makes it even harder for them to save money in a bank account.
More: Why the Working Poor and Banks Are a Bad Match - American Banker
When I was young, I was taught, “A fair day’s work for a fair day’s wage.” I could work a 40 hour week and make a decent living. I could even raise a family, send my kids to college and still look forward to retiring someday. But since trickle down economics, multiple recessions, the housing bubble, special treatment of banks ‘too big to fail’ and other corporate rot, that’s all gone. The jobs that are now available require I work two of them so I can default on a mortgage, apply for food assistance and deny my children the opportunity for a higher education. Meanwhile, the lazy rich help themselves to the fruits of my labor and produce nothing. Somehow, though, this is my fault.
The reality is that corporate America has stopped paying their workers for their work. Productivity is way up but wages are stagnant. Does that sound like the America you grew up believing in? It certainly doesn’t to me. The obvious solution is for corporate America to pay a fair minimum wage but the right finds the idea of this simple fix horrifying. When asked, those on the right use canned responses to explain why you don’t, and shouldn’t, make a living wage. Here are the top 5 “reasons” and why they’re completely wrong.
(1) Raising The Minimum Wage Will Cost Jobs
The biggest lie. Several studies have shown that increasing the minimum wage reduces turnover, increases spending and increases demand. These studies have all come to the conclusion that raising the wage has a negligible effect one way or another on job creation.
U.S. experience, it turns out, offers many ‘natural experiments’ here, in which one state raises its minimum wage while others do not. And while there are dissenters, as there always are, the great preponderance of the evidence from these natural experiments points to little if any negative effect of minimum wage increases on employment. - Paul Krugman
Does giving an increase really cost jobs? No. It seems that the real “problem” with an increase is that it affects profit margins. We, as a country, can more than afford increases on the minimum wage at the cost of a wage decrease on those earning the maximum. In other words, millions of poor workers can make more if millionaires and billionaires lose a tiny fraction of their yearly income. Clearly, you can see why corporate America is allergic to this idea. Sacrifce a third yacht so millions of people don’t have to use food stamps to survive? Blasphemy!