New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Fast Food Joint

Ms. Mary,

Wow, all about four employees get $12/hour! Amazing. I bet if only McDonalds would charge $4 for a cheeseburger, and $6 for their chicken sandwitch, they could do the same thing too! No body would go to McDonalds anymore, but think of the possibilties.


Five cents. The approximate price increase of a Big Mac...if minimum wage is increased to $10.50 per hour, about the current minimum in San Francisco.



...These corporations could pay workers more. But they are happy on the dole. There’s plenty of evidence that it’s possible to increase wages. For one thing, they already pay more in some places, like San Francisco, where the minimum wage is $10.55 and in Washington State, where it’s $9.19. In France, McDonald’s pays the equivalent of $12 at 1,200 thriving franchises.

In June, more than 100 economists signed a petition to raise the minimum wage to $10.50.In an attached report, they note that McDonald’s could cover half of the cost of that wage increase by raising the price of a Big Mac by one nickel. Mickey D patrons would still be “lovin’ it” at $4.05.

Here’s another telling example: McDonald’s spent $6 billion to repurchase shares and dividends in 2011—the equivalent of $3,500 for each of its 1.7 million restaurant workers worldwide. The Hamburglar gave all of the money to stockholders and none of it to the people whose labor produced the profits...


http://inthesetimes.com/article/15455/supersize_those_wages_mcdonalds/
 
Ms. Mary,

Wow, all about four employees get $12/hour! Amazing. I bet if only McDonalds would charge $4 for a cheeseburger, and $6 for their chicken sandwitch, they could do the same thing too! No body would go to McDonalds anymore, but think of the possibilties.


How much do you think McDonalds charges for their sandwiches these days -- $0.50?
 
Five cents. The approximate price increase of a Big Mac...if minimum wage is increased to $10.50 per hour, about the current minimum in San Francisco.



...These corporations could pay workers more. But they are happy on the dole. There’s plenty of evidence that it’s possible to increase wages. For one thing, they already pay more in some places, like San Francisco, where the minimum wage is $10.55 and in Washington State, where it’s $9.19. In France, McDonald’s pays the equivalent of $12 at 1,200 thriving franchises.

In June, more than 100 economists signed a petition to raise the minimum wage to $10.50.In an attached report, they note that McDonald’s could cover half of the cost of that wage increase by raising the price of a Big Mac by one nickel. Mickey D patrons would still be “lovin’ it” at $4.05.

Here’s another telling example: McDonald’s spent $6 billion to repurchase shares and dividends in 2011—the equivalent of $3,500 for each of its 1.7 million restaurant workers worldwide. The Hamburglar gave all of the money to stockholders and none of it to the people whose labor produced the profits...


http://inthesetimes.com/article/15455/supersize_those_wages_mcdonalds/

Mr. Craig,

Why the irrelevancies? I mean, sure, if the US was a communist country that dictated how businesses should be run, they yeah, you could force McDonalds to run their business and you think they should run it.

But here in the United States, businesses are free run their buisnesses as they see fit. If that means repurchasing shares and paying out dividends to increase their business capital and keep the corporation strong, so be it. If it mean not raising prices to keep their products competitive, so be it.

As for those 100 economist, if they knew how to run a business, they would be successful, not scounging for public grants to justify their existance. By the way, you do know economist don't have degrees in accounting, marketing, nor finance, ergo, they have no concept of running a business, writing a business plan, nor determining how a given business work other than the most rudimentary sense, right?

As for your lame assertions about France, sure, employees get government mandated saleries of $12/hour. That's why the cost of a big mac is approximately $1.50 more than in the United States.

Hope those little factoids help.
 
Ms. Mary,

Wow, all about four employees get $12/hour! Amazing. I bet if only McDonalds would charge $4 for a cheeseburger, and $6 for their chicken sandwitch, they could do the same thing too! No body would go to McDonalds anymore, but think of the possibilties.

And additional research says 68 cents on The Big Mac would cover doubling of wages and benefits..


FLINT, MI – Doubling the salary and benefits of every McDonald’s employeewould increase the cost of a Big Mac by just 68 cents according to comprehensive research conducted by the University of Kansas.

University of Kansas research assistant Arnobio Morelix said that increasing pay for the fast-food workers would not result in drastic price increases for consumers at the nearly 14,000 U.S. McDonald’s locations.

The research comes on the heels of the announcement that fast-food workers in seven cities across the nation – including workers in Flint and Detroit – are staging one-day walkouts in an attempt to garner higher wages.

“After reading and learning about the strike I decided to dig a little deeper on the issue. I work on financial research at the University of Kansas and did some financial modeling to figure out what the new prices for the Big Mac and Dollar Menu would be if McDonald’s doubled the salaries of its employees,” he said in an email to MLive-Flint Journal...

http://www.mlive.com/business/mid-michigan/index.ssf/2013/07/price_of_big_mac_would_jump_68.html
 
Mr. Craig,

Why the irrelevancies? I mean, sure, if the US was a communist country that dictated how businesses should be run, they yeah, you could force McDonalds to run their business and you think they should run it.

But here in the United States, businesses are free run their buisnesses as they see fit. If that means repurchasing shares and paying out dividends to increase their business capital and keep the corporation strong, so be it. If it mean not raising prices to keep their products competitive, so be it.

As for those 100 economist, if they knew how to run a business, they would be successful, not scounging for public grants to justify their existance. By the way, you do know economist don't have degrees in accounting, marketing, nor finance, ergo, they have no concept of running a business, writing a business plan, nor determining how a given business work other than the most rudimentary sense, right?

As for your lame assertions about France, sure, employees get government mandated saleries of $12/hour. That's why the cost of a big mac is approximately $1.50 more than in the United States.

Hope those little factoids help.

Yes...economists know how to run a business. Indeed, many people know how.

I made no assertion, I presented an article for your perusal and possible edification. Businesses need to follow the laws and if the minimum wage applies, then it does. McDonalds is forced to pay minimum wage today, so your comment regarding communist countries is ludicrous.

No...your rant has been of no help.
 

Ms. Maryanne,

Very good point. Just like your burger example, if your business model is offering a limited number of products, only in bulk, you don't need as many employees, so you can afford to pay them better due to the lower overhead. Unfortuantely, that business model doesn't work for stores like Kmart, Target, Walmart, etc. who have to offer a wider range of products and services, and require more individualized services.

Thank you for pointing that out.
 
I suspect that comparable sandwiches are sold for prices comparable to the other restaurant's prices. Don't you?

Mr. Nightswimmer,

I acknowledge your lack of business acumen, so I will attempt to elucidate. The higher end sandwitch product provide great margin, but are not as wide sellers as the lower price sandwitches which, by their sheer volume of sale, are what keeps most franchises afloat.
 
Mr. Nightswimmer,

I acknowledge your lack of business acumen, so I will attempt to elucidate. The higher end sandwitch product provide great margin, but are not as wide sellers as the lower price sandwitches which, by their sheer volume of sale, are what keeps most franchises afloat.

Whatever. I just wanted to call you out on your bullshit attempt to compare apples and oranges.
 
Yes...economists know how to run a business. Indeed, many people know how.

I made no assertion, I presented an article for your perusal and possible edification. Businesses need to follow the laws and if the minimum wage applies, then it does. McDonalds is forced to pay minimum wage today, so your comment regarding communist countries is ludicrous.

No...your rant has been of no help.

Mr. Craig,

If economist knew how to run a business, then they would run businesses, not suck off the public dole. However, an economic degree requires little or no marketing, accounting, nor business training. A degree on Economic only studies concepts in overall markets, not the development of a business and marketing plans.

Hope my shooting down of your non sequitur doesn't ruin your day too much.
 
Mr. Craig,

Why the irrelevancies? I mean, sure, if the US was a communist country that dictated how businesses should be run, they yeah, you could force McDonalds to run their business and you think they should run it.

But here in the United States, businesses are free run their buisnesses as they see fit. If that means repurchasing shares and paying out dividends to increase their business capital and keep the corporation strong, so be it. If it mean not raising prices to keep their products competitive, so be it.

As for those 100 economist, if they knew how to run a business, they would be successful, not scounging for public grants to justify their existance. By the way, you do know economist don't have degrees in accounting, marketing, nor finance, ergo, they have no concept of running a business, writing a business plan, nor determining how a given business work other than the most rudimentary sense, right?

As for your lame assertions about France, sure, employees get government mandated saleries of $12/hour. That's why the cost of a big mac is approximately $1.50 more than in the United States.

Hope those little factoids help.


Try this one....you won't like it...






http://www.businessinsider.com/mcdonalds-could-double-wages-for-employees-and-make-less-money-2013-7

More: McDonald's Jobs​

Or, McDonald's Could Double Wages For Employees, Not Raise Price Of Big Macs, And Just Make Less Money ...
HENRY BLODGET JUL. 30, 2013, 4:08 PM
Everyone's going nuts about a Huffington Post story that McDonald's could double wages for all of its employees, including its very well-paid CEO, and pay for this increase by raising the price of a Big Mac by only 68 cents.​
​
Those who would like McDonald's to pay its employees enough to live on love this idea. And what's not to love? Finally, McDonald's full-time restaurant employees would not have to suffer the ignominy and hardship of being poor in addition to having to work at McDonald's. Finally, McDonald's restaurants would be staffed by folks who felt proud and lucky to work there. Finally, America's "McJobs" problem, in which middle-class manufacturing jobs are being replaced by low-paying retail service jobs, would be getting addressed at the source. And, finally, America's strapped consumers, some of whom are McDonald's employees, would have more money to spend — and that money might accelerate revenue growth for not just McDonald's (employees eat there, too), but many other companies. Those who have bought into the "profit maximization" obsession that has taken over American business culture over the past 30 years, however, hate this idea.​
​
McDonald's shouldn't pay its employees a penny more than it absolutely has to, these folks say. It's not McDonald's fault that those employees have no skills and aren't worth more than $7.25 an hour. McDonald's should pay those people as little as possible and deliver as much profit as possible to its shareholders. The only purpose of a company, after all, is to make money for its shareholders. And McDonald's should absolutely not raise the price of its Big Macs by so much as a penny, because then it would sell fewer of them! Those are the two schools of thought on the McDonald's-doubling-wages talk. But there is another possibility here — one that, in this profit-obsessed country, no one is even considering.

That possibility is that McDonald's could double its restaurant-worker wages and not increase its prices at all ... but instead just make a little less money. In other words, it could better balance the interests of all three of its stakeholders — shareholders, customers, and employees — instead of shafting employees to deliver as much profit as possible to shareholders.

According to the Kansas City researcher who did the original wages-to-Big Mac study, McDonald's spends about 17% of U.S. revenue on employee salaries and benefits.

If that ratio holds true worldwide, McDonald's would have spent about $4.7 billion on salaries and benefits last year, on revenue of $27 billion. Meanwhile, the company made about $8.5 billion of operating income. (This is for the corporate parent, not the franchises.).

If McDonald's doubled the wages of its restaurant employees (not management, which is presumably very well-compensated), it might add, say, another $3 billion of annual expenses. This would knock its operating profit down to a still healthy $5.5 billion.
Importantly, however, $5.5 billion is still a lot of money.

McDonald's would still be very profitable.

Big Macs would still cost the same as they do today (billions and billions would still be served!)

McDonald's managers would still take home their impressive salaries.

And McDonald's restaurant employees would, finally, rise above the poverty line.​
Read more:http://www.businessinsider.com/mcdonalds-could-double-wages-for-employees-and-make-less-money-2013-7#ixzz2c4gPLjyK

Mr. Nightswimmer,
Top McDonalds items....
http://www.vancouversun.com/health/empowered-health/life/5223507/story.html?tab=PHOT
 
Last edited:
Mr. Craig,

If economist knew how to run a business, then they would run businesses, not suck off the public dole. However, an economic degree requires little or no marketing, accounting, nor business training. A degree on Economic only studies concepts in overall markets, not the development of a business and marketing plans.

Hope my shooting down of your non sequitur doesn't ruin your day too much.

Claptrap.

For example, my nephew has a degree in economics. He has plenty of accounting classes and began as an estimator for a business. A degree in economics covers many of the areas you mention and there are different types and disciplines within economics study.
 
Try this one....you won't like it...






http://www.businessinsider.com/mcdonalds-could-double-wages-for-employees-and-make-less-money-2013-7

More: McDonald's Jobs​

Or, McDonald's Could Double Wages For Employees, Not Raise Price Of Big Macs, And Just Make Less Money ...
HENRY BLODGET JUL. 30, 2013, 4:08 PM
Everyone's going nuts about a Huffington Post story that McDonald's could double wages for all of its employees, including its very well-paid CEO, and pay for this increase by raising the price of a Big Mac by only 68 cents.​

Those who would like McDonald's to pay its employees enough to live on love this idea. And what's not to love? Finally, McDonald's full-time restaurant employees would not have to suffer the ignominy and hardship of being poor in addition to having to work at McDonald's. Finally, McDonald's restaurants would be staffed by folks who felt proud and lucky to work there. Finally, America's "McJobs" problem, in which middle-class manufacturing jobs are being replaced by low-paying retail service jobs, would be getting addressed at the source. And, finally, America's strapped consumers, some of whom are McDonald's employees, would have more money to spend — and that money might accelerate revenue growth for not just McDonald's (employees eat there, too), but many other companies. Those who have bought into the "profit maximization" obsession that has taken over American business culture over the past 30 years, however, hate this idea.

McDonald's shouldn't pay its employees a penny more than it absolutely has to, these folks say. It's not McDonald's fault that those employees have no skills and aren't worth more than $7.25 an hour. McDonald's should pay those people as little as possible and deliver as much profit as possible to its shareholders. The only purpose of a company, after all, is to make money for its shareholders. And McDonald's should absolutely not raise the price of its Big Macs by so much as a penny, because then it would sell fewer of them! Those are the two schools of thought on the McDonald's-doubling-wages talk. But there is another possibility here — one that, in this profit-obsessed country, no one is even considering.
That possibility is that McDonald's could double its restaurant-worker wages and not increase its prices at all ... but instead just make a little less money. In other words, it could better balance the interests of all three of its stakeholders — shareholders, customers, and employees — instead of shafting employees to deliver as much profit as possible to shareholders.
​
According to the Kansas City researcher who did the original wages-to-Big Mac study, McDonald's spends about 17% of U.S. revenue on employee salaries and benefits.

If that ratio holds true worldwide, McDonald's would have spent about $4.7 billion on salaries and benefits last year, on revenue of $27 billion. Meanwhile, the company made about $8.5 billion of operating income. (This is for the corporate parent, not the franchises.).

If McDonald's doubled the wages of its restaurant employees (not management, which is presumably very well-compensated), it might add, say, another $3 billion of annual expenses. This would knock its operating profit down to a still healthy $5.5 billion.
Importantly, however, $5.5 billion is still a lot of money.

McDonald's would still be very profitable.

Big Macs would still cost the same as they do today (billions and billions would still be served!)

McDonald's managers would still take home their impressive salaries.

And McDonald's restaurant employees would, finally, rise above the poverty line.​
Read more:http://www.businessinsider.com/mcdonalds-could-double-wages-for-employees-and-make-less-money-2013-7#ixzz2c4gPLjyK


Top McDonalds items....

[url]http://www.vancouversun.com/health/empowered-health/life/5223507/story.html?tab=PHOT[/URL]

LOL, you're kidding, right? Double wages, not increase prices, that will bring in another $3B in annual revenue? Plus, it will cause unicorns to shit gum drops and moon beams as they fly through the drive through.

Oh, man, you liberals are so funny some times.
 
Back
Top