Tuesday, March 4, 2014

How Pizza Hut Is Preparing for the Coming Hikes in the Minimum Wage

Super cool automation that will replace high cost waiters, waitresses and cashiers.

1. More job's lost (WOW)

2. Look forward to the video on how 16.5 million workers are preparing for higher wages. According to the CBO, 17 million workers are making less than 10.10/hour. 97% will get a pay hike and 3% will lose their job. In other words, 97% are currently underpaid.

1. No, Jerry. 67.3% will lose their jobs.

And, yes, Jerry, I pulled that figure out of my ass. Exactly like your 3%.

In other words, you're a clown.

2. JW: Troll.

3. JW is either a government drone (granted, a redundant phrase) or a Pizza Hut delivery boy. Either way, he is most assuredly a big time troll.

4. Jerry, what standard are you using to define or measure "currently underpaid"? Your silence in answering this question is an acknowledgment that you have no standard but instead just a qualitative opinion, deeming that any wage which is \$10.09 per hour or less is somehow insufficient.

Work on this problem long enough, however, and you will discover the reason you have no standard you can apply: none exists. You may attempt to apply a whole series of mathematical formulae for use in deriving a standard, and you may even be able to bamboozle at least a percentage of the populace with them, but when examined under the pure and unforgiving light of reason, they evaporate like will-o'-the-wisps.

Setting a minimum wage is an inherently qualitative process. The only empirically justifiable course of action is to enact no restrictions upon wages.

5. Jerry, that's a great non sequitur and demonstration of ecoonomic illogic.

6. No troll. Workers can't be underpaid. That's because they voluntarily agree to work there and have therefor accepted the pay. If they don't like the pay, they should quit. If they stay, then obviously they *prefer* the pay over not working there. This means one of two things. They either cannot get higher wages in another job (which means their skills aren't worth it), or they cannot get other jobs period (which means their skills aren't worth it). So the alternative of NOT paying them more or not hiring them at all is preferable to employers over hiring them/paying them more. The only conclusion can be that raising the minimum wage is going to end up costing them their jobs sooner or later.

Furthermore, it is illuminating that beneath an article about automation, rather than see what raising the minimum wage will do to workers, you go right in against it like a blind moron and continue whining about people being "underpaid".
Go ahead, show your "progressive" heart by demanding higher pay KNOWING their jobs will be replaced by automation. Fool.

3. Sad how even with all the improvements we just keep running still for many things. How incredibly more prosperous we would be if somehow government only took 10 percent for the last 3 decades, or better yet, 0 obviously...We would have figured out how to live forever I think

4. I watch this from Connecticut, where Marxist obama will be pushing the new minimum wage with our Marxist Governor today. How ignorant. Is it me or is it weird that obama is being marked by my spell check that is should be capitalized??? Very undeserving.

5. They had better have some hand sanitizer on the table. I would not want to eat my pizza after rubbing my fingers over a screen that others have been touching and eating over. Yechhh.

1. You're already taking your chances by eating at Pizza Slut to start.

6. A woman in my office always fondly remembers making minimum wage in Missouri. She waited tables and raised a kid and got money for the earned income credit every year. Said it was basically middle class living given the cost of living where she was. She has since moved to California where minimum wage can't support anyone anywhere and the earned income credit doesn't help.

I guess my point is that it is typical of a bureaucratic solution to impose a Procrustean bed without regard for how height varies across the population, demographics and geography. Robbing from Paul to pay Peter, I guess would be another metaphor that fits (no pun). Government never works and when it inevitably fails again, the call is for more government. I'd be amused if I weren't so sad.

1. It seems that white Americans aren't buying it too much any more considering that more are leaving the democratic party all the time. The bad side of it is that 1. they vote for neocons like Mitt Romney instead 2. it'll be hard to reverse the demographic trend of whites becoming a minority and thus not a dominant voting bloc. Especially if amnesty is passed which many libertarians seem to be in favor of. I think realistically the best we can hope for is a libertarian leaning neocon lite like Rand. It's fun to talk about how someone like Ron Paul should be president or how government should be abolished entirely but it isn't the world we live in.

2. Some people might say that it's horrible to suggest that a candidate with moderate interventionist/imperialist leanings winning would be a positive development but I wonder, what will America look like economically if we just have nothing but left wing progressive regimes one after another? Things will get pretty destitute. It sucks because I hate both things, socialism and imperialism. But at some point you have to consider the survival of your own people not just that of others. Perhaps the legalization of cannabis will have a civilizing effect on people psyches and they won't want to commit violence as much as they do now.