I like this opinion piece about Tim Hortons and raising minimum wage ...
- Thread starter JimDandy
- Start date
Yup- clear and concise and exactly what everyone should have had a clue would happen in some form.
Bullying- fuck off KW!
Government does the same shit.
Horgan killed the bridge tolls- Hurray, how short sighted!
Now, just wait for Translink and ICBC to implement "mobility pricing" and increase road/gasoline taxes to further drill motorists to make up the losses.
$10 daycare? Can't wait to see how the masses will be paying for this- including those of us that don't and won't ever have kids.
Two things come to mind:
1. They are son and a daughter of two founders of Tim Hortons and they run a Tim Hortons franchise restaurant?
2. Would Robyn Urback use the same logic in support of sweatshop owners in China because they supply cheap goods to Canada even though they don't meet Canada's labor and environmental standards?
1. They are son and a daughter of two founders of Tim Hortons and they run a Tim Hortons franchise restaurant?
2. Would Robyn Urback use the same logic in support of sweatshop owners in China because they supply cheap goods to Canada even though they don't meet Canada's labor and environmental standards?
I'm for minimum wage increase but I agree it's naive to think it was not going to have a cascading effect. It goes way beyond these immediate responses too. Increasing a consumer's spending potential increases demand but not supply, so things get more expensive. That $15 won't go as far pretty soon.
Roughly speaking for example, if the government gave each citizen a million dollars a year pretty soon bread would cost $50,000 a loaf.
Roughly speaking for example, if the government gave each citizen a million dollars a year pretty soon bread would cost $50,000 a loaf.
I'm all for a fair wage. Problem in Vancouver is what is a fair 'livable wage'? $15 just won't cut it.
The small biz are the one's who will get the kick in the nuts on this one. Ontario Govt did the same and now NDP here will follow suit. You will see a lot more part time workers with a lot less hours and more unemployment in the small biz sector who hire the majority of minimum wage workers. They just can't afford these additional costs if their margin is already to the bone with taxes, fees from every level of Govt.
The small biz are the one's who will get the kick in the nuts on this one. Ontario Govt did the same and now NDP here will follow suit. You will see a lot more part time workers with a lot less hours and more unemployment in the small biz sector who hire the majority of minimum wage workers. They just can't afford these additional costs if their margin is already to the bone with taxes, fees from every level of Govt.
one thing to keep in mind as well, the productivity and reliability of minimum wage workers has been steadily going down
lower quality and lower productivity added to higher wage
the era of entitlement, should have to earn what you make in a market economy
lower quality and lower productivity added to higher wage
the era of entitlement, should have to earn what you make in a market economy
^ THIS....is what I totally agree with.
Yeah minimum wage sucks but if you want more upgrade your skill set.Increasing minimum wage to $15 will just be passed on to consumers across the board.Is a walmart "greeter" worth $15 an hour?.....fuck no!!!
As for the NDP National policy plank of $10 a day child care it is nothing but pure commie SOCIALISM.Child care for $10 a day = paying $10 per child as a parent and the STATE paying the rest via the tax payers purse.Most places for child care charge $80 to $100 a day......so do the math on that for the NDP's policy of "1 Million Child Care Spaces" and my answer to that is "if you want to fuck and procreate well you can pay for it"....why should I as a single guy who has no children subsidize those that have kids?
One gal I work with went the better route as she had the option to do so.She hired a Filipino nanny to look after the kids and take care of the house etc at a cost of say $1400 a month(including room and board) and she had 2 kids.On the flip side lets look at some of the examples we have in Canadian Society that are the proverbial "lowest rung" on the ladder.I know of a gal who got knocked up at 16 and then again at 19 and again and again....last time I was told she squeezed out 6 bastard kids and all during that she has sat her ass on welfare like a LEACH on society who has never contributed.Why the fuck should hard working Canadians have to pay for people like that?
SR
Instead of having minimum wages or guaranteed liveable incomes why don't we all start our own business and see how easy it is to make payroll every two weeks? It's a lot easier to sign the back of a cheque than the front.
I'm constantly amused at how quick governments and labour groups are to put the responsibility of increasing low income earner's quality of life on business. Rather than forcing a wage hike down the throats of business maybe these governments who want to improve people's quality of life should stop taking 50% of their incomes through taxes at the various levels of government.
It reminds of of how when gas prices go up. Everyone, including the left wing politicians, gets out the torches and pitch forks and storm the offices of the oil companies without telling anyone that depending on where you live in Canada 30 to 45 cents of that litre is various taxes levelled by these same governments.
There all a bunch of self righteous, sanctimonious a-holes.
It reminds of of how when gas prices go up. Everyone, including the left wing politicians, gets out the torches and pitch forks and storm the offices of the oil companies without telling anyone that depending on where you live in Canada 30 to 45 cents of that litre is various taxes levelled by these same governments.
There all a bunch of self righteous, sanctimonious a-holes.
How about if a person wants to make a better living they get off their ass and do something about it themselves?
There is also the ricochet effect when minimum wages are increased that much. Employees who were at that $15 level previously will now expect wage increases as well that they have probably earned due to their status or longevity within the company. The cost increases to business do not stop with the minimum wage earner but can escalate right through the system.
The state of Oregon implemented this years ago as well as full serve gas stations. I’ve dined at Denny’s in eastern Oregon where the wage was $15 hr US, the service level in there was fabulous and the staff really took their jobs seriously. I talked to the waiter and he said since it was implemented the quality of the staff has improved and there is no more turnover. Those people now work as team to make the restaurant’s experience as positive as possible and it has increased customer business.
We could use that here go to a Canadian tire no one working there knows anything about what they are doing the high turnover never gives a person the ability to acquire the knowledge required. This could improve the customer experience for many businesses as the quality people would stay in that job so there is a payoff in that regard. Tim Hortons can be very frustrating I don’t know how many times I’ve had to repeat myself and still get a screwed up order because the server doesn’t understand English or even care for that matter.
We could use that here go to a Canadian tire no one working there knows anything about what they are doing the high turnover never gives a person the ability to acquire the knowledge required. This could improve the customer experience for many businesses as the quality people would stay in that job so there is a payoff in that regard. Tim Hortons can be very frustrating I don’t know how many times I’ve had to repeat myself and still get a screwed up order because the server doesn’t understand English or even care for that matter.
this is an institutional ideological problem, the premise is that one solution fits all
governments and large institutions think you can replace common sense with rules, unfortunately it is a flawed concept
in a downturn wages will be lower (without minimums of course) in boom time the wages will go up and it will be hard to find workers
it will always go in cycles based on supply and demand which will dictate unemployment numbers
also we have evolved so that low end retail jobs are mainly for part time workers, typically young people or students. could not build a career on many of those low end jobs as there is no ascending career path for them. the chain stores deliberately hire new people as part time and keep them there so they don't have to begin wage increases over time for them
sad reality of the big chains from the US coming up here with their lower price/cost capabilities, forces everyone in retail to follow suit
governments and large institutions think you can replace common sense with rules, unfortunately it is a flawed concept
in a downturn wages will be lower (without minimums of course) in boom time the wages will go up and it will be hard to find workers
it will always go in cycles based on supply and demand which will dictate unemployment numbers
also we have evolved so that low end retail jobs are mainly for part time workers, typically young people or students. could not build a career on many of those low end jobs as there is no ascending career path for them. the chain stores deliberately hire new people as part time and keep them there so they don't have to begin wage increases over time for them
sad reality of the big chains from the US coming up here with their lower price/cost capabilities, forces everyone in retail to follow suit
Heh, tell that to the greedy sociopaths stealing millions of tax dollars. They don't earn any of it.... Well I maybe if you count lying, cheating, swindling, and exploiting as 'earning it'.
Trickle down effect works for ethics as well.
cuz it's easier to have you pay
In The States we have 'subsidies' based on the number of children in the household...it doesn't take a genius to figure-out that 'open-wallet' benefit. The $10 daycare idea would only exacerbate the problem and be ripe for abuses on both sides and place even more of the financial responsibility on the tax payer instead of the parent.
What the fuck are you talking about?Do you mean people go the distance and raise the bar and achieve?Such a silly notion since the "nanny state" will take care of ALL of those that dont have ambition/drive whilst at the same time acting as an agent provectuer with regards to the truly well off.....our current PM and his POS Finance Minister are perfect examples and at the same those overly rich cocksuckers flaunt the rules of "ETHICS" whilst giving out the line of "do as I say not as I do"
I have had my fair share of shitty low paying jobs in my life time.....though some were total dog fucker jobs so it is a bit of a balance for me.I discovered my "niche" 18 years ago and have made a good living doing it.That being said I bust my ass day in and day out and I have not had a "vacation" in 18 years....take the good with the bad and suck it up.
End story about minimum wage and increasing it to $15 an hour......politically it is a Socialist measure meant to garner votes from the Proletariate.....the truth is that prices increase on everything and Society ends up paying more for everything.Be it movie tickets/groceries and the list goes on.
If you want to better your life then get a better job or upgrade your skill set to get a better job and a higher wage.Last time I worked for minimum wage was in 1997 in North Vancouver....never worked for minimum wage again as I did not want to.
SR
Because that may be ONE example that slips through while dozens/hundreds more are legit.
In my experience, people break down into 10/80/10. 10% are amazing - no matter what is thrown at them, they succeed. Lemon into lemonade, post office worker into CEO, you get the picture. 10% are POS. No matter what you give them/help them, they remain a waste and a drain on society. The other 80% broadly cover in-between - some are obviously better than others, but given the right circumstances/help/leadership/etc, they can succeed (at least lean closer to the top 10% than the bottom).
It sounds like your perspective is: because the lowest 10% takes advantage of a program, than the ENTIRE program needs to be scrapped. (Did I get that right?) So the remaining chunk of people that may not fall into the top 10% (who wouldn't need any help) get left out in the cold and risk failing and falling. When they fall, in my opinion and what I've observed, they ultimately hurt society MORE - drug addiction, homelessness, crime, vote for Trump, etc etc.
I prefer to accept that yes, SOME of my tax dollars will get wasted on someone who abuses the system. The system DOES need safeguards, checks, and good workers to minimize the abusers of a system. But I prefer to see a system that will protect and help more, even if I end up with a little less cash myself. And the amount of money these people suck out of the programs is going to be miniscule compared to other corruption/waste elsewhere in govt. Vigilance against waste, pork-barrel politics, politicized projects, corruption in govt contract, etc etc must improve and will save the taxpayer much more than cutting a program due to a relative few who take advantage of it.
