@0:32s - I swear you can see him blink the tears of laughter away right at the start, and during the whole clip he seems like he's holding back something. This is probably the only take they could get of him describing the situation without him crumbling into hysterics on camera.

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Monday, April 11th, 2016 1:20am PDT - promote requested by artician.

Are fast food employees REALLY this unintelligent? Pressurized? Really? How? Opening the door wouldn't help? You believe anything a stranger tells you over the phone? And you want fucking fifteen dollars an hour? Please...

Um....most likely the manager took the call, and directed the employees to smash the windows...and most managers already make over $15 an hour. Perhaps if they paid $15 an hour to everyone, they could hire someone who's not overworked into a stupor or with common sense enough to stop the other idiots from following anonymous, phoned in directions without question.

Your logic doesn't track. How does increasing the base pay increase the base competence? I would argue that if you raise the bottom end, then everything else needs to go up too. If you argue that it's due to inflation, then everyone deserves to make 3 to 4 times what they used to make, otherwise, you're undervaluing those people. A rising tide lifts all ships, as the saying goes.

Well, if I worked at Burger King, and my manager told me we had to smash all the windows to relieve the pressure, no matter how wrong I knew it to be, I would do it with gusto and it would be the best day of working at Burger King ever.

I think perhaps your reading comprehension is lacking, not my logic.
I guess you missed the part where I mentioned the overworked employees being worked into a stupor...or didn't understand that it's because they have to work 2 or 3 full time jobs to afford both food and shelter that they are overworked zombies, unable to think well enough to stop the other higher ranking employees from instructing them to do stupid things. Increase the base pay so full time employees can afford food and shelter in the area they work in (or near) and you increase base competence because they no longer have to work 120 hour work weeks to survive.

AHHHH, but those at the top HAVE had their 'wages' go up far more than inflation, but not those at the bottom who would be making about $22 an hour if minimum wages were tied to inflation since their start.
A rising tide lifts all ships, OK, except for those already artificially 'lifted' WAY above the tide line. If all 'ships' floated on the tide, that saying would mean something. They don't.
OK, I'll go there, lets say everyone deserves to make >3 times what they used to make when the national minimum wage was started. That means a HUGE pay cut for those at the top, probably a 90%+ pay cut in most cases. Do that, and there's no problem at all affording the cost of paying the bottom 50% a living wage, which means anyone working full time is paid above the poverty line, no exceptions.
Yes, doing that will raise prices, which will require raising wages, which will raise prices...IF the top don't stop taking an obscenely unfair slice of the pie. If THEY pay themselves in the same manner they pay employees, there's no problem. They won't though.

Lol. Being paid a living wage shouldn't have anything to do with intelligence.

Exactly.
Jobs that pay minimum wage are (at least according to most who oppose higher minimum wages) supposed to be for the brain dead, lazy, and/or 'the shunned' (like child molesters that can't get any other kind of job, no matter what their skill set).
Jobs that require more than average intelligence should absolutely pay better than minimum wage. Intelligence is a valuable (and rare) commodity.

So you can't possibly live on less than $15/hr? I feel like maybe that's more an issue of your money management skills then.

Sure, $6/hr is probably not enough. But it wasn't too long ago when 15 was a pretty decent wage. And kids living with mommy don't exactly require the same kind of "living wage" as they don't have any real expenses. So now, you raise the bottom to 15, and these kids now make more money. What about those who were making 15 before? Suddenly they're making minimum wage. I'm sure that makes them feel swell! Everyone should get a boost, not just those at the bottom. Probably a combination of that and a bit of a sliding scale to a certain maximum, along with tax reforms to close loop holes for those gaming the system.

First off i'm not sure where anyone is planning on raising the min wage to 15hr immediately(I don't know one way or another for sure). Even if the California bill passes for a min wage of 15hr its rolled out over six years. I think the first bump is fifty cents(10 to 10.50). Arriving at 15hr in 2022.

I also think the way you raise wages for everyone is exactly this way. The pressure to pay more for more skilled positions comes from the bottom.

(edit)
On another note. Ive never understood the attitude that if im not going to get more, then others shouldn't get more. Also a few of the people i hear saying there shouldn't be a 15 hr min wage are people who make quite a bit of money themselves($75,000 and up). They are so quick to judge others work value. It boggles my mind how workers will argue against other workers getting a bit more. The powers that be(owners) have duped you into doing there work for them it seems to me.

What insulting ignorance you display with that first statement.
Let's discuss the bay area, where a studio apartment might cost you $1500 a month + utilities. There, even at $15 an hour, you are working 2 1/2 weeks just to put a roof over your head, then there's utilities, food, gas and insurance because you can't live where you work and don't have 4 hours a day to take public transportation, medical expenses, well, you're already FAR over what you make, and living like a monk. Now think about trying to raise a family of 4, even with 2 incomes it can't be done on $15 an hour...it really is an unwinnable struggle even if both parents have 2 full time jobs each.

You make the typical mistake of thinking that minimum wage jobs are all held by people who don't even really need jobs. That's simply 100% wrong. Most are held by adults that can not support themselves, much less have a family on $15 an hour. The amount of minimum wage jobs held by teenagers is only 20%...and that includes those not living at home. The group you describe as the norm is likely far less than 10% of the minimum wage work force.
http://www.raisetheminimumwage.com/pages/demographics
Also, you ignore the idea that teens that work and live at home should be able to save money to move out, or for school...but even living at home isn't free (just cheaper, usually) and paying them a wage that leaves nothing for the bank means they can NEVER move out and are only going backwards financially. That's a terrible financial trap to design for our youth, and is a direct cause of people turning to crime as a last resort. EDIT:You also ignore the fact that many if not most teens living at home and working work to support the family, not for their own money, and their income is imperative in keeping the family financially viable.

Yes, it wasn't 'that long ago' that $15 an hour was a decent wage...but it was even more recent when <$.79 gas was the norm, or even high, $.99 cigarettes were expensive, $200 a month rent was average or even high, $25 a month water bill was considered excessive, milk was <$1 a gallon at 7/11, health insurance was well under $100 per month (often <$50 per month)....etc. Inflation has raised the price of most 'necessities' by at least a factor of 5 in the last 25 years, but not wages. Luxury items are just out of the picture for those living on minimum wage, so there's no point mentioning their costs.
Those making $15 an hour ARE ALREADY AT THE BOTTOM TODAY. [ EDIT: As I mentioned above, anyone making less than $22 an hour is making less (in purchase power) than minimum wage as it was originally set, they are all at the 'bottom'.] Yes, they should all get a 'boost' as well if life was fair. Clearly it's not, so it's good to prioritize and focus on those below the bottom first, then work upwards. It's also imperative to work from the top down at the same time, as the outrageous compensation at the top is a big part of how/why companies pay those at the bottom so poorly and claim it's all they can afford. If the CEOs keep taking 95% of the profits, the employees can never be paid 'fairly' or even humanely.

overworked into a stupor Where was this in the story?

I'm not here to bitch at you I just don't get the argument you make.

You then implied that these workers have to work 2 to 3 jobs ( hence stupor) just to make ends meet because those at the top are making too much.

What about the guy ( gal) at the top making fat stacks. I agree it does rub me wrong but still how does it directly hurt the minimum wage employee?


If the employee has has / develops skills he makes more. According to you logic this would be like robbing his fellow workmates, stealing money that can go towards them.

If you started you own company struggled to make ends meet and slowly built up a company should you not receive the fruits of you labor?

When you have an entry position what should you pay? Dishwasher should not be making 30K /yr ( 15$/hr). This is what you are generally saying.

My Boss had a 5 Million bonus and salary hike to near 4 million. Yes this pisses me off but it does not correlate to what I make.
Even if you took that and spread it across all employees ( 300k) it would only be about 30 bucks each.


Would you rather just see a cap of salaries to 1 Million?

They what if you suddenly became the next Gates or Jobs would you want to be paid what you are worth?

If you are going to go to 15$/hr why not more? Some could argue that this is too low? What about the company that made all salaries 70K the other year? 15$/hr seems pretty stingy.

We can't just make a blanket min wage. Some places cost unnecessarily a lot for cost of living. You mentioned the bay area. I would never live there first of all, but those who choose to live there need to consider their income. There are far cheaper places to live. Then, $15/hr becomes a lot more viable.

And 99 cent cigarettes and 79 cent gas was a lot less recent than the time to which I was referring, which was closer to just 10 years ago.

I also never stated that only kids work for minimum wage. Make assumptions on your own time. I don't agree that we all should be responsible for those who don't actually mean to work at their jobs. Meaning, those unwilling to put in the effort and gain the skill required to actually do a decent service to society. There needs to be a motivator for that--something worth reaching for. Complacency shouldn't be allowed to make life more difficult for all of us. Afterall, you know that when companies start raising prices, suddenly everyone's purchasing power drops. Then everyone needs a raise again. Etc. etc. It's a vicious cycle.

Curbing inflation should be a focus, if that's even possible, along with preventing megapowers from abusing the financial system. Getting corporations out of government would be a start.

OMG...I was SOOOO hoping you would make that argument.
The 'blanket' minimum wage is the minimum we have decided that those living in the cheapest places to live should be paid. I agree, it should be based on cost of living...but the $15 an hour standard is what we've said should be the minimum in back woods Appalachia, and in larger cities it should be well over $20. Reduce the pay at the top to a reasonably high level and that won't cost most businesses another penny.

OK, bay area....you said ""those who choose to live there need to consider their income" ....ignoring the majority of people who are 'stuck' there without sufficient income; those who've lost financial stability, or those born there to poor parents who have never made any choice, and usually their parents who no longer have a choice to make at this point. They simply can't afford to move. The same goes for most low income people anywhere, they don't "choose" to live there, they don't have the luxury of a 'choice'. ...or are you lobbying for free moving and relocation services for the poor?

10 years ago, $15 an hour was not a living wage in many places, the bay area for one. I left there 20 years ago, and $15 an hour was pretty hard to live on as a single man sharing an apartment THEN, I can't imagine how it is now, especially for those with children.

No, you didn't say ONLY kids living at home have minimum wage jobs, but you did mention them as if they are a large percentage of minimum wage workers, and the group we should focus on, and implied that wages should be determined (at least in part) by THEIR needs. They are in fact the smallest group of minimum wage workers, and even they need more money to eventually move out.

Really? " those unwilling to put in the effort and gain the skill required to actually do a decent service to society." If you really believe a large percentage of people working for minimum wage are "unwilling to put in effort" to better themselves, I just don't know what to say. That's completely batshit insane, they work insanely hard for little compensation, with little respite, and absolutely no respect. Most are putting out more than a reasonable maximum effort just to go deeper into debt constantly, there is no amount of effort that makes more time to make more money to pay for training, or an amount of effort that makes tuition free. Also, who do you think will take over for them if they all put in the effort and gain the skill required to actually do a decent service to society"...(whatever the hell that insulting statement is supposed to mean besides implying they aren't decent or serving society today...by choice)?
What are you talking about "Complacency shouldn't be allowed to make life more difficult for all of us"? WHAT?!? OK, yes, so stop being so complacent about the horrendous way we treat those at the bottom of the financial system because that makes life more difficult for all of us by forcing those with 'more' (but not enough 'more' to avoid taxes) to pay higher taxes for welfare, prisons, policing, housing, etc....by making the nation more crime ridden because it's the only way to make a living for so many...by overtaxing our medical system because so many can't afford to be preemptive with their health and only accept medical help when it's at emergency stage...etc.

If the funds to raise the lowest wages don't come from the extravagant pay that goes to the top and are instead being transferred directly to consumers, yes, it's a vicious cycle. That's why you have to ALSO lower top compensation by law, like maybe tie it to the lowest paid worker in the company. That would stop inflation from being a feedback loop with wages.

Or to put it more succinctly:
The quality of a society is best measured at it's bottom level.

To be honest, if I worked at burger king I don't think I'd need much incentive to go around smashing the windows either.

Just to address the often repeated idea that if you raise wages even slightly for those at the bottom it will drive up prices.....

Breaking minds is fun. Now go smash your windows. All the windows in your house. Then stand and face the corner forever.