« previous   misc   next »

Study: College still worth the cost


By tvgnus   Follow   Mon, 3 Jun 2013, 2:18pm PDT   1,501 views   38 comments
Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)  

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=23553

Economic returns are large for typical graduate regardless of major •  College graduates contribute enormously to the state's prosperity Debt among California students has increased dramatically in recent years, but college is still seen as a good investment for the vast majority, according to a report released Monday night by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC).

Comments 1-38 of 38     Last »

Rin   Mon, 3 Jun 2013, 2:42pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (5)   Dislike     Comment 1

Only 10 years ago, a person could work as a paralegal with an associates degree. Today, all paralegals are expected to have a bachelors, even if it's in underwater basket weaving.

Thus, it has nothing to do with education but a type of artificial class distinction, created by HR depts.

Dan8267   Mon, 3 Jun 2013, 2:52pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (4)   Dislike     Comment 2

Debt among California students has increased dramatically in recent years, but college is still seen as a good investment for the vast majority, according to a report released Monday night by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC).

College is not an investment. College is a tax on the entry into the workforce. In order to be an investment, college would make you more prepared for the real world than working in it for four or six years. It doesn't.

You have to get a degree just to be consider "employable" because degrees are so common place. You end up wasting four years that you could have spent getting real experience and getting paid rather than building debt.

College is a tax, not an investment. Just because you have to pay that tax, doesn't mean you get anything for it.

New Renter   Mon, 3 Jun 2013, 2:56pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (4)   Dislike     Comment 3

Funny how an academic study shows a college education is worth the cost.

adarmiento   Mon, 3 Jun 2013, 2:59pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 4

I majored in mechanical engineering. The courses ranging from Physics II (electromagnetics) to Ship Energy Systems were helpful in forming a foundation in the engineering field. Also, the liberal arts courses such as literature and history helped to broaden my education experience, and led me to be more of a critical thinker.

JodyChunder   Mon, 3 Jun 2013, 3:00pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 5

tvgnus says

College still worth the cost

Well, yeah. What else are we gonna stuff them SLABS with?

(Student Loan Asset-Backed Securities.)

New Renter   Tue, 4 Jun 2013, 10:15am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 6

adarmiento says

I majored in mechanical engineering. The courses ranging from Physics II (electromagnetics) to Ship Energy Systems were helpful in forming a foundation in the engineering field. Also, the liberal arts courses such as literature and history helped to broaden my education experience, and led me to be more of a critical thinker.

Sure, in some cases college is useful. The question is a four year college degree - from a purely fiscal perspective - worth the cost. At best this has depended on the degree. For example in most cases a degree in art history has NEVER paid off. Given the skyrocketing out of pocket costs of college, the lengthening time to degree (due to having to work more to pay the bills, greater difficulty to get required courses, etc), and difficulties for even college grads to obtain decent jobs this cost-to-benefit balance has shifted further into the red.

Rin   Tue, 4 Jun 2013, 10:26am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 7

New Renter says

For example in most cases a degree in art history has NEVER paid off.

The problem is that earlier, a paralegal could start work, straight out of community college. Today, that same person would need a BA in Art History (yes, mostly unrelated outside of essay writing) to be eligible to be seen in a law office.

Hysteresis   Tue, 4 Jun 2013, 10:28am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 8

you don't need any formal education to be a software engineer.

everyone i know that's any good learned it on their own.

i have never, ever met anyone that was great at it only by going to school. the best ones, spent a shit load of time, on their own, writing software.

conversely, the folks right out of college that took only computer science courses and didn't have any experience were typically very bad.

freak80   Mon, 16 Sep 2013, 11:01pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 9

Dan8267 says

College is not an investment. College is a tax on the entry into the workforce. In order to be an investment, college would make you more prepared for the real world than working in it for four or six years. It doesn't.


You have to get a degree just to be consider "employable" because degrees are so common place. You end up wasting four years that you could have spent getting real experience and getting paid rather than building debt.


College is a tax, not an investment. Just because you have to pay that tax, doesn't mean you get anything for it.

Exactly. Now that college is the new high-school (high-school is mainly just babysitting) there's really nothing special about a college degree. Except for the massive debt, of course.

freak80   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 12:38am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 10

John Bailo says

As far as costs...I still don't know what the big deal is. The average debt is something like $35,000. For a person entering the workforce, with zero obligations like a child or spouse, if they pay it off $1000 a month, the loan could be gone in 3 years...less than a car. If they use the normal 10 years, you would expect by the end of it they would have a higher salary, and also savings, and have made money in the stock market.

But remember, college is the new high school. After high school, you get a low paying job. How many college degrees actually lead toward gainful empolyment these days? Even many science degrees are worthless (as I learned the hard way).

John Bailo says

Also housing costs are lower and more importantly, not rising out of control for
people entering the workforce.

Well that all depends on the location. Where I live, housing is very affordable. In coastal CA and parts of the Northeast, not so much.

John Bailo says

In fact, some of us are looking for deflation by 2014 so even better as a salary then gets a free ride without even having to increase!

Do you think Uncle Ben will allow deflation? ;-)

freak80   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 1:13am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 11

John Bailo says

If it were up to me, earning a college degree would also guarantee you a stipend, something like a low level GS grade salary, enough to let you live the simple life of an intellectual.

Who's going to pay the salary though? Colleges shouldn't be rewarded for offering worthless degrees. I actually think federal student loans should only go to certain kinds of degrees, like science, engineering, medicine, etc. Want a federal loan for art history or psychology? Forget about it.

smaulgld   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 2:34am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 12

It all depends- its up to the individual not the statistics

http://smaulgld.com/is-college-worth-it/

freak80   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 3:05am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 13

John Bailo says

I'd rather pay people $36,000 a year to be art historians, then spend $160,000 a year to deal with social issues caused by people not finding jobs.

I didn't know you had that much disposable cash laying around. ;-)

New Renter   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 1:18pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 14

egads101 says

go in state, go to community college, get good grades, be active in honor societies, student life etc, and you'll get a scholarship to the transfer college...

graduate with little to no debt.

Fuck that! go work for you uncle at the utility company or better yet a bank straight out of high school.

SoftShell   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 1:30pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 15

take online courses. get cheap degree..supplement with google.
No debt and if you have the drive you will succeed.

thomaswong.1986   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 2:15pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 16

Dan8267 says

College is not an investment. College is a tax on the entry into the workforce. In order to be an investment, college would make you more prepared for the real world than working in it for four or six years. It doesn't.

more of a good or bad investment, depending on the cash flow afterwards.

spydah_hh   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 2:36pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 17

John Bailo says

freak80 says

Who's going to pay the salary though?

We play plenty of money already to "solve the problem" of joblessness.

My solution solves the problem by establishing a benchmark for people to earn a job.

Seems like it would be better than unemployment or underemployment.

I'd rather pay people $36,000 a year to be art historians, then spend $160,000 a year to deal with social issues caused by people not finding jobs.

Your solution causes nothing but problems. Who's going to pay for the stipend? The Government? Don't you think we spend enough as is? And in case you were thinking that businesses will pay for it you're not thinking straight.

spydah_hh   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 2:39pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 18

SoftShell says

take online courses. get cheap degree..supplement with google.

No debt and if you have the drive you will succeed.

Online classes are not cheap either. In fact they're just as expensive as state universities and sometimes they may even charge you more.

MershedPerturders   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 2:47pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 19

Rin says

Only 10 years ago, a person could work as a paralegal with an associates degree. Today, all paralegals are expected to have a bachelors, even if it's in underwater basket weaving.

Thus, it has nothing to do with education but a type of artificial class distinction, created by HR depts.

this is exactly what's going on.

eventually we're all going to have to unionize in some way. Each and every person who is working for a living is getting screwed out of everything.

who is representing labor interests? Democrats? hah. they seem more interested in Gay Marriage, Sandra Fluke, and the Black Panthers.

spydah_hh   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 3:07pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 20

MershedPerturders says

this is exactly what's going on.

eventually we're all going to have to unionize in some way. Each and every person who is working for a living is getting screwed out of everything.

who is representing labor interests? Democrats? hah. they seem more interested in Gay Marriage, Sandra Fluke, and the Black Panthers.

Unionization hasn't worked very well either. I give them credit for establishing a workable work place, weekends, and 40 hour work weeks. But the truth is demanding more pay each year just isn't going to work anymore. Costs go up, businesses make less and they seek outside work or go out of businesses, which is still a lost for the working man.

A businessman or company is going to pay you for what you're worth. Just because food prices have gone up doesn't mean you should be expecting them to pay you more. The expectation of more pay is from production. If you used t make 10 widgets and hour then all the sudden found a way to increase your production by 15 widgets per hour then a company will be obligated to pay you more income because, A.) You managed to lower their costs and increase their revenue through increased production and B.) If they don't pay you they face the fear of you working for their competitors.

Asking for more pay because the price of living increases only causes more stress on the company. It's not the company's fault for the increase of cost of living, you blame that on the Federal Reserve and our Government spending like there's no tomorrow.

Quigley   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 3:23pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (4)   Dislike     Comment 21

It's not production that determines the pay rate of workers. Productivity has been rising for decades, doubling every ten years or so, and average wages have dropped (inflation scaled) over time. It's competition, plain and simple. If they can get someone else to do your job for less money, they will. That's the point of unions, to prevent this kind of go-around cheating of workers. But unions have declined over the last three decades to a shadow of their former strength. Now your job is at risk not only from fellow americans, but from illegals and imported STEM workers from India and China and other countries. Your employer has bribed government to enact bills which let them bring in workers to do your job for less.
That's the situation. It's more of a free market than it's been in the last 85 years. And it's a disaster for both the people and the economy.

MershedPerturders   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 3:24pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)     Comment 22

spydah_hh says

Unionization hasn't worked very well either. I give them credit for establishing a workable work place, weekends, and 40 hour work weeks. But the truth is demanding more pay each year just isn't going to work anymore. Costs go up, businesses make less and they seek outside work or go out of businesses, which is still a lost for the working man.

this thinking is just utter !@#$ing nonsense propagated by the predictable Old Economy Steves out there who enjoyed protections in the workplace while they generated their wealth, but then denounce them when they retire.

It's pretty simple really, you need bargaining power if you expect to have any kind of fair deal from your employer. It is that simple. Otherwise, youre going to be in a perpetually stress inducing environment with no rights, just enough pay to keep you there, and no health care, etc.

All you people who think you got rich in the 90s and onward, were going to take it back. So let go of it psychologically. You're not the new upper class.

spydah_hh says

A businessman or company is going to pay you for what you're worth. Just because food prices have gone up doesn't mean you should be expecting them to pay you more.

and we're giving them tax breaks for what reason exactly? removing import tariffs for what reason? so we can't even fucking afford the food? open your !@#$ing eyes and stop citing Ayn Rand.

spydah_hh says

Asking for more pay because the price of living increases only causes more stress on the company. It's not the company's fault for the increase of cost of living, you blame that on the Federal Reserve and our Government spending like there's no tomorrow.

then they can all leave the country.

when your quality of life is dropping so low you can't afford food, I think it's time to re-evaluate your economic-political values.

the poster above is right, we should implement a basic living stipend. All these people who believe they are so darn 'productive' never tell you that really what they do all day is cover their asses and actually produce more problems for everyone. Let's just remove the hypercompetitiveness. Provide basic living accommodations for all citizens regardless of skill. If they want to sit around and smoke pot, great let em do it. Tax the crap out of the uppers class who have been doing nothing but sitting around and skimming off the top.

We dont live in an industrial economy anymore, and were setting our policy according to that. School should be FREE. If you have the time and the brain and drive, you should be in school end of story.

dont bother with your libertarian free market tripe, heard it all before hasnt gotten us anywhere. Made life far worse.

MershedPerturders   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 3:26pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 23

Quigley says

It's not production that determines the pay rate of workers. Productivity has been rising for decades, doubling every ten years or so, and average wages have dropped (inflation scaled) over time. It's competition, plain and simple. If they can get someone else to do your job for less money, they will. That's the point of unions, to prevent this kind of go-around cheating of workers. But unions have declined over the last three decades to a shadow of their former strength. Now your job is at risk not only from fellow americans, but from illegals and imported STEM workers from India and China and other countries. Your employer has bribed government to enact bills which let them bring in workers to do your job for less.

100% true.

if you have to work for a living, then there is no one supporting you in this environment. It amounts to slavery.

spydah_hh   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 10:20pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 24

Quigley says

It's not production that determines the pay rate of workers. Productivity has been rising for decades, doubling every ten years or so, and average wages have dropped (inflation scaled) over time. It's competition, plain and simple. If they can get someone else to do your job for less money, they will. That's the point of unions, to prevent this kind of go-around cheating of workers. But unions have declined over the last three decades to a shadow of their former strength. Now your job is at risk not only from fellow americans, but from illegals and imported STEM workers from India and China and other countries. Your employer has bribed government to enact bills which let them bring in workers to do your job for less.

That's the situation. It's more of a free market than it's been in the last 85 years. And it's a disaster for both the people and the economy.

Productivity has increased due to technology not because people have better skills in producing more widgets themselves. And you could argue and say it takes skills to use the technology to increase output. But the truth is sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't.

If we're talking about a writing a script for a machine or computer to behave a certain way that will increase output then yes that skill set could be worth a lot in the eye's of an employer. But then other things such as using a copier or windows to produce/type documents which can also increase output doesn't require much of a skill set to operate.

spydah_hh   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 10:26pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 25

MershedPerturders says

this thinking is just utter !@#$ing nonsense propagated by the predictable Old Economy Steves out there who enjoyed protections in the workplace while they generated their wealth, but then denounce them when they retire.

It's pretty simple really, you need bargaining power if you expect to have any kind of fair deal from your employer. It is that simple. Otherwise, youre going to be in a perpetually stress inducing environment with no rights, just enough pay to keep you there, and no health care, etc.

All you people who think you got rich in the 90s and onward, were going to take it back. So let go of it psychologically. You're not the new upper class.

I am not rich. No, bargain power has nothing to do with it. Look at the Mc Donald's situation. The Unions wants the company to pay their workers $15 an hour. You seriously think franchise owners of Mc Donald's thinks those workers are worth $15 and hr?

Hell at my job I do less work than a Mc Donald's employee and I still make more. Ironic, but that's due to union backing and etc. Luckily I work for the state so the true cost is not really formulated very well. I mean just look how the states are doing with their budgets. Hell look at pensions, they're over the top in many local and state governments thanks to unions. Really the unions do nothing but destroy jobs and have been for decades

MershedPerturders says

and we're giving them tax breaks for what reason exactly? removing import tariffs for what reason? so we can't even fucking afford the food? open your !@#$ing eyes and stop citing Ayn Rand.

I don't believe in the corporate tax breaks either. I believe they should pay. But the truth is this problem is just as big as the union problem. I stated in a previous post that we're not in a free market economy, this economy is built for those at the top to stay at the top. And Ayn Rand? Please I can't stand that witch. Her ideals are truly over the top. I do believe in a free market economy but even free market economies have to have some rules

Oxygen   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 11:06pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 26

adarmiento says

the liberal arts courses such as literature and history helped to broaden my education experience, and led me to be more of a critical thinker.

lol

marcus   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 11:12pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 27

spydah_hh says

But the truth is demanding more pay each year just isn't going to work anymore.

And unions don't do that.

I work for a school in Los Angeles, and am a member of UTLA, a very large teachers union. WE have not asked for any raises since 2006. WE haven't even fought all that aggressively against pay cuts (furlough days) in 2009 - 2012 and a lot of lay offs (which increase class sizes).

When we finally do ask for a pay increase, the first since 2006, all the right wing dim bulbs will be screaming about how evil unions are.

THe fact is unions are sensitive to tough times.

marcus   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 11:24pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 28

spydah_hh says

A businessman or company is going to pay you for what you're worth.

Which is a price set by the market, which is international and includes outsourced jobs. Eventually as automation increases and globalization continues, and unemployment and under employment stay high, "what you're worth" is going to be a very good deal for corporations.

Fortunately for them, by then unions will be a thing of the past.

Is it possible that our system for the 20th centruy is not ideal for the 21st century?

The thing that many miss is the demand side of the consumption equation. AS labor gets priced too low, the masses no longer have any discretionary income, let alone a suficient disposable income for their most basic needs.

The elite and corporations might think "tough luck chumps" but that's because they are too myopic to see what this ultimately does to demand for their products and services.

spydah_hh   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 11:41pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 29

marcus says

spydah_hh says

But the truth is demanding more pay each year just isn't going to work anymore.

And unions don't do that.

I work for a school in Los Angeles, and am a member of UTLA, a very large teachers union. WE have not asked for any raises since 2006. WE haven't even fought all that aggressively against pay cuts (furlough days) in 2009 - 2012 and a lot of lay offs (which increase class sizes).

When we finally do ask for a pay increase, the first since 2006, all the right wing dim bulbs will be screaming about how evil unions are.

THe fact is unions are sensitive to tough times.

I've worked for the state 6 years and we've received a cost of living increase 3 out of my 6 years. Soon we'll be getting 2 more in the next two years (or one more but the two combine in two years).

Also the thing is each year you receive a 5% salary bonus until you're topped off which could take as much as 5 or more years. And this all occured while CA has had a budget crisis. Which goes to show that unions don't care what the costs are to a government or a company.

Rin   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 11:47pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 30

adarmiento says

Also, the liberal arts courses such as literature and history helped to broaden my education experience, and led me to be more of a critical thinker.

On the more practical side of things, even our secretary/receptionist has a bachelors in a humanities. She's doing a part-time masters in an applied science to sit for the Patent Agent exam. She's a got a broad background but I don't think she'd ever thought that it made her into a critical thinker.

Truth be told, the hedge fund partners do not want the clients to see any high schooler, working at the firm which manages their money. In finance, it's about image, everyone is degree-ed.

At other white collar companies, which don't interact with VIP clients, it's about HR barriers of entry.

spydah_hh   Tue, 17 Sep 2013, 11:51pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 31

marcus says

Which is a price set by the market, which is international and includes outsourced jobs. Eventually as automation increases and globalization continues, and unemployment and under employment stay high, "what you're worth" is going to be a very good deal for corporations.

Not really, it'll benefit the employees. If the government got out of regulating everything and allow new businesses to rise or a t least promote business creation we'd have a lot more businesses looking for employees which means more competition in the employers market. An employer will want to high a skilled worker and will be willing to pay more for him/her just so they don't go to their competitors.

None of this is happening because it's nearly impossible to create a business. You need to go through so many loops and costs that you can't afford it and banks won't give it to you because they can find better deals elsewhere like in the student loan market or housing. Both which are contributed to the government backing them up or subsidizing the industry.

Hell in today's world you need to get a business license to cut people's hair, wtf? And it doesn't get anymore basic than that. I don't see the point in getting a business license for cutting hair.. I mean if you suck then customers will avoid your business, simple as that.

Quigley   Wed, 18 Sep 2013, 1:23am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 32

Business license costs around $300 and confers a world of tax breaks on its holder. That hair stylist can write off expenses for equipment purchased, depreciate equipment used, write off mileage getting to the shop, write off rent charged by the shop owner, write off a percentage of rent if they use their home to do some cuts now and then, etc.
A business license is a pretty good deal!

The fact is that today's ├╝ber wealthy would rather sit back and earn "rent" on their billions by investing in growth stocks or hedge funds or just buying T-bills if they are really cautious. Creating a company that creates jobs is way too much work, and is something for the nouveau riche to handle. They are perfectly happy sponging off the labors of others, and charging rent for the use of credit for production decades in the past.
How can this change? Raise the nominal tax rate on investment income (say over $100,000/year from 15% to 30%.
Then it would make sense to these sponges to get off the divan and create something. And if not, they can support the government more to pay for the jobs they aren't creating.
Republicans hate this idea. Democrats would likely be for it, if their handlers would let it get out of committee.

Quigley   Wed, 18 Sep 2013, 1:30am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 33

On a separate note, spydah_hh has convinced me that government workers are paid too much for too little and they shouldn't have unions, because they are already working for the people and not soulless corporations. I'm quite sure that your average McDonalds fry chef works twice as hard as you do, so what's wrong with higher pay for them? I hear In&Out pays its workers $14/hour, and they are doing fine. They are always cheery and efficient and the restaurants are always packed, despite having a very limited menu of very ordinary food. Also they seem to have twice the number of employees that other fast food chains employ. I guess that shoots the "higher wages are a job killer" argument in the foot!

freak80   Wed, 18 Sep 2013, 1:50am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 34

Quigley says

How can this change? Raise the nominal tax rate on investment income (say over $100,000/year from 15% to 30%.

Godless Communist!! Why do you hate America??

spydah_hh   Wed, 18 Sep 2013, 10:41am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 35

egads101 says

spydah_hh says

If the government got out of regulating everything and allow new businesses to rise

yes, like those deep water oil drilling jobs in the gulf... no need to regulate them.

or the financial industry writing innovative mortgage, and sellng derivatives, they don't need regulation!

or the medicine companies that recombine the pills, nope all is fine there with a free market!

I did say that there should be rules in a free market. I am not saying NO REGULATION PERIOD. So don't exaggerate, you know exactly what I mean.

spydah_hh   Wed, 18 Sep 2013, 10:46am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 36

Quigley says

Business license costs around $300 and confers a world of tax breaks on its holder. That hair stylist can write off expenses for equipment purchased, depreciate equipment used, write off mileage getting to the shop, write off rent charged by the shop owner, write off a percentage of rent if they use their home to do some cuts now and then, etc.

A business license is a pretty good deal!

Yes but that hairstylist has to get a license to cut hair (which means go to a hairstylist school) then a business license itself. All that hassle just to cut someone's hair.

Now all the other BS you're talking about, is just well more BS created by our fabulous government in making taxes so complex and favoring certain classes.

spydah_hh   Wed, 18 Sep 2013, 10:57am PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 37

Quigley says

On a separate note, spydah_hh has convinced me that government workers are paid too much for too little and they shouldn't have unions, because they are already working for the people and not soulless corporations. I'm quite sure that your average McDonalds fry chef works twice as hard as you do, so what's wrong with higher pay for them? I hear In&Out pays its workers $14/hour, and they are doing fine. They are always cheery and efficient and the restaurants are always packed, despite having a very limited menu of very ordinary food. Also they seem to have twice the number of employees that other fast food chains employ. I guess that shoots the "higher wages are a job killer" argument in the foot!

HELL yeah many government workers are overpaid. Hell I AM OVERPAID for what I do, I can't believe the stuff I see that goes on, it's unbelievable!

Now as for you McDonalds fry chef working twice as hard as I do (which I'll admit is probably true).

The fact is when you walk into a Mc Donalds, it's a franchise business. Meaning it's owned by a businessman. The corporate HQ of Mc Donalds does not pay the Mc Donalds workers, the franchise owner does. Not only does the Franchise owner have to pay the workers (and other expenses) but they have to pay the Mc Donald's Corporation a license fee for every sales the owner generates, regardless if the owner made profits or not.

So if the Mc Donald's Corp. enforced a policy stating that all franchise owners are required to pay their workers $15 an hr, that money isn't paid by Mc Donald's Corp itself, that coming out of the business owner's pocket. You think they'll be able to afford that? No. Do you think Mc Donald's would like to see that? No, because they know their franchise owners will not be able to afford these workers and will close up shop, which means Mc Donald's will lose their income from the licensee fees they impose.

How the hell do you think Mc Donalds Inc manages to exceed growth year after year? By selling more Hamburgers? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! No, they make their money by selling the license to sell their product to businessmen who want to own a Mickey D's franchise. Which I guess you can say does increase the sale of hamburgers if they manage to expand more franchise stores.

Now please do me a favor and go educate yourself so I can stop making you look like a fool.

spydah_hh   Wed, 18 Sep 2013, 1:25pm PDT   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 38

Quigley says

On a separate note, spydah_hh has convinced me that government workers are paid too much for too little and they shouldn't have unions, because they are already working for the people and not soulless corporations. I'm quite sure that your average McDonalds fry chef works twice as hard as you do, so what's wrong with higher pay for them? I hear In&Out pays its workers $14/hour, and they are doing fine. They are always cheery and efficient and the restaurants are always packed, despite having a very limited menu of very ordinary food. Also they seem to have twice the number of employees that other fast food chains employ. I guess that shoots the "higher wages are a job killer" argument in the foot!

Here watch this, hopefully you'll learn something.

http://youtu.be/1EcOUfvmliU

tvgnus is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email

home   top   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net