Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So what's your point?
Dicks' is doing well.
People like Dick's.
unfortunately for Seattle area, there are more dogs (4 legs) than there are "people" (2 legs) in the available labor pool.
The chain is doing very well. Our Vice-President loves her some Dick's, as does our Transportation Secretary. It's been rumored that our 44th president loved to get a bag of Dick's when he was in the area. It is a very popular place.
But being popular is not enough to overcome the labor pool issues in the area. The reality is that not only has the labor pool been disrupted (by the government), technology has made the food service business far more difficult with the introduction of having to fill orders of people who are not physically in front of you.
Imagine running a Starbucks. In the early days, your orders came directly from people who are in your physical building. Now, every food outlet has an app. Imagine 40 people in line at Starbucks, and imagine another 200 ordering simultaneously on their app. It's very difficult to plan for, and is very difficult to execute without enough labor.
That I disagree with. Perhaps in a perfect world, we all would have skills and profitable careers. That isn't the case though.
I'll use my own Mom as an example. Her and Dad got married young, and then had me. Dad had a career that allowed our family to only need one bread winner. Mom's job was to raise me. That was the plan. According to you, this was wrong ? Whatever...
Wrong??
Not then no.
But single breadwinner families are pretty rare these days. The economy is completely different, as are jobs.
You can't expect employers to pay anyone more than the value of their labor just because they've made bad decisions or had bad luck.
The irony here is that people are saying that people working menial jobs don't deserve more money when in fact it is capitalism itself that has decreed that they are now worth more money because there aren't enough people willing to do those jobs.
It seems like some posters here want the poor to be punished because they think they don't deserve better. They claim to be capitalists but seem to be mad that the basic laws of supply and demand in the labor market are leading to better lives for low wage workers. You may not think a fast food worker deserves $20 and hour but the laws of economics imply that they do now.
Nobody is advocating punishing anyone.
But there's a big difference between letting the market set wages and the government arbitrarily setting a minimum. (Not to mention the government artificially pumping billions into an economy while simultaneously crippling it with shutdowns and paying people to stay home and do nothing..... that's not Capitalism)
No job pays "what you deserve" in a moral sense.
Jobs pay on the skill level required for the position and availability and competition of the labor pool.
But neither of those things allow employers to ignore the cost of labor in their business models.
One poster here like to keep saying that "you can't get blood from a stone"....
The chain is doing very well. Our Vice-President loves her some Dick's, as does our Transportation Secretary. It's been rumored that our 44th president loved to get a bag of Dick's when he was in the area. It is a very popular place.
But being popular is not enough to overcome the labor pool issues in the area. The reality is that not only has the labor pool been disrupted (by the government), technology has made the food service business far more difficult with the introduction of having to fill orders of people who are not physically in front of you.
Imagine running a Starbucks. In the early days, your orders came directly from people who are in your physical building. Now, every food outlet has an app. Imagine 40 people in line at Starbucks, and imagine another 200 ordering simultaneously on their app. It's very difficult to plan for, and is very difficult to execute without enough labor.
Your logic lacks logic.
You imply because of technology these fast food places are seeing increased number of orders -- what do you base that on?
And whether or not you get 100 orders through a computer or have a 100 people liined up -- what's the difference.
Lol, and looking at a large portion of our society, and their debt, they seem to have failed basic arithmetic...don't ya think ?
They seem to not have been raised properly and not taught how to budget. But you keep making excuses for those who cannot do what is needed
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
