Quoting pu (Reply 50): If I were in charge of the US defense budget the first thing I would erase would be new pilot training! Screw those guys, let them learn to fly drones from remote control and forbid them from ever being able to work at the airlines!

I see what you did there...

Quoting pu (Reply 50): it keeps a lot of people employed and is a huge part of the global economy

Very true, but I look at it this way. Keep in mind, I'm going to be very simplistic, don't read into it too much: if we took X money and X jobs from defense and put it in, say, education (costing X dollars and creating X jobs) the net gain/loss in jobs and money is 0. Defense, at least at the levels we have now, may offer a job to someone, but what does that soldier contribute by chillin in a garrison in Germany? Or blasting away money in an expensive war in Iraq? All this money does is employ someone

On the flip side, you're still spending money on a professor, but the fruits of the professor goes back into society.

Like I said, it's a very loose example, but basically it's what we get out of what we pay into, not just the job created itself. We can spend a bunch of money for millions to dig holes... it creates jobs, but little else

Quoting pu (Reply 50): Are you willing to give this up?

Yes. I see other countries as spending money on their societies, not into war machines.

I guess it all depends how far I'd want to go. I'm not saying be an insignificant isolationist, but we don't need this HUGE war machine and we don't need to be involved in everyone's business

Quoting pu (Reply 50): Look who the rivals for power are: Russia. China.

This is a good objective. While I wouldn't mind pushing our terrorist problems away and let them deal with it, I'd hate for their stupidity or aggression to screw up everyone else.

I guess I should have been more clear. I'm not talking about being "just another country." We can seriously cut our defense budget and still be very formidable, especially allied with the EU. Will still be able to take on the Second Coming of the Soviet Union or China or whatever, I would think. But putting that money into society, it would really make it a better country, more Australia-ish (have to link it back to the OP so we're not off topic   )

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 46): You're right, we need a huge one since we invade countries like Iraq needlessly and cause animosity by our presence.

Because Iraq loved us before? And, for what it's worth, making people like us is not an aim of foreign policy. What matters is protecting American interests, if others like us for that, all the better.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 46): Their education is phenomenal,

And yet we already spend more on education.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 46): I don't see the welfare leeches over there like over here.

The Scandinavian type welfare state effectively makes most people welfare leeches.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 49): And again, we can still cut a big part of our defense and stay on top.

It's not about being on top, it's about being untouchable. The goal is not just to win wars, the goal is to dominate wars and be able to bring overwhelming force to wherever it may be needed. If any American ever finds himself in a fair fight, we already failed.

Quoting pu (Reply 50): They began sometime in the late 60s or early 70s to adopt the ideas you discuss, reduce military spending, stop foreign invasions, etc.

The Falklands War was a bit of a rude awakening for the UK. And later when the US swiped an island without telling them.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 51): Yes. I see other countries as spending money on their societies, not into war machines.

Many of them buy plenty of ours.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 51): Will still be able to take on the Second Coming of the Soviet Union or China or whatever, I would think.

That's why spending can't be cut. We do have to do that. And also have the right resources to find and zap Mullah Whomever in whichever cave or apartment he happens to be hanging out in. The feel good days of not having the Soviet Union around anymore are over.

Australia, in particular, benefits from having a border which is protected by thousands of miles of shark-infested waters and is sealed with the help of gunboats. This is, by the way, a good thing... but one must acknowledge that you cannot simply perform an apples-to-apples comparison.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 37): Quoting Revelation (Reply 6): The monied interests in the US seem to have no problem stirring up hatred of the poor, taking the focus off of all the great perks they have gained for themselves. Yeah, what could possibly be seen as wrong with a group of people who will fatten themselves up on junk food and then expect the taxpayers to pick up the tab for the resulting heart attack, diabetes, stroke, etc.

What could possibly be seen wrong with a group of people like Mitt Romney, with income of $13.7 million in 2012 who paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes, giving him an effective tax rate of 14.1%? Then he made a point of saying that he was paying more than legally required, without pointing out that it was a system rigged for people like him to be paying less per dollar earned than middle class wage earners.

Ref: http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/21/pf/taxes/romney-tax-return/

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 37): Quoting Revelation (Reply 26): I doubt they are of extreme wealth so I don't get the sympathy for the rich. Because they bankroll the country (besides likely employing many people) and all liberals can do is complain about how they don't do enough.

By historical standards they do not do enough. Trickle down economics of the Reagan era and the GWB tax cuts have done nothing but create historical income disparity. They certainly have not created the wide spread prosperity they were predicted to create.

In current times the GOP is let to sit there and insist on no increases in revenues after decades of coddling. It's absurd.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): Because Iraq loved us before?

No? Your point? Beating them up sure helped us out didn't it? What did we get out of it besides a ton of dead troops, and worse in your opinion, trillions of dollars down the toilet?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): And, for what it's worth, making people like us is not an aim of foreign policy. What matters is protecting American interests, if others like us for that, all the better.

Having people not pissed off at us and not attacking us serves our interests

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): And yet we already spend more on education.

Per student? Overall? No doubt in addition to throwing money at education is making sure that money is spent properly. I should have been more clear

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): The Scandinavian type welfare state effectively makes most people welfare leeches.

Do you have people over there that have no jobs but crank out babies? You may disagree with that model, and pu, let me know if I'm wrong, but you don't have the level of unproductivity over there like we have by some of our welfare recipients

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): It's not about being on top, it's about being untouchable. The goal is not just to win wars, the goal is to dominate wars and be able to bring overwhelming force to wherever it may be needed. If any American ever finds himself in a fair fight, we already failed.

I don't know which military you're looking at. I'm looking at the one that needlessly wastes billions of dollars. You know that every dollar spent doesn't go towards our military dominance? A ton of it goes to egregious wastes. Take a recent example I heard from my friend: their unit was about to deploy but it got cancelled. So they returned all the money to the government... yeah right. Instead, they bought a bunch of munitions including laser guided bombs and they blew it up all in one exercise. Cost every company at least $15 million to go through and there are about 8 companies in the exercise IIRC. So ~$100 million simply blown up. And no, before you come back and say it was great training, it wasn't $100m of training. You could have easily gotten just as much training at a mere fraction of the cost.

The military is full of such waste. I swear you could cut the budget by 10%, maybe even 20%, and still have it function the exact same way if you did it right (I know, easier said than done.)

And bases in Germany? Russia plan on invading soon? Can't the Europeans handle their defense by now?

Afghanistan? What are we still doing there? Iraq? That was a waste.

The military you want can easily be funded at a fraction of what we have now. Also, your overall strategy seems to be foreign entanglements that drain our money, NOT make us safer, and piss everyone off just so what, we have influence? I get what you're overall goal is but you have a great misunderstanding of how our military works it seems and how a lot of our actions you think help America only hurt us.

Maybe this crappy analogy will help: we both want to get over a 15 foot wall. Your idea is to spend billions of dollars to develop a capsule launched out of an orbital cannon that will shoot you over the wall, into space, and land on the other side. My idea is to build a sturdy ladder.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 54): Then he made a point of saying that he was paying more than legally required, without pointing out that it was a system rigged for people like him to be paying less per dollar earned than middle class wage earners.

Considering how many people pay next to nothing, I'd say the system is pretty well rigged in their favor.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 54): Trickle down economics of the Reagan era and the GWB tax cuts have done nothing but create historical income disparity.

The rich don't owe us anything. Why is America so obsessed with getting their hands on money other people make? They aren't making their money by robbing us. Nothing they do deserves punishment and everyone should keep as much of their earnings as they possibly can.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 55): Per student?

Per student the US is tied for first with Switzerland.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 55): Having people not pissed off at us and not attacking us serves our interests

America should act in its interests. It's preferable if that doesn't anger anyone, but it can't be a deal breaker. Not hurting people's feelings is not a goal in and of itself.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 55): Take a recent example I heard from my friend: their unit was about to deploy but it got cancelled. So they returned all the money to the government... yeah right.

That's not a military flaw, that's a bureaucracy flaw. If they don't spend every nickel, the allocation gets cut. The whole government needs to be overhauled so as not to punish organizations for being too efficient.

You're going at cutting waste backwards. Define the capabilities and do it in the most cost effective way rather than blindly cutting budgets and seeing what sort of military you can buy with whatever is left.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 55): Also, your overall strategy seems to be foreign entanglements that drain our money, NOT make us safer, and piss everyone off just so what, we have influence?

You can't avoid issues or roll over just because it might hurt someone's feelings.

This was in one of the papers here today, some interesting comments.....

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/aust...ping-in-the-us-20131016-2vmn8.html

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): The Scandinavian type welfare state effectively makes most people welfare leeches.

Not exactly, we have way less unemployment than most countries with way less welfare, Finland is also economically still one of the best doing European countries.

Also fertility rate here is 1.83, lower than in the US which shouldn't be the case if most people were making children just to get more welfare money.

The truth is the system works just fine here in every way, there isn't that much abuse among Finnish population at least. Some Somali "refugees" are of course completely other thing then but those people don't seem to adjust no matter what country they go into.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 56): America should act in its interests. It's preferable if that doesn't anger anyone, but it can't be a deal breaker. Not hurting people's feelings is not a goal in and of itself.

So if nuking whole population of Afghanistan would serve your interest that would be okay as not hurting other people's feelings can't be a deal breaker?

Some people have actual humane morals which you seem to lack totally.

Quoting allrite (Reply 31): he preferred the United States because there was more opportunity to work hard and get rich.

I don't believe living in the US makes it any easier to work hard and get rich then in Europe or any other first world country, there are plenty of people in Europe, Australia, New Zealand & Canada who have done just that.

Quoting pu (Reply 42): I mean seriously, no one is in their league in internet or high tech....large software companies or small startups, web innovations, e-commerce, global consumer products etc. all come from only one place.

They do, someone forgot to tell the Germans that. Germany builds the best cars, Europe leads the way with rail technology, Sweden gave us Spotify, IKEA, Tetrapac, the Swiss Nestle (I believe Nestle is the largest FMCG company), the list of large global companies in Europe is pretty huge, and wasn't it Tim Berners-Lee from England that made the internet possible?

The US has done some interesting things but to claim everything only came from one place is nuts.

Wait someone explain this to me. $2.13/hr is the minimum wage?
Not $21.30 but $2.13?
Please explain

Quoting melpax (Reply 57): This was in one of the papers here today, some interesting comments

Very interesting. I know that we don't have a tipping culture in Australia, but I find some of the comments sickening.

For example:

Quote: if you are in their country, you are already spending your money there, and if they want this to continue, they can make cultural allowances

Wow! Way to go  

More:

Quote: tipping in the USA is supporting a culture where servers of food get paid less than $2.50 per hour

Quote: it's part of their wage"?? I'm not their employer, so I don't have to calculate or pay their wage. Take it up with your government to legislate a decent minimum wage. If I've paid for the meal and taxes associated with that meal then no tip

Quote: And that's our problem how? Blame their government, not the tourists spending enough getting and staying there. Laugh all you want, I won't tip you coz I don't go to a restaurant more than once so they don't remember me and spit in my food

Quote: What rubbish! Most of us work hard (I certainly do) and it's my money so as a competent adult I'll spend it as I choose and as fits my conscience. I dare say it's not my fault that their wage and living conditions are as they are. It is not my job to supplement their wage

These people clearly don't realise that the ONLY person who suffers when they don't tip is the guy earning $2.13. That's sad.

I did have to agree with this:

Quote: I am amused at Australians who spend thousands of dollars travelling to the USA and then complain about a few dollars in tips to workers whose minimum wage may be as low (in "tipped jobs") as $2.13 per hour excluding tips

  

And I got a good chuckle out of this one:

Quote: a ridiculous, antiquated and unfair system. bosses should be made to pay their workers liveable wages, like is done in the civilised world. so glad I don't live there

:D

Quoting cupraibiza (Reply 60): Wait someone explain this to me. $2.13/hr is the minimum wage? Not $21.30 but $2.13?

For tipped workers (i.e. wait staff), yes.

The normal minimum wage is $7.25

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): The Scandinavian type welfare state effectively makes most people welfare leeches.

Go on prove it!

Quoting pu (Reply 45): One of the main differences is that, for instance, all Norwegians are Norwegians and Americans are probably half a dozen different identifiable culturally different groups

They are, could have fooled me, there are several 100 thousand Norwegians of Pakistani origin, then you have the Sami who are Sami not Norwegian, then there's also my three little half Kiwi half Norwegian Norwegians.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 59): I don't believe living in the US makes it any easier to work hard and get rich then in Europe or any other first world country, there are plenty of people in Europe, Australia, New Zealand & Canada who have done just that.

Though if Big Gina (the world's richest woman) had her way, we'd all be working for 50 cents an hour...... She caused a bit of bother when she suggested that the minimum wage be cut, and that the poor should spend less time on lesuire & more time working.....

http://www.theage.com.au/small-busin...lfare-comments-20120830-2521b.html

Quoting allrite (Reply 4): This struck me as well, but it may be that fatty fast food is more affordable than fresh food. Poverty in western countries is, I believe, often associated with unhealthy eating habits. So is extreme wealth, judging by a couple of rather well known magnates in Australia.

From comments here it is clear that there is only one solution to the US economy. Motivation through taxation

Tax at 100% for anyone earning less than $30000 - There are more of them so they can pay to run the country. If they don'tlike living in workhouses and eating gruel they can always emigrate
0% tax above $150 000 dollars - These are clearly the innovators and must be rewarded
sliding scale in between.
If you introduce this you'll have McD's on Mars before the end of the decade with all that rampant innovation.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): Because Iraq loved us before?

Of course they did. Who else could they turn to to buy their WMD's

Quoting pu (Reply 47): innovating the products 7 bilion earthlings all demand

No-one was demanding them until the marketing department got involved.
Currently, over here at this company, it seems to be a 50/50 split as to whether the smart-phone is a useful tool or pointless toy.

I'm with Scandinavia - Dog eat dog capitalism isn't a sign of a highly developed civilization.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 56): You're going at cutting waste backwards. Define the capabilities and do it in the most cost effective way rather than blindly cutting budgets and seeing what sort of military you can buy with whatever is left.

I agree 100% in theory, but having actually worked on developing military requirements (and home remodeling plans with my wife LOL) I can tell you that it is much harder in practice. There has to be a clearly understood financial ceiling on the process in order to separate the 'requirements' from the 'desirements'.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 62): For tipped workers (i.e. wait staff), yes. The normal minimum wage is $7.25

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 61): These people clearly don't realise that the ONLY person who suffers when they don't tip is the guy earning $2.13. That's sad.

Aside from the fact that some people are douches and others don't fully understand how it works, the idea of servers working for tips is ideal...pay for performance results in the best service. I typically 'over tip' quite a bit for a job well done, particularly when I buy a really cheap meal because good service is good service and should be rewarded.

Quoting Philby (Reply 66): Quoting BMI727 (Reply 52): Because Iraq loved us before? Of course they did. Who else could they turn to to buy their WMD's

France?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 56): Considering how many people pay next to nothing, I'd say the system is pretty well rigged in their favor.

Right - the way forward is to chase down all the people who have next to nothing, that'll do wonders for the economy.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 56): The rich don't owe us anything. Why is America so obsessed with getting their hands on money other people make? They aren't making their money by robbing us.

In fact, by historical standards, they are robbing us.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 61): I know that we don't have a tipping culture in Australia, but I find some of the comments sickening.

Quite often the term 'ugly American' gets tossed around. In that context, it's sad to see how freaked out these people are by a different customary way of doing things.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 68): In that context, it's sad to see how freaked out these people are by a different customary way of doing things.

I understand what you're saying, and I agree.

Without excusing their behavior, there are deadbeats and idiots everywhere, and for some reason the comments sections of new stories (like YouTube comments) seem to attract them. Presumably it provides them with an outlet to express their frustration with having to compensate for something  

Quoting sccutler (Reply 53): Australia, in particular, benefits from having a border which is protected by thousands of miles of shark-infested waters

Which is nothing compared to what is waiting for you once you get ashore LOL

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 56): The rich don't owe us anything. Why is America so obsessed with getting their hands on money other people make? They aren't making their money by robbing us. Nothing they do deserves punishment and everyone should keep as much of their earnings as they possibly can.

No offense intended to you personally, but the way you talk about rich people in your posts on here make me picture the guy who is so smitten by his hot girlfriend that he just can't see that she is banging all of his friends in his own apartment while he is at work.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 69): Without excusing their behavior, there are deadbeats and idiots everywhere,

I guess I'd be described as a deadbeat, I refuse to partake in the con job that is tipping, I'd be far far happier to pay more for the meal, haircut, taxi, and know that the employee was paid a decent wage. IMO it's an easy way for the employer to take a larger slice of the profits and foist his obligations onto the customer.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 71): I guess I'd be described as a deadbeat,

I was referring more to the abhorrent attitude that some posters displayed in that article, than the practice of not tipping per se.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 71): I'd be far far happier to pay more for the meal, haircut, taxi, and know that the employee was paid a decent wage

I agree, which is why I like the Australian (and Kiwi?) approach.

It's also part of the reason why I REFUSE to tip in Australia, even if I receive exceptional service. Here most wait staff are earning over $20 an hour. It is insulting to American workers for me to "reward" Australian wait staff with 10-20% on top of $20, when in America they earn $18 less.

On the other hand I tip religiously (and generously) when in the USA, not because I support the American minimum wage system, but because it's not fair for someone to starve or not be able to pay their rent just so that I can make a principled stand.

Quoting Philby (Reply 65): Dog eat dog capitalism isn't a sign of a highly developed civilization.

Capitalism isn't dog eat dog, it's dog help dog. Dog eat dog implies you can benefit at someone else's expense. This is not the case with capitalism.

The problem with the US and a lot of western countries is that they scarcely have capitalism.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 55): America should act in its interests. It's preferable if that doesn't anger anyone, but it can't be a deal breaker. Not hurting people's feelings is not a goal in and of itself.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 55): You can't avoid issues or roll over just because it might hurt someone's feelings.

Uh huh, but you're acting like everything we're doing overseas is completely necessary and there's not a more efficient way of going about it. Since you only care about money and our interests, I'll only talk from that angle--I'm under the opinion that our foreign policy causes problems for us and wastes a lot of money. You seem to think that I want to tuck tail and run away when someone gets offended. Of course not. I'm talking about blindly supporting Israel, for example... that doesn't serve our interests IMO and only causes more problems for us. The bases in Germany and Italy... you may go on about military dominance against the scary Soviets or something but I see it as a waste of your and my tax dollars. Etc etc

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 55): That's not a military flaw, that's a bureaucracy flaw. If they don't spend every nickel, the allocation gets cut. The whole government needs to be overhauled so as not to punish organizations for being too efficient.

Besides cutting unnecessary parts and adapting a different foreign policy as to not be counterproductive (see above,) this is what I'm talking about. It's not an easy thing to do, I know all about different pools of money and how if you don't spend it you don't get it again. It would have to be a big goal from the very top at the Pentagon down to all levels. I don't foresee us being the most efficient organization out there, but if you get every company/squadron/battalion/brigade/etc to be more efficient and not punish them for doing so, you'd see a huge decrease in spending. Based off what you write, it's obvious you have no idea how inefficient the military is, through your job working with defense (I think that's what you said) maybe you're see the blatant waste. I don't see why you are not mad, YOUR tax dollars gets pissed away in unimaginable ways that even you'd be hard pressed to defend

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 55): You're going at cutting waste backwards. Define the capabilities and do it in the most cost effective way rather than blindly cutting budgets and seeing what sort of military you can buy with whatever is left.

Of course. I am being simplistic. Slashing the budget by 20% and hoping the military will be able to handle it is a dumb way of going about it. I talk about waste in the military but I know that some parts of it are underfunded, some are about right, and some have plenty of fat to trim. I know bureaucracies are very difficult to tackle but I see the waste as big enough to be worth tackling. Sometimes, making a deal out of something costs more than the inefficiencies costs, not in this case, let me tell you

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 73): Capitalism isn't dog eat dog,

The modern form, based on getting that high-score on the bank statement and ignore everyone else is what I'm referrring to. Capitalism per se isn't necesarily dog eat dog.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 73): The problem with the US and a lot of western countries is that they scarcely have capitalism.

Expand? I can see how they scarcely have democracy but capitalism?

Quoting Philby (Reply 75): The modern form, based on getting that high-score on the bank statement and ignore everyone else is what I'm referrring to.

That is not dog eat dog. The only way you can get rich is by serving others. If you have a big bank account it's normally because you've generated that much wealth for others.

Quoting Philby (Reply 75): Expand? I can see how they scarcely have democracy but capitalism?

Where to begin? Government spends 40%+ of GDP. Government sets interest rates. Government bails out banks. Government racks up huge deficits.

And those are just the obvious ones...

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 55): The rich don't owe us anything. Why is America so obsessed with getting their hands on money other people make? They aren't making their money by robbing us.

That would be the case in a perfect market. There are such things as rent seeking, crony capitalism, privatization of profits using public money as a safety net, etc.

Lots and lots of poor and destitute people cause undesirable effects to the whole social ladder at some point. My father pointed this out to me when I was younger and had more of a screw-everybody-else attitude, and boy was he right. Unfortunately some income redistribution is needed (without rewarding abusing behavior from the recipients, I agree on that).

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 66): the idea of servers working for tips is ideal

In theory. In reality it is a way for owners to remove risk.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 73): The problem with the US and a lot of western countries is that they scarcely have capitalism.

True capitalism is an utopia.

Quoting AA7295 (Reply 2): Firstly.... if you are living in poverty.. what the HELL are you doing having a child. That just grossly irresponsible and downright unfair to the child. If you can't afford to pay for yourself... you should NOT be having a child. Use contraception!

YOu are right, but in many cases people that live in poverty are very religious and their religions leanings moves them away from contraceptive uses.

Quoting ImperialEagle (Reply 15): Because they can go out and get free food with their "WIC" cards. They stand there at the supermarket check-out with a shopping cart full of stuff and the poor hard working guy behind them is buying beans and rice for his family and he pays cash for his stuff. Some of the fattest people you ever saw can be seen in public housing and food stamp lines. They just know how to play the game.

WIC is a program for any mother that has children that can buy a very select list of items to support the nutrition of mothers and their young children. I believe the program you were referring to was SNAP.

While with ANY system there will be those that take advantage, the people that are bringing their shopping cart full of stuff are likely shopping for the entire month. You are talking about an amount of about a couple hundred dollars for an entire month of groceries. But hey bashing the poor is easy because in most cases they have no voice.

Quoting cmf (Reply 78): In theory. In reality it is a way for owners to remove risk.

You say that as though it were an inherently evil thing. The restaurant business, like any small entrepreneurial operation is extremely challenging; when you stake your life savings and/or go into debt to open the doors of a restaurant why isn't it reasonable to expect those who have made no up front investment but also hope to prosper from it to bear some of that risk? Especially when the better the customer service is, the better the restaurant performs and the better the servers get paid in tips.

Isn't that the "American Dream", to be compensated commensurate with our efforts? To reward those who have the drive and courage to start an enterprise? It would be one thing if the owners were lounging around while the peasants toil, but that has not been my observation. Small business owners typically work their fingers to the bone while trying to get their "help" to do the simplest tasks without having to drive them like cattle. At least a gratuity-based system incentivizes doing a good job...so critical in the service industry.

I do genuinely believe that everybody who puts in an honest day's work ought to be able to feed themselves and have a reasonable place to live but the one question that I haven't yet heard answered about raising the minimum wage is how to counter the effect it would have on prices...ie what good are we doing if we pay a substantially higher 'living wage' to all hourly employees and businesses simply respond by increasing prices to make up the difference? How do we actually increase workers' spending power without also dictating price controls? At what point are we driving away from a labor marketplace that rewards people who perform to a 'command' economy that rewards mere compliance (if that)? I don't have the answers but it's not as straightforward as saying "Hey let's just increase the minimum wage to X".

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 80): You say that as though it were an inherently evil thing. The restaurant business, like any small entrepreneurial operation is extremely challenging; when you stake your life savings and/or go into debt to open the doors of a restaurant why isn't it reasonable to expect those who have made no up front investment but also hope to prosper from it to bear some of that risk?

I do think moving risk from owners to employees is an inherently evil thing. When you tell people to work on your stuff x number of hours then you should compensate them for those hours. I find the practice of evaluating your staffing every 15 minutes and send home people without pay if it doesn't look like you want equally apprehensive.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 80): Especially when the better the customer service is, the better the restaurant performs and the better the servers get paid in tips.

I'm not against tip. I'm against it being such a significant part that it is moving the risks from the owner to the employee.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 80): Small business owners typically work their fingers to the bone while trying to get their "help" to do the simplest tasks without having to drive them like cattle.

Then they are poor managers.

FYI, my parents started their first restaurant when I was 7. They had more than 35 by the time they retired. Being the oldest kid I ran away as fast as I could but my siblings are still in the business and I have been part owner in some of their restaurants.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 80): I do genuinely believe that everybody who puts in an honest day's work ought to be able to feed themselves and have a reasonable place to live but the one question that I haven't yet heard answered about raising the minimum wage is how to counter the effect it would have on prices...ie what good are we doing if we pay a substantially higher 'living wage' to all hourly employees and businesses simply respond by increasing prices to make up the difference? How do we actually increase workers' spending power without also dictating price controls?

A far too big issue for this thread.

Quoting cmf (Reply 81): I find the practice of evaluating your staffing every 15 minutes and send home people without pay if it doesn't look like you want equally apprehensive.

You departed from English a little bit (   ) but I think I follow your meaning and agree that it's wrong of the owner not to give them the OPPORTUNITY to stay on the clock for the guaranteed minimum rate that they were scheduled for. Whether they think their time standing around is worth $2 is their decision, but ultimately it's also worth remembering all the busy hours that they are pulling in ten or more times that amount in tips.

Quoting cmf (Reply 81): I do think moving risk from owners to employees is an inherently evil thing.

Quoting cmf (Reply 81): I'm not against tip. I'm against it being such a significant part that it is moving the risks from the owner to the employee.

Unless it comes with the opportunity to receive greater rewards, I agree. That is the whole point - a good server can pull down a ton more per hour in tips carrying trays to people's tables than I ever did performing three different functions at a supermarket (cashier/bagger, stock clerk and operating the price change computer system) back in the day. Waiting tables for right or wrong is a minimum wage gig with the opportunity to do better if you hustle. No matter how good I was at that supermarket I was getting $4/hr just like the other 'union guy' who did half as much as I did or less.

Sounds like people want to have their cake and eat it too...the business owner should both shield them from all the risk AND provide a higher wage. That would be a reasonable expectation if waiters/waitresses weren't a dime a dozen in the labor marketplace (which they are because there is no substantial investment or education required). Which leads me to you calling the raising of the minimum wage

Quoting cmf (Reply 81): A far too big issue for this thread.

But one that is ultimately critical to this discussion because going away from the gratuity system would likely take money out of servers' pockets unless the minimum wage was raised. Which may or may not result in an actual increase in spending power or overall well-being due to rising prices and the other kumbaya factors that I listed.

Again, I love the idea of everybody's effort being valued but I don't know how to make that work in our 'market economy' system without killing the good aspects of it. The underlying assumption of this thread is that somehow Australia and other countries have "cracked the code" and I'd be interested to hear how.

Quoting cupraibiza (Reply 59): Not $21.30 but $2.13? Please explain

Park Av, New York.



I think this photo pretty much says it all...

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 82): You departed from English a little bit

Trying to do too many things at the same time, sorry.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 82): agree that it's wrong of the owner not to give them the OPPORTUNITY to stay on the clock for the guaranteed minimum rate that they were scheduled for. Whether they think their time standing around is worth $2 is their decision, but ultimately it's also worth remembering all the busy hours that they are pulling in ten or more times that amount in tips.

Much more complicated than that. While some don't have the option of earning their guaranteed almost non-existent salary others are required to stay at that salary. Not unusual to see them work 8 hours and still not cover parking costs.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 82): Sounds like people want to have their cake and eat it too...the business owner should both shield them from all the risk AND provide a higher wage.

Nothing such. As I said before it is about owners providing reasonable compensation for the time they require employees to be there.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 82): Waiting tables for right or wrong is a minimum wage gig with the opportunity to do better if you hustle.

I'm all for being able to do better. I do not expect the guaranteed wage to be enough for a life in luxury. I do expect it to be enough to pay your bills even if there is a week of bad weather. I'm happy to say that my parents and siblings have always practiced this rule. It means their turnover is very small as they have loyal, dedicated employees who know how things work and happily pitch in and show up whenever needed.

Quoting qantas077 (Reply 83): I think this photo pretty much says it all...

A picture of a homeless guy? Am I missing something? There are homeless people in every city in the world. I disagree with the tipping system (make it a wage and only tip a small amount if you get exceptional service) but I'm confused by your picture. Is that guy a waiter or something??

Quoting qantas077 (Reply 83):

Right because bums do not exist outside of the US right? There are plenty of homeless not out in the streets and many of them also choose not to be a part of the city's own shelter system and private shelters.

I did my medical training there and some of the homeless patients would flat out refuse our referrals to the NYC City Shelters.

Sorry but your picture doesn't say anything.

Quoting cupraibiza (Reply 59): Wait someone explain this to me. $2.13/hr is the minimum wage? Not $21.30 but $2.13?

Because when you walk into a bar or restaurant in the states you get INSTANT, attentive service. Because otherwise the staff don't make a wage since they would get no tips. When you walk into a pub in Sweden, the UK or OZ you get served when the server gets done chatting with his mates, and you may get the chance to order again if the server is done playing with their iPhone.

AGAIN, the error is refusing to acknowledge the advantages that the US system has and then further imagining that you are better able to decide what the Americans want for themselves. The US system has its costs, which maybe you don't like, but the difference in results their way of life produces come from a different set of pros and cons which they are perfectly right to embrace if they so choose.

Give me an American bar any day of the week with their cheap beer and tipping-for-service model !

Pu

The minimum wage just tells you what you can't work for. It doesn't tell you what what you will work for.

What you will work for is determined by the strength of the economy in region in question.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 80): The restaurant business, like any small entrepreneurial operation is extremely challenging; when you stake your life savings and/or go into debt to open the doors of a restaurant why isn't it reasonable to expect those who have made no up front investment but also hope to prosper from it to bear some of that risk?

Probably because it's a horrible concept. Essentially what you're saying is that labor should be free until the company shows a profit. You don't get to steal other folks' time until we feel like paying for it.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 80): better the restaurant performs and the better the servers get paid in tips.

Yeah, but it doesn't work like that in practice. Sometimes better service gets better tips, but often it doesn't. Your gratuity won't go to 35% just because you went above and beyond. Then you have things like Mondays and any other times when no amount of effort will bring enough business in to be worthwhile.

As well, as seen in this thread, some people just don't tip anyway.

There's a reason why those of us who can be motivated have moved on as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 80): Small business owners typically work their fingers to the bone while trying to get their "help" to do the simplest tasks without having to drive them like cattle. At least a gratuity-based system incentivizes doing a good job...so critical in the service industry.

Where on earth does this notion that managers deserve assistance from the "help" that they're not actually paying for come from?

Wow, sounds like a British board I frequent whose participants happened to watch a program(me) on Panorama and of course made a post about it.

You should be happy wherever you live, but honestly to come to this board and announce you are so glad you live there vs. here because you watched a program on tellie and saw certain conditions just sounds like baiting to me. People in the US enjoy a high standard of living and estimates are approx 80% do have health insurance. Obviously if 20% do not, that is a good 50 million or so, but it still is a low number in relation to the size of the US. Not saying it's acceptable and okay, but you really have to look at the scope of things. I am guessing if someone stated that there are more people without health insurance than the population of all of Australia, a few mouths would drop. I could easily find a youtube video of another racist incident in Australia and fear for my safety if I sat foot on Aussie territory, so let's not be quick to judge. There are good and bad everywhere. I personally would not want to live anywhere else (maybe the Costa del Sol for a few months out of the year however).

The US is changing, and thats good. "I" feel it's in a mish mash state at the moment and is still strong and a powerful place, but will emerge better, stronger and more inclusive down the road. CIvil rights, human rights in general, womens rights, gay rights, immigration reform, health care reform, gun control (something WILL change eventually) all this seems to scare a number of US citizens, moreso on the right, but it's inevvitable and that is why I think we are seeing such flux these days and some very extreme right wing politics emerging and being somehow eventually being deflated as the majority changes their way of thinking.

I for one am excited at the future of this country. The emergence of women in power is going to be the best change coming forward. Expect several more years of flux and turmoil as Obama's reign ends and Hillary's begins!

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 38): Just because we didn't have the foresight to invent social networking doesn't makes us in some way less as a country.

In Australia I don't think that the lack of support for innovation driven companies (and there are actually a few - eg Atlassian, Cochlear and the like) is due directly to taxes, wages or any other repression of the rich. It's more about the timid, risk averse mind set of business and the fact that our business and financial ecosystem is so incestuously small (ie company directorships are matters of rearranging deckchairs across industries) that it's difficult for innovators to get the support that's needed. The fact is that if you try to do something innovative then there is a high chance of failure, but nobody wants to tarnish their reputation, especially as boards may be legally liable for risky strategies by corporations.

A very senior manager of a government research organisation (now moved to a different one involving weaponry) who has been involved in a technology startup and is a company director once said "We have to look overseas to market our ICT technology as there are no Microsofts, HPs or Apples in Australia" ignoring the fact that all three started out as small garage industries. So rather than nurturing startups he just wanted the prestige of doing a deal with a big foreign corporation. I've also heard from a member of the board (also on the boards of major Australian corporations) who basically said that they wanted to ensure that the organisation was only doing research with a high chance of success. I constantly read and hear that America is much more tolerant of failure than Australia.

Quoting darksnowynight (Reply 89): Probably because it's a horrible concept. Essentially what you're saying is that labor should be free until the company shows a profit. You don't get to steal other folks' time until we feel like paying for it.

No, what I'm saying is that the restaurant owner has taken on substantial financial risk to open an enterprise that provides the server the opportunity to directly trade their labor in return for compensation from the patrons in the form of tips. It's not a model that works for most businesses but for the reasons that Pu and I have already discussed it seems to work in food service and some other service industries.

And as far as "stealing" the servers' time...there is no rational reason for each of their hours to be compensated at the same rate. Some hours they get $2, some hours they get $25+. Average it out over a week or month and see if it ends up being more or less than they would get at the minimum wage. I'm thinking it must be more (or offer other important advantages like flexible hours etc.) or they'd be working over at WalMart or McDonald's instead. Every one of which I have ever seen is hiring.

Big picture, waiting tables is something that just about anyone can do, doesn't require capital investment or education...if it did then restaurant owners would be forced to offer a better compensation package to attract qualified people. That's harsh but it is reality at present - the owners aren't greedy asshats for paying employees what the market dictates, but human beings with a lot at stake who are competing with other businesses just to say afloat. I've already addressed my general support for (but concerns with) the idea of substantially increasing the minimum wage. If you have answers to those concerns I'm all ears!

Quoting darksnowynight (Reply 89): Where on earth does this notion that managers deserve assistance from the "help" that they're not actually paying for come from?

Wasn't talking about 'managers' or even the restaurant business specifically, I was talking generally about the challenge that business owners - the people who have the most skin in the game - face in finding good employees who can be counted on to do what is in owner's interest while they are in their employ.

Let me give you an example...today I had a dumpster removed from my driveway (from a home improvement project), and the driver who picked it up just left the nasty plywood it had been resting on there in my driveway, that they put in place when it was delivered. Would have taken him 30 seconds tops to toss that trash in the dumpster before he drove off and not leave me, the customer, with a chore to do. I bet the owner of that business, the guy/gal who invested the money to start the business and bears the most risk for its success or failure, will not appreciate the fact that I'm going to call tomorrow and ask them to drive back over to my house to pick it up. All because a driver that he/she is paying good money to provide a service couldn't be bothered to make sure that I (the customer) was happy. After all I'm the guy who just paid thousands of dollars to commission a project that employed a lot of people.

Elbert Hubbard hit the nail on the head over 100 years ago in his essay "Message to Garcia": http://www.benning.army.mil/infantry...tent/pdf/Message%20to%20Garcia.pdf

And in part because there are so few Rowans, the tipping model of the service industry was born. Obviously it wouldn't be practicable for trash haulers but if the better part of that guy's paycheck directly depended on my satisfaction with his work he not only would have removed the plywood but probably swept the driveway too. I would be the winner and I deserve to be because I'm the one signing the check!

Here in New Jersey we're not allowed to pump our own gas (LOL). I always tip the guy who pumps $1...$2 if he wipes the windshield. At my main fuel stop they jump to it.

[Edited 2013-10-23 17:11:35]

Quoting pu (Reply 87): Because when you walk into a bar or restaurant in the states you get INSTANT, attentive service. Because otherwise the staff don't make a wage since they would get no tips. When you walk into a pub in Sweden, the UK or OZ you get served when the server gets done chatting with his mates, and you may get the chance to order again if the server is done playing with their iPhone.

That is simply untrue. Waitstaff here have to work equally hard for the money that they earn -- if they didn't then they would lose their jobs and end up without a wage.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 93):

That is bullsh*t.

There is a palpable difference between American service in pubs/ restaurants versus countries where they are guaranteed pay for mediocre service.

Pu

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 67): France?

  

Quoting Revelation (Reply 68): Right - the way forward is to chase down all the people who have next to nothing, that'll do wonders for the economy.

It will make them think twice before voting for more entitlement programs if it actually costs them money.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 68): In fact, by historical standards, they are robbing us.

They cannot be robbing us because it wasn't ours to begin with. That's what makes liberals so distasteful: they think that the money is theirs and everyone owes them a piece and maybe they'll be nice enough to let the people who actually earned the money keep some of it.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 74): Besides cutting unnecessary parts and adapting a different foreign policy as to not be counterproductive (see above,) this is what I'm talking about.

We should, generally speaking, not be adapting foreign policy. American interests are what they are and steps should be taken in furtherance of that. If that pisses someone off so badly that they decide they want to build a bomb, then so be it. There are plenty of people who work very hard to make sure he's gonna get got.

Quoting qantas077 (Reply 83):

And this photo says what?...the owner of the Mercedes should be ashammed of himself...oops, herself?. Is the owner of the Benz supposed to now offer it to the vagrant. Is this the New America promised by this administration? You know what I see in this photo?...I see an individual that despite his impoverished appearence, seams to be much more melow and relaxed than I am or than the owner of that Mercedes probably is. I say this because he has not much to worry about, you can always find food to eat, he doesn't have a mortgage to worry about of a potential job loss in the future due to a lean economy. I'm rather jealous of that gent actually as I on the other hand am the opposite of him, high strung, exhausted and never feel as relaxed as this gent appears to be in the photo. Why do I have all these issues?...because I chose to live by the numbers and fly by the rules. That is a tough reality to follow these days especially living in the same city as this man. Now that the ficticious pot of gold, "retirement" closes in, it couldn't be further down the road no thanks to our leader.
In five years I'll take my Nikon to Park Ave and I'll bet this man will have been forced to move over for many more in his shoes. We'll compare photos. Many on the side walks will be white and the Mercedes will still park in front of them.

Quoting allrite (Reply 91):

I think you are right. Australia doesn't lack for innovation per se, but we are quite risk averse for a number of reasons.

Another interesting issue is that we are a world leader in medical research, but the difference to the USA and Europe is that most of our R&D is done through universities rather than drug companies. For example, the now widely used HPV vaccine was developed by the University of Queensland, and is only licensed to drug companies. This minimises the returns to the Australian economy from this R&D, as we only pick up some license fee revenue, whereas if we marketed it as well then we could collect much bigger profits. Arguably we should learn to play the game better so that we derive better returns on our development, but that is a story for another thread.

(I'm using "we" in terms of the national economy. Obviously I'm not advocating the drugs be developed by some sort of workers collective!)

Quoting pu (Reply 94): That is bullsh*t.

No it isn't  

While it is true that customer service in America is generally good (but God knows that I can think of some bad examples), that doesn't mean that (a) customer service in Australia is poorer across the board* and (b) qf002 is absolutely right that people can lose their job if they don't do it well. Most wait staff are on casual contracts so they don't have any job security.


* Given that I'm not originally from Australia I say this with something of an outsiders perspective: while Australian wait staff aren't incentivized to provide good good customer service, the friendly and outgoing nature of Australian culture means that most do anyway. I think that the quality of customer service is higher in Australian than the UK for example, even though the UK has more of a tipping culture than we do, IMHO largely due to cultural reasons.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 97): while Australian wait staff aren't incentivized to provide good good customer service, the friendly and outgoing nature of Australian culture means that most do anyway.

I think that's dead right. The important thing, to my mind, is that people are genuinely 'equal' - waiters and waitresses don't have to feel like 'second class citizens,' the vast majority of them smile and provide good service because, as you say, that's their nature; they aren't required to 'crawl.' Tipping happens 'naturally' too - you don't have to tip, but if you do (I usually do) you don't have to count out any sort of percentage and hand it over - there's usually a bowl on the counter. When you get your change you just put some of it in the bowl; and presumably it gets shared out among all the counter staff at 'close of business.'

Quoting allrite (Thread starter): does it make me glad that I live here. And yes, I don't mind paying more for stuff if it means the employees can live and I'm happy for some of my taxes to go to Medicare (and glad that it's around when I need it) and other services, despite also having private health insurance. It's not perfect here and there are still many in poverty, but I do feel quite a bit luckier after watching it.

Was thinking about this on my way home from work yesterday because the same applies here. When you take a step back from things, one realises that our forefathers have built us up truly epic societies. Not perfect, but with high standards of living, education, healthcare, full or opportunity for 'betterment' and social mobility. Societies that have a helping hand, not a hand that pulls the finger. Australia is benefiting particularly from the minerals boom which is great. I know a quite a few otherwise economically disadvantaged people who have really been given an extra 'leg up' by it. And of course the financial benefits flow across the Tasman too.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 7): she was smart enough and ambitious enough to try and improve her position, and that having a child restricted her options for further study. That is the real travesty.

I'm sure the hard right would be fine if she had an abortion.  

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 43): Why would you want to be Scandinavia?

Oh, I don't know, happiness. http://unsdsn.org/happiness/

Quoting pu (Reply 49): They began sometime in the late 60s or early 70s to adopt the ideas you discuss, reduce military spending, stop foreign invasions

Great, so all thats needed to fix the British Economy is to start invading somewhere.  

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 71): it's an easy way for the employer to take a larger slice of the profits and foist his obligations onto the customer.

  

Quoting pu (Reply 94): There is a palpable difference between American service in pubs/ restaurants versus countries where they are guaranteed pay for mediocre service

Nope. I've never noticed a 'palpable' difference between service standards of restaurant staff in Oceania, the US, Asia or Europe.

[Edited 2013-10-23 22:09:37]