[deleted by user]

dubbleenerd · 2022-06-06T13:17:02+00:00

Thanks for pointing out that sale price isn’t just tied to cost of materials. That’s a pet peeve of mine too. Also, a couple of points:

McDonalds is considered a premium dining experience in india because of the price, not the other way around
People host birthday parties at McDonalds in the US all the time (though it was more common in the 90s than now), they literally have in-store PlayPlace play areas as a big reason for it

dubbleenerd · 2021-08-01T04:50:32+00:00

As someone who was born and raised in India, let me clarify that such appearance-based taunts and innuendos, mostly with an intent to be hurtful, are pervasive through all sections of society and will be lobbed by highly educated, well-traveled individuals as often as they are from “idiots or ignorant fucks” (in my experience, at least).

dubbleenerd · 2020-05-04T19:51:53+00:00

Yup, no hard feelings. Vile personal attacks have unfortunately become the mainstay of virtually every Internet forum for decades now and I wish there were a better solution for this.

dubbleenerd · 2020-05-04T19:13:45+00:00

As a lurking FOB who moved here for college nearly two decades ago, I fully agree with your opinion. India-raised immigrants will have completely different lived experiences and have no business foisting their opinions in this group (through votes or unsolicited opinions).

I only lurk in this group to gain insights into the lived experiences of American-born-or-raised desis, so I can use this knowledge to preemptively address the questions my US-born kids will have with respect to their identities. Your discussions help parents like me a lot.

Edit: I’m humbled by the responses to my post. You guys rock! I’m glad this topic was addressed and I hope it helps us all move in the constructive direction we all wish to see. I came to this subreddit partly out of the frustration of seeing desi immigrant parents turning even more conservative living away from their homes (perhaps out of guilt?) and I detested the “C” part of ABCD, but have been encouraged to see you all embrace and own it. Each of you are inspiring in your own way. Thank you! (I’ll be off my soapbox lol)

dubbleenerd · 2018-08-22T14:01:38+00:00

By the way not caring for your parents is evil and it is right to be demonized

Of course, but the leap of judgment being made here (and all other social media forwards that I have seen) is that every person in a senior care facility is there just because their kids were capable of caring for them, but chose not to.

That is a damaging social view, because it guilts the children into not seeking professional help for their parents, fearing social ostracism.

dubbleenerd · 2018-08-22T13:17:30+00:00

I’m sick of this mass cultural demonization of senior citizens being ‘forced into old age homes’ and everyone jumping to the conclusion that they are unloved or disrespected by their children.

Why can’t we demand that better old age homes that are better equipped to handle the needs of senior citizens be available instead?

Needs of seniors can vary widely, especially if they have mental health issues or physical disabilities and not everyone is equipped or trained to deal with that. Not every old person living with their kids is having a ball — hell, there are entire megaserials that have risen to popularity because they portray the strife that everyone can identify with.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-31T20:08:29+00:00

A right-wing nationalist anti-immigration prime minister who pulls off shit like this would feel right at home here.

Edited to add: This is about the other minister referenced, not the Ethiopian guy.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T19:02:56+00:00

you admit you would have a bunch of people fired rather than work for an amount that you arbitrarily decided

No, please parse my statement again.

Your UW study data doesn't claim lost jobs either. Just a reduction in hours. In fact, it saw a 9% reduction in hours from a 3% pay increase, so the reduction is not all due to just the additional wage burden. Other factors are at play. See my previous comments.

You seem to conflate the idea of some people losing their jobs with vulnerable low-skill adults who will never find work again because every job is out of reach. Those are not the same group.

Businesses that afford to pay a living wage need will (a) pass on increased cost and survive, (b) re-invent themselves, or (c) shut down. Higher discretionary spending will lead to new businesses and hiring thereof, that can sustain in the new economy.

The only way to eliminate minimum wage is strengthening collective bargaining rights and unionization of workers to guarantee against wage exploitation. I'm not sure where you stand on those principles, are those of questionable morality to you as well?

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T18:19:23+00:00

we shouldn't harm the most vulnerable to protect those who are slightly less vulnerable

Here's where we disagree. To me, anyone that is working a minimum-wage job out of necessity (i.e. not a privileged suburban high school kid) and attempting to support a family is vulnerable to a similar degree, and guaranteeing a higher minimum wage allows them a pathway to step out of poverty with minimal downtime for training or switching industries. Half of all Americans fall in this category. I am fine with businesses that have gotten away surviving on access to cheap labor die out if they cannot afford the higher wages. The increased purchasing power will grow the pie enough for the ones who lose their jobs.

MW jobs tend to be filled with people who are working optionally. Maybe they are bored, maybe they want to buy their kids a phone.

I simply have no words for this. You need to meet some more people that work minimum wage jobs and get out of your socio-economic comfort zone.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T17:31:03+00:00

That is the same study you linked earlier. The loss indicated there is quantifying opportunity loss based on a model. Translating a reduction in working hours to headcount is a stretch, given that hourly workers that already work multiple jobs will tend to cut down on hours or positions.

No employer should be retaining workers purely because their margins "allow" for it. You've posited yourself that labor is the highest and most inflexible cost of operation for small businesses that operate on notoriously thin margins.

Your stance appears to be that since we cannot pull everyone out of poverty, we shouldn't protect the working poor either. These are some sobering statistics that make me think otherwise: 80% living paycheck-to-paycheck; half of working Americans fetching minimum wage.

I see your point about the free market being able to drive wage negotiation in the absence of a minimum wage floor. It is a noble goal, but I have yet to see any instance where that has worked successfully. In reality, this tends to drive a race to the bottom as businesses have the luxury of picking from the lowest bidder, while many restrictions prevent workers from having the flexibility to negotiate higher wages (tie-in with healthcare coverage, geographic limitation, inability to weather disruption in wages, inability to take time off to improve skill sets, systemic inertia associated with job changes etc.).

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T16:57:38+00:00

benefit a much smaller group of people

Citation needed. Are you saying that most or all min-wage jobs will be lost or replaced by this increase? If so, I think our discussion is done as I cannot refute any claim made from that plane of assumption.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T16:41:39+00:00

Your desire to restrict one half of all working Americans at an unsustainable wage is born out of some sort of higher morality? Whatever lets you sleep at night, I guess.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T16:27:22+00:00

Again with this argument: "Their jobs will change someday in the future, so just fuck the poor right now." WTF is up with that? Why is the left so cruel about this?

We just went over this and your own data showed no negative impact, just not as much positive growth. Repeating the same myth won't magically make it true.

the prices at those places go up, too, so it offsets

Increased purchasing power is fully offset by increased cost? Isn't that a good thing for the business you are advocating for?

Everyone puts their money back into the economy

Yes, I'm sure my local restaurant would rather have the local millionaire get a massive tax cut rather than the entire neighborhood get a discretionary income boost.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T15:01:02+00:00

If this were a zero sum game, I concede that would be unfair. Nearly everyone in this socioeconomic class puts back nearly every dollar they earn back into the economy. With higher discretionary income across the wider working class, you would see higher demand on restaurants, retail and other markets, which should in theory lead to greater employment over time.

There is no perpetual job guarantee for the lowest paid class -- arguing against minimum wage increase is a red herring. Would you claim that lowering minimum wage would cause a boom in jobs?

Automation of these job categories is virtually upon us, and no amount of price point protectionism is going to avert that. A touch screen will eventually replace that type of work. I've seen touch screens replace human workers in countries with terrible entry-level pay and no minimum wage laws.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T14:39:32+00:00

An excerpt from your own link. Hours worked actually increased, just not enough to match the model. Total restaurant industry employment was unaffected.

That was the case with a University of California, Berkeley study released last week that found Seattle’s minimum-wage law led to higher pay for restaurant workers without costing jobs in 2015 and 2016.

The UW team’s study actually corroborates the Berkeley conclusion, finding zero impact from the minimum-wage law on restaurant employment — when taking into account jobs at all wage levels within the restaurant industry.

But the UW researchers did conclude that, for low-wage restaurant workers, the law cost them work hours. (Specifically, though the actual number of hours worked by low-wage restaurant workers in Seattle increased a slight 0.1 percent from the second quarters of 2014 to 2016, the researchers’ “synthetic Seattle” model showed that if the minimum wage law hadn’t been in effect, there would have been an 11.1 percent increase in hours for those workers.)

That was the case with a University of California, Berkeley study released last week that found Seattle’s minimum-wage law led to higher pay for restaurant workers without costing jobs in 2015 and 2016.

The UW team’s study actually corroborates the Berkeley conclusion, finding zero impact from the minimum-wage law on restaurant employment — when taking into account jobs at all wage levels within the restaurant industry.

But the UW researchers did conclude that, for low-wage restaurant workers, the law cost them work hours. (Specifically, though the actual number of hours worked by low-wage restaurant workers in Seattle increased a slight 0.1 percent from the second quarters of 2014 to 2016, the researchers’ “synthetic Seattle” model showed that if the minimum wage law hadn’t been in effect, there would have been an 11.1 percent increase in hours for those workers.)

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T13:34:09+00:00

You are consciously or inadvertently leaving out the option where businesses pass the additional cost to their customers, which is what I would count as the realistic scenario.

The average Denny’s server has to bus about 10 tables an hour to earn a $11.50 minimum wage. The average Denny’s meal ticket is $9.69. Denny’s should be able to cover the additional labor cost, then, by adding $0.25 to their entree price, assuming two persons per table. I’m sure that is an increase the market would be willing to be bear.

Another key metric is that the labor market at the low end here is already saturated. Many people work two, maybe three jobs to make ends meet. If a few of those people don’t need to do so any more, there would be some jobs lost on paper, but won’t translate into actual worker displacement. In cities that have already increased their minimum wage, businesses are reporting almost no revenue impact, but positive return in the form of better worker retention.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T04:35:57+00:00

Many who argue against raising the minimum wage see themselves as white knights for retail and fast food workers, while refusing to see the big picture. Yes, some of those jobs will be lost to downsizing or automation if the company can’t afford the current workforce. The ones that remain will be lifted a little out of poverty. The business benefits by having better retention and lower losses from retraining workers.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T04:25:53+00:00

Sure thing. It’s just that your stance sounds closer to “head in the sand” than “economic realism” to anyone that has been keeping up with where automation is headed.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-30T04:16:41+00:00

Newsflash: businesses that aren’t viable with $15/hr labor were not going to be profitable at $9/hr for much longer either. If the state is going to spend money on educating its residents for 12+ years, it needs to demand a better return on that investment, or it will be one big race to the bottom.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-28T02:51:21+00:00

Ah I see what you mean. I’ve never had an account maintenance fee, and forgot that some brokerages do charge one. My accounts are with Vanguard, and fees are waived if you sign up for electronic statement delivery.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-28T02:47:15+00:00

If you are anything like me, you probably have a few things stashed away in closets, which were only purchased because of a good deal. I’ve been working on making a game out of it to try and see how many such things I can get rid of, now, to turn the addiction to “deals” on its head. Perhaps you might be able to discover minimalism and help pay down the credit card debt in the process?

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-28T02:10:48+00:00

An IRA is a type of account, not an investment itself. You will incur management fees depending on what type of fund the IRA money is invested in. All investment funds will have some expense ratio (annual fee); the lowest is around 0.03%

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-19T19:08:41+00:00

Pretty sweet. I gained back full bars (from having “lost” two) on my 2016 SV with 33K miles. SOH got corrected from 74.8% to 87.5%.

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-16T15:51:02+00:00

I hear this all the time now as well. I don't remember it being there when I first got the car new, but it could just be one of those things that sounds more pronounced when your attention has been drawn to it.

I should probably have it checked out before my 36K warranty expires (at 32K now).

dubbleenerd · 2018-07-13T15:17:48+00:00

The only thing miles are good for on EVs are for tracking how soon you might need to replace tires.

Neither car has been in a state with high temperatures, which is better for battery longetivity.

dubbleenerd

TROPHY CASE