If supply and demand is a thing...

If supply and demand is a thing, and it's getting harder and harder for fast food employers to find and keep good workers, then why aren't they responding to this market demand by raising wages?

Attached: Capture.png (1374x842, 1.05M)

Because they don't have to.

Cuz Juan the illegal next door will work for cheaper and wont talk about to the boss like you.

>if supply and demand is a thing
No market has a tendency towards equilibrium.

Because Minimum wage creates an articial price floor which fucks with the market equilbirum.

Alright, but take this for example: I have been in several shitty jobs where they may as well just put a revolving door on the facilities with as much turnover as they have. If they're having that much trouble keeping help, then why don't they raise the wages? Their businesses are also suffering, with low sales/poor performance etc.. Are they just too stupid, is it mismanagement? What incentive is preventing businesses like these from raising wages when a lack of properly trained workers is hurting their business?

Because they are no longer profitable (or profitable enough to make it worth their tune and risk) if they pay menial labor more. They would need to hack the prices and would lose a lot of customers

It's only broken in an open system (ie, lots of immigration).

When the number of workers is held constant, and demand increases, everyone gets pay raises and nobody who wants work is unemployed. When the number of works is allowed to rise freely through immigration, not only do wages stay suppressed, but unemployment rises regardless of changes in demand.

>and it's getting harder and harder for fast food employers to find and keep good workers

Says who?

Sounds like mismanagement. People will adjust to shitty pay if they like the work and their boss.

People don't quit their jobs: they quit their bosses.

So you feel the government should step in? I always think if the government is so good then why do they need public employee unions

There could be any number of reasons from mismanagement, a reflexive phenomenon where poor performance leads them to the idea of (labor) cost cutting, them angling to exploit the HB visa programs by saying, 'golly gosh, there's just no workers [who want to for for half their worth],' etc. But I already said that markets have no tendency towards equilibrium.

Because of globalization, no joke.
In Tijuana we have this same scenario, factories make a shit ton of money and the main problem in the region is finding and keeping labor, unlike what is commonly thought there are not 100 people outside a factory waiting to do the same job, most places function daily with way less people than they are aiming for.
But, most multinationals don't see offer demand within the context of a single city or nation, they see it globally, they won't raise the wage of the workers to get more of them because the wage being this low was one of the main reasons they brought the factory here in the first place, and if they are going to have to raise wages to keep the factory full they might as well move to India or any other cheaper 3rd world country.

Our country has been importing 3rd worlders for decades to keep wages low. If we let the the population thin out a little then labor would become more scarce and drive wages up.

>markets have no tendency towards equilibrium.
What's your evidence for this?

Because they can get mexicans and niggers to push the shiny buttons until all branches are fully automated, which is fine by me, good riddance to those crap jobs

Because youve got it backwards.

There is a surplus of burger flippers, therefore their labor isnt wortg as much.

At the end of the day there's only so much a fast food restaurant can pay a person and have them be worth it.

ummm, just go outside of your house and be aware of the world?

The extensively defined prerequisites for equilibrium theory to hold true don't exist in reality, in any market.

When was the last time you saw a fast food place that was staffed with mostly teenagers? That used to be the norm. Nowadays most places are full of illegal adults. The supply of labor is way up due to illegal immigrants, but that isn't seen in our census data, so (((experts))) are acting like it's some big mystery why wages aren't rising.

Fast food niggers won’t hire and train people without experience, so they can go fuck themselves

ummm, because investors want a return on their investment? You don't get rich because you want to work.

Not an argument, not evidence.

That's an argument from logic, but I asked for evidence. I'll even grant that you're probably right because economists are 100% fucking idiots who couldn't hack it in a trading pit, but I'd like an example of a market that doesn't trend towards equilibrium.

Still not an argument, still not evidence. Why the fuck are you even posting so badly? Lurk more.

If supply and demand doesn't work then what other mechanism would do better at producing and distributing resources? It does work - it's just not perfect like everything in life.

A central power? Look how that turned out. How can a small group of elites know what hundreds of millions of people want produced and where it should be distributed?

>If supply and demand doesn't work then what other mechanism would do better at producing and distributing resources?
You need to be more careful with your terms: supply and demand doesn't "produce and distribute resources". A free market does that. Or a centralized state economy does that. Supply and demand is just a theory dreamed up by poor faggots who couldn't hack it in trading.

>full employment
Jew lie.

you're not an argument, bitch

Oh wow, lol. I actually burst out laughing from that. Okay, literally every stock, commodity, currency market, etc. Operate off of reflexivity with no tendency towards equilibrium. Perpetual flux is entirely antithetical to the concept of equilibrium and some natural tendency towards perato efficiency. Secondly, every consumer good market operates off of monopolistic competition--meaning producers act as price-setters which is, again, antithetical to equilibrium.

Equilibrium theory is both conceptually absurd and empirically unobserved.

Ever hear of inflation?

Because we've entered the Twilight Zone. Or your assumptions are incorrect.

Attached: ecbffeca699cfa5ca694fb6655693c25.jpg (736x1626, 108K)

Inflation is what killed the people working at lower tier jobs. Inflation is making our money worth less and less as time goes on.

$10 used to get you a lot back in the day. Now you can get very little.

Attached: 1528905058827.jpg (625x988, 277K)

Sauce?

Sounds like you guys could use a wall.
also this
so win win

>Perpetual flux is entirely antithetical to the concept of equilibrium
If wages are fixed without consideration to supply and demand then they are not in perpetual flux and are, by your definition, therefore in constant equilibrium.
> every consumer good market operates off of monopolistic competition--meaning producers act as price-setters
And yet if those same producers make a product out of steel and the supply of steel goes down, the price of their product and manufacturing costs go up, which is not antithetical to equilibrium, but demonstrative of it.
Again, this appears another example of corrupt academics feeding the public a bullshit scenario to keep them and their cohorts rich and everyone else poor, delusional, ignorant and at each others throats.

Because historically fast food was the job you held as a teen and moved on when you got older educated etc.
Fast food and service have always been pleb tier work meant to train young how to do a job keep a schedule etc.
The exception being 5 star restaurants that require professional seasoned help.
Fast food will literally be the last industry to raise wages.

I could post my dissertation, but suffice it to say: jewry.

See, this is the problem with discussing economics: Most people don't actually understand the theories that they're trying to defend.

>If wages are fixed
I never said they were. Just that the rates are not determined by the intersection of supply and demand.

>supply of steel goes down, the price of their product and manufacturing costs go up
And now you're just assuming equilibrium as a normative.

>which is not antithetical to equilibrium, but demonstrative of it.
>I'm going to assume something; look how it demonstrates it!

Wages are rising and that's what started the stock market dive in january-february.