Once again, the poster boy for those who don't listen speaks.
1. If you're just plain bad and slow at your job, nobody is advocating any type of wage. But if you do your job well at, say fast food, for 40 hours a week, you deserve a decent wage. Such a job may not require a degree, but that doesn't mean it isn't work.
2. As for your arguments about raising the cost of burgers, that's dependent on how the business is structured, and there are businesses which pay a decent wage, make better burgers than the competition, and charge less. If you can't compete with those businesses, maybe you shouldn't be in business.
1. Why does working 40 hours a week mean you get a good wage? McDonald's work is easy. It doesn't require a degree because a monkey could do most fast food jobs. Apparently monkeys can even work in higher class restaurants.
Because 40 hours a week (plus getting ready for work and commuting to work) consumes most of your time. Pretty simple.
2. What fast food place is cheaper than McDonald's but higher quality, while paying more than any other place? Obviously no place exists, or McDonald's would not be such a dominant force in fast food. Even if this place did exist, they have a very inefficient business model.
Glad you asked.
http://blogs.wsj.com/independentstreet/2009/01/28/in-n-out-burger-vs-mcdonalds-guess-who-won/https://www.google.com/search?q=in-n-out&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=hF0KUuHbI-G2igK6wYCQDg&sqi=2&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1144&bih=1006A cheeseburger, fries and soda costs just over $5. Starting pay is $11. They're serving more customers at 3:30 in the afternoon than most fast food restaurants are serving at 12:20 in the afternoon. At lunchtime, I will count about fourteen employees working in an In-n-Out.
They never freeze any ingredients. They have no microwaves or freezers or heatlamps. Potatoes are sliced from whole potatoes at each store. They have the freshest fast food you'll ever eat.
Why not just make everything automated? Wouldn't that be the most efficient? You know, if a business really wanted to be as efficient as possible they'd just have machines serving the food faster, fresher, and better than the employees ever could. Oh, but wait, then you wouldn't really need the employees...
So maybe we should just set limits on how efficient a company can be to ensure that there will always be employees around to be paid and to take away from company efficiency.
Your efficiency argument is inefficient.