You are forgetting to ask the question "Why can McDonalds hire such unskilled workers and still run a successful business?"
McDonalds has put many millions of dollars into automation systems and foolproof menus that allow the food to be prepared effectively by minimum wage employees.
Short order cooks generally earn roughly double the minimum wage, so you can see how significant an accomplishment this was.
Most of the items sold by McDonalds could probably be sold out of an "automat" style vending machine, so I imagine that the decision to use actual humans is more about marketing than about production.
As for the NJ gas station attendant, the law requiring gas stations in NJ to hire people to pump gas (self service stations are outlawed) was simply intended to increase employment among very low end workers.
The objective could have also been achieved by outlawing dishwashing machines or farm combines, etc.
So your point rings true -- the value of a pump attendant is very low (lower than minimum wage) when set by the market precisely because people don't want the service and it wouldn't exist without a social policy driving it.
The situations you have mentioned all involve unskilled labor. The invention of modern farm equipment and many appliances is to blame for decreasing the value of unskilled labor.
The question that I consider most important is in how you look at unskilled labor. Is it a "class" of people who will never improve their skills and are doomed to live on whatever wage is the market price for unskilled labor? Or are the currently unskilled workers (many of whom are in high school) likely to obtain skills and experience that makes them command a far higher wage?
I'd argue that artificially inflated minimum wages, not intrinsic quality improvement, is why McDonalds relies far more upon pre-prepared items assembled (bun, pattie, cheese, lettuce, bun) in the store than on semi-skilled short-order cooking.
A restaurant like Noodles & Co. is a great example of how a chain was able to introduce one small skill (the art of stir frying a bowl full of noodles, sauce, and a few other ingredients) to make the food taste significantly better than if it were made in a factory and heated up, or stored in a vat then ladled on.
Again, I haven't argued that a living wage is unreasonable. I'd just rather see market wages left alone and separate state subsidies of the unskilled, along with career counseling, community college availability, and possibly free daycare.
The approach we have today is to proudly proclaim that our $6 minimum wage helps people, when it actually (and measurably) harms them, as I've illustrated elsewhere in this discussion.
McDonalds has put many millions of dollars into automation systems and foolproof menus that allow the food to be prepared effectively by minimum wage employees.
Short order cooks generally earn roughly double the minimum wage, so you can see how significant an accomplishment this was.
Most of the items sold by McDonalds could probably be sold out of an "automat" style vending machine, so I imagine that the decision to use actual humans is more about marketing than about production.
As for the NJ gas station attendant, the law requiring gas stations in NJ to hire people to pump gas (self service stations are outlawed) was simply intended to increase employment among very low end workers.
The objective could have also been achieved by outlawing dishwashing machines or farm combines, etc.
So your point rings true -- the value of a pump attendant is very low (lower than minimum wage) when set by the market precisely because people don't want the service and it wouldn't exist without a social policy driving it.
The situations you have mentioned all involve unskilled labor. The invention of modern farm equipment and many appliances is to blame for decreasing the value of unskilled labor.
The question that I consider most important is in how you look at unskilled labor. Is it a "class" of people who will never improve their skills and are doomed to live on whatever wage is the market price for unskilled labor? Or are the currently unskilled workers (many of whom are in high school) likely to obtain skills and experience that makes them command a far higher wage?
I'd argue that artificially inflated minimum wages, not intrinsic quality improvement, is why McDonalds relies far more upon pre-prepared items assembled (bun, pattie, cheese, lettuce, bun) in the store than on semi-skilled short-order cooking.
A restaurant like Noodles & Co. is a great example of how a chain was able to introduce one small skill (the art of stir frying a bowl full of noodles, sauce, and a few other ingredients) to make the food taste significantly better than if it were made in a factory and heated up, or stored in a vat then ladled on.
Again, I haven't argued that a living wage is unreasonable. I'd just rather see market wages left alone and separate state subsidies of the unskilled, along with career counseling, community college availability, and possibly free daycare.
The approach we have today is to proudly proclaim that our $6 minimum wage helps people, when it actually (and measurably) harms them, as I've illustrated elsewhere in this discussion.