Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by bix6 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

bix6

$30 min wage sounds doable? CA took fast food min wage up to $20 and it’s been fine.

View on HN

> CA took fast food min wage up to $20 and it’s been fine.

Reduced employment by 3% but otherwise fine, yeah.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w34033

A nationwide $30 minimum wage would have a significantly higher impact (most places have lower wages than California and $30 is more than $20).

3% of fast food jobs. Honestly that seems like a worthwhile tradeoff. Fastfood prices have increased a lot in recent years as well, but it's unclear how much if any is due to minimum wage increase.

Fast food jobs are where the higher minimum was imposed.

It's fine to argue it's a good tradeoff; I just want advocates to admit there is a tradeoff.

>fine

A medium fries is over $4 before taxes… over $1 more expensive than the rest of the country.

McDonald’s made $14 billion in profit last year. It’s not the labor driving the costs, it’s the profits.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44968997

Same with Chipotle.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45762671

Who pays the profits? Like tariffs, the consumer. You pay for these billions in annual profits.

McDonald's the corporation doesn't sell fries, they rent out real estate and franchise licenses.

What you really need to look at is the cost of labor for a random McDonald's franchisee.

> While menu prices did increase, costs rose by an average of just 1.5% –equivalent to about 6 cents on a $4 hamburger, down from the 15-cent increase reported in the September study.

Study: California's $20 fast-food minimum wage improves pay at small cost to consumers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43806608 - May 2025

https://www.axios.com/local/san-francisco/2025/02/27/uc-berk...

https://irle.berkeley.edu/publications/brief/effects-of-the-...

What was their revenue and what was profit as a percentage of that?

If the profit percentage hasn’t increased, “record profits” is meaningless drivel that just means it kept up with inflation.

I'm ok paying a little more for fries if it means the people making it and serving it to me are paid a living wage.

Regardless, the fries cost what the local market can bear, not what they "want" to charge for them.

Prices are not related to costs. That's just a lie to folks use to justify price increase to the market. Prices never decline when costs do unless the consumer is wise enough to know like in the case for gasoline.

That's probably OK when the poorest workers are making the difference ten times over per hour.

Why would you expect fries to cost the same in California as in much poorer states (most of them)?

Have you seen how fries are made at McDonald’s? There’s nearly zero labor involved. It’s nearly automated. You’re paying that price cause that’s what the market will bear and McDonald’s needs to see profits go up.

In-n-out fries are 2.45 (and a burger is 4$).

Do you know why in n out is so cheap still? It seems like all the other fast food jumped up.

the answer is staring you in the face and you still can't see it. let me give you a hint: it's also the reason arizone ice tea is still $.99

Reply on news.ycombinator.com