• Spongebobsquarejuche [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Fair enough. But California is a large place with diverse economic situations. And Id hate for every restaurant to be McDonald’s. so i guess my concern will come out in the wash. we’ll see if this creates a greater monopoly eventually. Also im a small business owner.

      • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        diversity is when more borger places and the more borger places the more diverser it is

        pay a living wage or sell to someone who can. ideally the state.

            • Spongebobsquarejuche [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              But is that what we’re doing? Having business owner foot the bill for workers comp is more of the same. We do that already and the actual solution is to have the state perform that function. This solution just cuts out people that cant afford the new regulation. Leaving the large player who can afford it. Furthering wealth disparity.

                • Spongebobsquarejuche [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Really??? Im trying to understand and you’re not being persuasive. Saying you dont care about someone losing their income just comes off as cruel.

                  Should we regulate it so that only McDonald’s afford to run a restaurant? Should benefits be based on employment?

                  You’re acting like under our system this is a benevolent outcome and there couldn’t be a downside.