4 ms·

This is the real point. The idea that somehow the catering business serving startups or the kitchen workers in cafes are somehow less worthy of support than own

This is the real point. The idea that somehow the catering business serving startups or the kitchen workers in cafes are somehow less worthy of support than owners of restaurants

dunpeal 8y ago
To be fair, there are a lot of efficiency gains and economies of scale involved. Google pays a lot less to provide an employee with a nutritious, healthy meal than the same employee would be paying for a less healthy meal in your typical local restaurant. So this law will create more local jobs in the short term... except the next Techplex will not be built in MTV, which will lose it far more local jobs than it gained.
- extradego 8y ago
  Great points. If only the public could elect the officials in charge at Google so these kinds of efficiencies could benefit the whole of society... Wait... I think that’s called democratic socialism. Oh and hey I found a website for it. Check it out: https://dsausa.org https://dsausa.org Awesome! Don’t confuse this restaurant nonsense for a leftist progressive agenda. This is moderate hype designed to appease small business owners without affecting corporate profits or contending with systematic income inequality. Broadly speaking, those cafeteria workers have nothing to lose either way. A real left agenda would seek to change that.
rtkwe 8y ago
Restaurants do have some added benefits over just a catering business though and those are mentioned in the article. Restaurants bring foot traffic to areas that other shops can benefit from where a catering business doesn't.
repsilat 8y ago
No, this is not the real point. Employment isn't an upside, that's the broken window fallacy. Employees should be allowed to bring food from home to eat at their desks if they want, and that is obviously terrible for jobs in local cafes and restaurants.

4 ms·

This is the real point. The idea that somehow the catering business serving startups or the kitchen workers in cafes are somehow less worthy of support than own

by tidon12 8y ago

This is the real point. The idea that somehow the catering business serving startups or the kitchen workers in cafes are somehow less worthy of support than owners of restaurants

dunpeal 8y ago
To be fair, there are a lot of efficiency gains and economies of scale involved. Google pays a lot less to provide an employee with a nutritious, healthy meal than the same employee would be paying for a less healthy meal in your typical local restaurant. So this law will create more local jobs in the short term... except the next Techplex will not be built in MTV, which will lose it far more local jobs than it gained.
- extradego 8y ago
  Great points. If only the public could elect the officials in charge at Google so these kinds of efficiencies could benefit the whole of society... Wait... I think that’s called democratic socialism. Oh and hey I found a website for it. Check it out: https://dsausa.org https://dsausa.org Awesome! Don’t confuse this restaurant nonsense for a leftist progressive agenda. This is moderate hype designed to appease small business owners without affecting corporate profits or contending with systematic income inequality. Broadly speaking, those cafeteria workers have nothing to lose either way. A real left agenda would seek to change that.
rtkwe 8y ago
Restaurants do have some added benefits over just a catering business though and those are mentioned in the article. Restaurants bring foot traffic to areas that other shops can benefit from where a catering business doesn't.
repsilat 8y ago
No, this is not the real point. Employment isn't an upside, that's the broken window fallacy. Employees should be allowed to bring food from home to eat at their desks if they want, and that is obviously terrible for jobs in local cafes and restaurants.