[The Immortal Goon]

The nuance you missed is that I was baiting with a literal non-thought regularly employed by trolls and you researched the legal history of a minor regulation on tips in response.

My presumption was correct then. You were having an emotional reaction and I was using facts.

This is, of course, to be expected.

So when your boss took your tips, did you quit or continue taking it like a bitch?

Neither. As I am not from money, I needed the employment, so quitting was not an option.

I led a unionization effort. It succeeded. In the contract it now explicitly states that the boss cannot take tips

The welfare state makes it so that losing your tips is unlikely to make you go hungry.

You cannot quit your job and then get on SNAP.

What if I told you that most restaurants fail and if the boss is taking your tips, either (1) you deserved it for some reason, (2) the restaurant is struggling and is about to fail and needs your tips, (3) the boss is a jackass and his entire staff is about to quit and then his restaurant will fail while the employees can start collecting unemployment.

This rests on the assumption that the customers are tipping the boss instead of the service. It is faulty reasoning.

The challenge of course is that if you try to allow both tipping pools and prevent employees from losing all of their tips, the federal government is essentially required to start micro-managing tipping pools, which would be inefficient and probably also futile.

This has not been the case.

The thing you would-be agitators are not commenting on is that cooks and dishwashers probably deserve tips too but they weren't getting them for the aforementioned reasons.

Perhaps you have difficulty reading the previous provisions being overturned, which explicitly state that cooks and dishwashers did get tips:

Restaurant 'Tip Pool' That Gives Greater Proportion of Tips to Kitchen Staff is Valid When Employer Does Not Take Tip Credit.

It seems to me that you are having an emotional reaction and trying to do anything to make it seem as if an administration you value is not doing something that you don't like. Perhaps if you tried to separate your feelings from the issue, or read up on it, you could solve the impasse you seem to be stuck at.

[Libertarian353]

The welfare state

And you lost right there.

What if I told you that most restaurants fail

That's the Boss fault, personal responsibility.

if the boss is taking your tips

That's theft.

you deserved it for some reason

Uh, no. A tip is usually giving for good service.

the restaurant is struggling and is about to fail and needs your tips

Again a tip is a donation to the waiter or cook, nothing to do with the restaurant. Also again personal responsibility. What this is welfare for the Boss. He's being dependent on the donations, while still have more money. So he's in a sense a thieve.

the boss is a jackass and his entire staff is about to quit and then his restaurant will fail while the employees can start collecting unemployment.

And considering trump will never bring back any jobs, there will be more poor whites than Blacks at the rate. Which comes to the question, hapa: Is it really ok to be white. I mean surely whites are the victim(manly by their own kind) but why make it worse. It seems to me you only care about white supremacy than the welfare of whites.

The thing you would-be agitators are not commenting on is that cooks and dishwashers probably deserve tips too but they weren't getting them for the aforementioned reasons.

Implying there's no tip pooling and I'm against government interference of it. But again, you somehow support big government when it comes to screwing over white working people. So why say it's ok to be white, if their white government is causing them to commit self-genocide?

Again, why are supporting a president who doesn't give to shits about whites? Are do you hate the savage Blacks that much?

I believe you insecure and lonely, so you need a scapegoat.

[B0ycey]

The class divide and intelligence level in this thread is embarrassing. Did @Hong Wu, actually suggest that tip stealing was needed to prevent poor businesses from failing? How about the restaurant achieving high standards to keep it from failing? Surely that makes more sense? If it requires theft to keep the business afloat then it says it all about the management who are running it. But sure, why not eliminate the poor class from having any spending power? How much service related businesses are going to survive without the capital being available for all classes to spend there? Hardly any.

[Hong Wu]

This has not been the case.

I'm sure this is wrong. How exactly does the government allow tipping pools, but not prevent the boss from taking away someone's tips, if it isn't going to micromanage how the tipping pool is distributed? I'm failing to see how that is possible.

Perhaps you have difficulty reading the previous provisions being overturned, which explicitly state that cooks and dishwashers did get tips:

Restaurant 'Tip Pool' That Gives Greater Proportion of Tips to Kitchen Staff is Valid When Employer Does Not Take Tip Credit.

It seems to me that you are having an emotional reaction and trying to do anything to make it seem as if an administration you value is not doing something that you don't like. Perhaps if you tried to separate your feelings from the issue, or read up on it, you could solve the impasse you seem to be stuck at.

So you are saying but literally every publication I've found on this says that tipping pools were banned under the previous law. It's almost like you're making up facts so that you can win the argument.

[The Immortal Goon]

I'm sure this is wrong. How exactly does the government allow tipping pools, but not prevent the boss from taking away someone's tips, if it isn't going to micromanage how the tipping pool is distributed? I'm failing to see how that is possible.

If you need more help with very basic internet, please let us know!

[Hong Wu]

If you need more help with very basic internet, please let us know!

Thanks I will. Please help me understand how the government controls the distribution of tipping pools without trying to manage how tipping pools are distributed.

[The Immortal Goon]

Thanks I will. Please help me understand how the government controls the distribution of tipping pools without trying to manage how tipping pools are distributed.

The coding is somehow problematic for me...My apologies in the delay.

I'm assuming you have never had a job. There are a lot of regulations that exist without having an FBI agent there monitoring everything. You report infractions to the appropriate office. Just as has been the case for the last ten years.

Here is the (still not modified) government regulation on tip pools:

Tip Pool: The requirement that an employee must retain all tips does not preclude a valid tip pooling or sharing arrangement among employees who customarily and regularly receive tips, such as waiters, waitresses, bellhops, counter personnel (who serve customers), bussers, and service bartenders. A valid tip pool may not include employees who do not customarily and regularly received tips, such as dishwashers, cooks, chefs, and janitors.

What Trump is changing is "The requirement that an employee must retain all tips"

[Hong Wu]

The coding is somehow problematic for me...My apologies in the delay.

I'm assuming you have never had a job. There are a lot of regulations that exist without having an FBI agent there monitoring everything. You report infractions to the appropriate office. Just as has been the case for the last ten years.

Here is the (still not modified) government regulation on tip pools:



What Trump is changing is "The requirement that an employee must retain all tips"

Ok, you got me. Although this means that the language in the OP about tip pooling is misleading, in that it talks about "restrictions on tip pooling" and says that tips were the property of the worker that collected them. This suggests that tip pooling was limited or impossible. The OP post that was written by you.

Since I don't want to spend my time researching this minor regulation, I have to take your word for it and that's kind of difficult to do for obvious reasons. So I have to ask myself, is Trump really trying to take people's tips away from them for no reason? What is he, the fucking Grinch? Wait, don't answer that! The bottom line for me is I just don't believe people on the internet writing that Trump wants to steal people's tips.

[mikema63]

Trump and his buddies would love to make a million more dollars a year at the expense of their employees. It's hardly surprising.

This is why we need more unionization in the service industry, the conditions are horrific for anyone trying to actually make a living and better their lives.

[Hong Wu]

I see now, Trump will use this rule to make more money off of the restaurants in his hotels?

[mikema63]

It's not like he's the only rich person in consideration here. He almost certainly didn't wake up one day with a deep desire to review these regulations. Someone he appointed to some role or another brought this to him for their own reasons. His administration is filled with people who have various friends, business interests, or future jobs that would benefit from making someone somewhere richer.

[The Immortal Goon]

This suggests that tip pooling was limited or impossible. The OP post that was written by you.

It sounds like you had difficulty understanding and that you're looking for someone to blame.

Since I don't want to spend my time researching this minor regulation, I have to take your word for it and that's kind of difficult to do for obvious reasons. So I have to ask myself, is Trump really trying to take people's tips away from them for no reason? What is he, the fucking Grinch? Wait, don't answer that! The bottom line for me is I just don't believe people on the internet writing that Trump wants to steal people's tips.

So you don't understand the issue, you're unwilling to learn anything about the issue, but you feel like you must be correct.

Sounds like a right-winger and his fee-fees to me!

[Hong Wu]

It's not like he's the only rich person in consideration here. He almost certainly didn't wake up one day with a deep desire to review these regulations. Someone he appointed to some role or another brought this to him for their own reasons. His administration is filled with people who have various friends, business interests, or future jobs that would benefit from making someone somewhere richer.

You're dodging the question, you said Trump and his buddies would like to make a million dollars a year by taking worker's tips. So do you think Trump's restaurants in his hotels will start taking their worker's tips, or is it something more subtle, like certain restaurant owners will do it and give Trump a slice of this tip money under the table? Or does someone in his administration own a restaurant and is looking forward to taking the tip money?
All I'm doing is asking you to explain your statement with a hypothetical example.

[mikema63]

Are you seriously asking me how a rule change that allows employers to take in more revenue by taking tips might be something people making money in that industry would support and lobby for?

The scenario is simple. People owning restaurants will make more money by taking in more revenue. You want me to write you a short story to explain the most basic principles of greed?

Do you need all politics explained to you in the form of a children's book?

[Hong Wu]

Are you seriously asking me how a rule change that allows employers to take in more revenue by taking tips might be something people making money in that industry would support and lobby for?

The scenario is simple. People owning restaurants will make more money by taking in more revenue. You want me to write you a short story to explain the most basic principles of greed?

Do you need all politics explained to you in the form of a children's book?

You said Trump and his buddies would like to make money off of this rule, so yes, I'm asking you to describe a hypothetical to me in which Trump or his buddies use this rule to make more money. I notice that you're not willing to do it because you realize how ridiculous it will sound if you get even a little bit more specific. Such as, you won't write "yes, Trump will take tips away from the waiters in his hotels, that's why he passed this law" because if you get even that much more specific you wouldn't be able to take yourself seriously anymore. Sad!

[mikema63]

How is increasing revenue by taking tips from your servers not translate to increased profits for the owners in your head? Do you just have some sort of disability where you can't understand basic accounting or what? A restaurant chain that routinely took the tips, or even just a portion of tips, would see huge increases in profit. The owners of the company would see huge benefits at the expense of the workers.

What about this do you apparently need spelled out to you? Should we start with a lesson on basic addition or do you need some help learning to count first?

[Hong Wu]

How is increasing revenue by taking tips from your servers not translate to increased profits for the owners in your head? Do you just have some sort of disability where you can't understand basic accounting or what? A restaurant chain that routinely took the tips, or even just a portion of tips, would see huge increases in profit. The owners of the company would see huge benefits at the expense of the workers.

What about this do you apparently need spelled out to you? Should we start with a lesson on basic addition or do you need some help learning to count first?

Ok, let's walk it back. You won't say that Trump or his buddies intend to take tips away from the waiters in their restaurants again, even though that is necessarily what you were implying earlier. Is Trump just trying to help restaurant owners as a class then but he doesn't intend to take tips away from the people in his own restaurant?

[mikema63]

It's beyond just intending to. They'd be obligated to. Of course they'd take advantage of their workers as much as possible, for the same reasons they pay them as little as they think they can get away with. They have a responsibility to their shareholders to do so. Do you imagine these regulations exist for shits and giggles and no one would ever take advantage of their employees?

That trump of all people wouldn't happily screw over the little guy for an extra buck?

[The Immortal Goon]

I'm amused by a seemingly serious discussion with a right-winger that refuses to learn about the issue that he's passionately whining about

What are you trying to get at? That this didn't happen? I have three sources in the OP alone and you admitted:

I don't want to spend my time researching this minor regulation

[Hong Wu]

So then write the words man. Write that Trump passed this law so that he can take waiter's tips away from them in his hotels. You keep suggesting that's what happened here, that he can, nay, that he must. Just be honest and write it out. I genuinely want to see if you can do it.