Respectfully snipped.
Just this sentence leaves me with many questions, and a few observations.
Is a 'grand scale' the issue?
If $2 per hour works out to a 20% (or more) wage increase, is that insignificant?
If a 20% wage increase would be an appealing benefit for someone who was making more money, would it be less valuable for some who was making less?
Aside from these questions, I wonder how many people reading this have worked in fast food. I have, and let me say (and just in my experience), all things considered, it is harder than all of the better paying jobs I have had since then.
Don't get me wrong -- some of my subsequent jobs have been riskier in some ways, and more taxing on expertise I didn't have when working my first job. I also had some good times in my fast food job, and made some good friends. But aside from these virtues, one cannot dispute that the pay and pay-scale is terrible; the work itself is totally unrewarding; the work is often smelly, dirty, and risky; the work has no value for most people; and rather than casting the employee as a diamond in the rough awaiting a better opportunity, the job casts the aura of a stigma, in which any worker who is not a child must be a loser.
McD's is only one company, but its profit last year was something in the range of 34 billion -- more than the GDP of many countries. On that alone, I'm hard pressed to see them as the victim in this debate.