If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Detroit Free Press)   Study finds you can't pull yourself up by your bootstraps on minimum wage because bootstraps are all you can afford to eat   (freep.com) divider line 545
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

11326 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Jun 2011 at 1:43 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



545 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2011-06-05 06:21:49 PM  
 
2011-06-05 06:28:56 PM  
don't worry though - if you pray HARD ENOUGH then Supply Side Jesus will help you out!
 
2011-06-05 06:31:48 PM  
This isn't exactly a new study. This is more of a reevaluation of an older study from the nineties. I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe. She tried for three months to live on exactly what her coworkers made and found, quite overwhelmingly, that she was barely making ends meet, let alone the single moms out there. And that's if you're lucky enough to be employed.

/Still believes in "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em."
 
2011-06-05 06:33:28 PM  

mrichmond3737: I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe.


Nickel and Dimed by any chance?
 
2011-06-05 06:37:29 PM  
what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.
 
2011-06-05 06:37:36 PM  
Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS as if anyone was ever meant to.

Your FAIL is strong, libtards...
 
2011-06-05 06:38:40 PM  

mrichmond3737: This isn't exactly a new study. This is more of a reevaluation of an older study from the nineties. I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe. She tried for three months to live on exactly what her coworkers made and found, quite overwhelmingly, that she was barely making ends meet, let alone the single moms out there. And that's if you're lucky enough to be employed.

/Still believes in "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em."


And then there was the guy who, after a year, had a home, car and savings....
 
2011-06-05 06:41:28 PM  

LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS as if anyone was ever meant to.

Your FAIL is strong, libtards...


1/10. use of 'libtards' is too obvious an attempt to troll the thread.

you should try using the prosperity gospel. preach a warped/twisted interpretation of the 'sermon on the mount' and you'll get TONS of bites that way.
 
2011-06-05 06:42:32 PM  

LordZorch: mrichmond3737: This isn't exactly a new study. This is more of a reevaluation of an older study from the nineties. I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe. She tried for three months to live on exactly what her coworkers made and found, quite overwhelmingly, that she was barely making ends meet, let alone the single moms out there. And that's if you're lucky enough to be employed.

/Still believes in "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em."

And then there was the guy who, after a year, had a home, car and savings....


so what made this alleged 'other guy' different from everyone else?
 
2011-06-05 06:47:06 PM  

LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS as if anyone was ever meant to.

Your FAIL is strong, libtards...


A woman working two jobs should be able to feed her family and afford new shoes.
 
2011-06-05 06:53:02 PM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


It has to do with the spread of misinformation. It appears to me that the majority of Americans get their information not from news sources, but from water-cooler talk. We have a few people in my office that, during the election of '08, tried their hardest to convince everyone else that Obama pledged to raise everyone's taxes. Even the CEO of my company makes slightly less than 220,000/yr before taxes, his AGI is probably in the 190-195 range, and he repeatedly states that his fellow executives that do not toe the party line are "thinking in a blue-collar mindset."
 
2011-06-05 06:54:25 PM  
Don't feed the troll, kids.


Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican.

A lot of people subconsciously believe if they act like they're running with the big dogs, they'll somehow turn into big dogs, too. It's sympathetic magic, like supply-side economics.

Remember Joe the Plumber? A living archetype of Fooling Yourself right-wingers. Joe would have paid higher taxes under McCain, but he planned to vote for McCain because he planned to be a millionaire. He had no actual plan or means to become a millionaire. He just figured if he hung around the club long enough and sucked up hard enough, surely they'd give him an honorary membership.

And the rich love that, they perpetuate that, they tell you that if you just keep believing, well, gosh, you too can become rich. (Only in America!)

Never mind that the vast majority of people who keep their heads down, work hard, and keep the faith . . . have their constant-dollar income go down as the years go by. Inflation keeps most of them from ever realizing it, anyway.
 
2011-06-05 06:55:27 PM  
WhyteRaven74 Nickel and Dimed by any chance?


That sounds about right.


LordZorch And then there was the guy who, after a year, had a home, car and savings....


I suppose it would depend largely on where you live and what kind of support system you have, but I've lived a great many places across this country and it's never been possible where I've lived.
 
2011-06-05 06:59:25 PM  

LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS


How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.
 
2011-06-05 07:11:18 PM  
[ric_romero.jpg]
 
2011-06-05 07:11:22 PM  

RandomAxe: Don't feed the troll, kids.


Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican.

A lot of people subconsciously believe if they act like they're running with the big dogs, they'll somehow turn into big dogs, too. It's sympathetic magic, like supply-side economics.

Remember Joe the Plumber? A living archetype of Fooling Yourself right-wingers. Joe would have paid higher taxes under McCain, but he planned to vote for McCain because he planned to be a millionaire. He had no actual plan or means to become a millionaire. He just figured if he hung around the club long enough and sucked up hard enough, surely they'd give him an honorary membership.

And the rich love that, they perpetuate that, they tell you that if you just keep believing, well, gosh, you too can become rich. (Only in America!)

Never mind that the vast majority of people who keep their heads down, work hard, and keep the faith . . . have their constant-dollar income go down as the years go by. Inflation keeps most of them from ever realizing it, anyway.


Have faith and a god will bless you with riches!!!
 
2011-06-05 07:14:58 PM  

mrichmond3737: That sounds about right.


Good read that sadly didn't get as much coverage as it should have and really still should be brought up.
 
2011-06-05 07:24:08 PM  

doglover: Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.


That's because God hates minimum-wagers!
 
2011-06-05 07:33:28 PM  
In PA, if you make federal minimum wage you may be eligible for public assistance, depending upon the number of family members you support. I'm sure that's true in many states.

So, what happens is the burden of providing for the working poor is shifted from the employer to the state. What's wrong with this picture?
 
2011-06-05 07:37:34 PM  
We should expand EITC, or (my preference) go with a wage subsidy. That would help the poor and encourage work.

/the only down side is paying for it.
//Pigovian and Georgist taxes would do it, but the whining would be monumental.
 
2011-06-05 07:38:04 PM  

FredaDeStilleto: So, what happens is the burden of providing for the working poor is shifted from the employer to the state. What's wrong with this picture?


If you're Walmart absolutely nothing.
 
2011-06-05 07:40:37 PM  
Ftfa: Cameo Thomas of Jackson works two jobs as a nursing home aide to support her 4-year-old twin sons.

So, "you" can't live off minimum wage, or "three people" can't live off minimum wage?
 
2011-06-05 07:49:30 PM  
A mother with two young children -- like Thomas -- needs $24.49 an hour to house, clothe and feed her children. That's three times the minimum wage.

That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????

I thought $50k per year was "outrageous teacher salary" range and $250k/year was "barely making it"..... damn this new math, the numbers just don't make sense any more.
 
2011-06-05 07:50:50 PM  
Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.
 
2011-06-05 07:53:21 PM  

RandomAxe: Remember Joe the Plumber? A living archetype of Fooling Yourself right-wingers. Joe would have paid higher taxes under McCain, but he planned to vote for McCain because he planned to be a millionaire. He had no actual plan or means to become a millionaire.


Unfortunately, his plan to say dumb sh*t that the right wing likes to hear worked pretty well for him.
 
2011-06-05 07:54:04 PM  

slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.


And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?
 
2011-06-05 07:54:43 PM  

Fizpez: That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????


I think the number is a general figure, and could vary place to place depending on various costs and how available stuff is.
 
2011-06-05 08:01:44 PM  
In most of the civilized world, parents and children have free health care, free nursery schools and preschools, and parents have paid maternity/paternity leave for 1 year. College tuition is also free and in some countries (Germany), students receive a stipend.

But yeah, go USA.
 
2011-06-05 08:02:58 PM  

Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?


Pray
 
2011-06-05 08:03:19 PM  

WhyteRaven74: Fizpez: That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????

I think the number is a general figure, and could vary place to place depending on various costs and how available stuff is.


Day care's a biatch. Child care for kids costs more than state university in almost every state. But you don't have 529s to pay for those five-six years..

If this chick had pre-K offered, it would be a very different story. All the folks who want more "murrican kids" would be well served to advocate funding of child care.
 
2011-06-05 08:03:56 PM  

ginandbacon: In most of the civilized world, parents and children have free health care, free nursery schools and preschools, and parents have paid maternity/paternity leave for 1 year. College tuition is also free and in some countries (Germany), students receive a stipend.

But yeah, go USA.


Sounds like soshalizm.
 
2011-06-05 08:04:23 PM  

ginandbacon: In most of the civilized world, parents and children have free health care, free nursery schools and preschools, and parents have paid maternity/paternity leave for 1 year.


Beat me by like 90 seconds, whydontcha?
 
2011-06-05 08:06:42 PM  
I like how the headline is basically "You can't bootstrap yourself up on minimum wage because you can't afford bootstraps" and there are several people in the thread saying "you shouldn't be living on minimum wage, just bootstrap yourself into a better wage"

Yes, I'm using bootstrap as a verb.
 
2011-06-05 08:06:42 PM  

Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?


I know right. There should totally be some program with $s instead of Ss in it's acronym, that helps people in that kind of situation get themselves educated and back on their feet. Oh wait....

ftfa: For Thomas, though, the future is looking brighter. She completed three years of classes and financial counseling in the Michigan $AVE$ program for low-income families and learned how to budget.
....
And she's continuing to work toward a college degree in criminal justice so she can some day work as a probation officer.
 
2011-06-05 08:08:42 PM  

Babwa Wawa: ginandbacon: In most of the civilized world, parents and children have free health care, free nursery schools and preschools, and parents have paid maternity/paternity leave for 1 year.

Beat me by like 90 seconds, whydontcha?


I was educated in Europe. *wink*
 
2011-06-05 08:11:25 PM  

Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?


Pay attention in high school, don't gangbang and keep your legs closed. Fill out the FAFSA in January and use your Pell grant and free state aid to go to your local community college. Get a work-study job and work like a dog during summer to avoid taking out loans. Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.
 
2011-06-05 08:16:16 PM  
Is this one of those time management games? Because, I totally suck at those.
 
2011-06-05 08:17:40 PM  

Arthur Jumbles: Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.


You're proposing a uniquely American solution to a uniquely American problem. In other words, you're not helping.
 
2011-06-05 08:20:07 PM  
"But we're all suffering through this difficult economic downturn!"

www.shirefolk.com
 
2011-06-05 08:24:32 PM  

Arthur Jumbles: Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?

Pay attention in high school, don't gangbang and keep your legs closed. Fill out the FAFSA in January and use your Pell grant and free state aid to go to your local community college. Get a work-study job and work like a dog during summer to avoid taking out loans. Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.


That's pretty much the way I'm getting my kid through school. Two years in a community college for basics, with all tranferable to a private university. Pell grants, however, are almost dead in the water. She has received academic scholarships that cover several thousand dollars a year. You have to apply for everything - the pennies turn into dollars.
 
2011-06-05 08:43:13 PM  
Arthur Jumbles: Pay attention in high school, don't gangbang and keep your legs closed. Fill out the FAFSA in January and use your Pell grant and free state aid to go to your local community college. Get a work-study job and work like a dog during summer to avoid taking out loans. Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.

And have good luck. Because lots of people who follow that plan absolutely as hard and as diligently as they can still fail to ever really get anywhere.

People who succeed love to believe that it's because they earned it, period, or because they're just plain better. This is the case about 25% of the time. The rest are lucky and either don't realize it or don't want to believe it. They understandably don't want to share what they have, so they want to believe that people who have less have something wrong with them and just deserve to have less.

Stay in school, work hard, save your pennies. That's the best plan there is, if you aren't lucky in the first place. But it's no guarantee of anything. It's not even close, and it hasn't been since around 1970.

Most of the hardest-working people I know are either scraping to make ends meet or working part-time for crap money while looking for something better. And looking. And looking.
 
2011-06-05 08:46:20 PM  

Weaver95: And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?


Exactly.
 
2011-06-05 08:54:31 PM  

mrichmond3737: WhyteRaven74 Nickel and Dimed by any chance?


That sounds about right.


LordZorch And then there was the guy who, after a year, had a home, car and savings....


I suppose it would depend largely on where you live and what kind of support system you have, but I've lived a great many places across this country and it's never been possible where I've lived.


It's called "showing initiative". I think he even wrote a book about it...
 
2011-06-05 08:55:52 PM  

Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?


Student loans?

(Of course, at the rate things are going, paying for college with student loans will soon end up costing more than the extra salary you get from a college degree... For all but the highest-paying careers.)

Well, uhh, less competition from me!
 
2011-06-05 08:56:44 PM  

elchip: Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?

Student loans?

(Of course, at the rate things are going, paying for college with student loans will soon end up costing more than the extra salary you get from a college degree... For all but the highest-paying careers.)

Well, uhh, less competition from me!


Ahem, less competition FOR me.
 
2011-06-05 08:57:36 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: Weaver95: And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?

Exactly.


Getting an education is easy. Paying for it is another issue altogether. Sallie Mae will give a loan to anyone. She will also pursue you till your death to get it back, but throw her a few hundred $$$'s every quarter and she'll stay off your back.
My point is that anyone can get an education. Not everyone will succeed.
 
2011-06-05 08:59:07 PM  

RandomAxe: Arthur Jumbles: Pay attention in high school, don't gangbang and keep your legs closed. Fill out the FAFSA in January and use your Pell grant and free state aid to go to your local community college. Get a work-study job and work like a dog during summer to avoid taking out loans. Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.

And have good luck. Because lots of people who follow that plan absolutely as hard and as diligently as they can still fail to ever really get anywhere.

People who succeed love to believe that it's because they earned it, period, or because they're just plain better. This is the case about 25% of the time. The rest are lucky and either don't realize it or don't want to believe it. They understandably don't want to share what they have, so they want to believe that people who have less have something wrong with them and just deserve to have less.

Stay in school, work hard, save your pennies. That's the best plan there is, if you aren't lucky in the first place. But it's no guarantee of anything. It's not even close, and it hasn't been since around 1970.

Most of the hardest-working people I know are either scraping to make ends meet or working part-time for crap money while looking for something better. And looking. And looking.


Worked for me and I'll admit I don't consider myself lucky, although people always say I am. If I am different in any way I guess I have a higher internal locus of control and tend to be more future oriented than others. I also strongly believe in the mantra of "Work smarter, not harder".
 
2011-06-05 09:08:48 PM  

Ed Finnerty: "But we're all suffering through this difficult economic downturn!"


How many families would one of those neck wattles feed?
 
2011-06-05 09:15:49 PM  
Don't get me wrong -- if it worked for you, there isn't somehow something automatically wrong with that. But if you look up real wages (income measured in constant dollars) since the early 70s, you'll see that on average each new crop of workers has made less money than the last crop.

Household income has fared slightly better . . . but of course the average number of people per household who have to get a job outside the home has gone way up. In the 70s, in most married couples I knew, only one person was gainfully employed. Now, at the moment I can't think of a married couple I know where both people aren't holding down at least a part-time job.

Wait -- my parents are still married, and my mother volunteers but doesn't have a paid job. So one couple I know.

Personally, I'm single, I make about twice the poverty line, in a high-tax low-income area. My job pays squat, but tons of people around here can't find a full-time job, and my job is basically a community service position. I can get by, but I couldn't support someone else. The sad thing is that fifteen years ago (at a different job) I made the same wage I make now. I'll never retire, but I've never been on the dole, either.
 
2011-06-05 09:18:48 PM  

serial_crusher: I know right. There should totally be some program with $s instead of Ss in it's acronym, that helps people in that kind of situation get themselves educated and back on their feet. Oh wait....


Arthur Jumbles: Pay attention in high school, don't gangbang and keep your legs closed. Fill out the FAFSA in January and use your Pell grant and free state aid to go to your local community college. Get a work-study job and work like a dog during summer to avoid taking out loans. Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.


You both forgot the most important factor: never, ever have anything go wrong. You cannot get sick, nor can your children or loved ones. Your car cannot break down. You cannot get pregnant, or get someone else pregnant. The price of basic commodities like foodstuffs, clothing, and gasoline cannot increase, or cannot outstrip the rate of inflation if you work for a semi-reputable employer. Your bills cannot increase. In short, you'd better live in Perfect Land, because something will go wrong, and you will go from living on the edge of the knife to being fish bait.
 
2011-06-05 09:43:02 PM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: I know right. There should totally be some program with $s instead of Ss in it's acronym, that helps people in that kind of situation get themselves educated and back on their feet. Oh wait....

Arthur Jumbles: Pay attention in high school, don't gangbang and keep your legs closed. Fill out the FAFSA in January and use your Pell grant and free state aid to go to your local community college. Get a work-study job and work like a dog during summer to avoid taking out loans. Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.

You both forgot the most important factor: never, ever have anything go wrong. You cannot get sick, nor can your children or loved ones. Your car cannot break down. You cannot get pregnant, or get someone else pregnant. The price of basic commodities like foodstuffs, clothing, and gasoline cannot increase, or cannot outstrip the rate of inflation if you work for a semi-reputable employer. Your bills cannot increase. In short, you'd better live in Perfect Land, because something will go wrong, and you will go from living on the edge of the knife to being fish bait.


What I'm saying is that there should be help available for people in extraordinary circumstances who want to make life better (and already is to an extent). Just raising the minimum wage for all the high school kids/lazy people who don't need it/won't use it, isn't the solution
 
2011-06-05 10:03:52 PM  
Meh. At least the guy trying to scrape by isn't a loser like the dude on unemployment is.
 
2011-06-05 10:08:53 PM  

serial_crusher: What I'm saying is that there should be help available for people in extraordinary circumstances who want to make life better (and already is to an extent).


So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.
 
2011-06-05 11:06:25 PM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: What I'm saying is that there should be help available for people in extraordinary circumstances who want to make life better (and already is to an extent).

So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.


Well, just like it's unfair to expect a business to have to pay a high school student enough to support a family of 10, it could be similarly unfair to force the business to give an employee a raise just because they're having yet another baby.

I do see the need for a minimum wage in general though. Somebody who doesn't have any extraordinary circumstances should be able to make a "living wage" off any job, provided a reasonable definition of "living wage". i.e. you're only supporting yourself, you split your rent/bills among multiple roommates who all work, that sort of thing. For everybody else, limited welfare or life on the streets if you're squandering it.
 
2011-06-05 11:14:51 PM  

serial_crusher: just like it's unfair to expect a business to have to pay a high school student enough to support a family of 10


False dichotomy. Name the group lobbying for an entry level position to pay a minor enough to support 10 people. Or the societal demand. Or the mere existence of the above scenario.
 
2011-06-05 11:20:21 PM  
Yawn, it's called an exaggeration. Every one of these threads you see somebody who's trying to support more than one person on one minimum wage job (like the lady here...2 jobs feeding 3 people).
 
2011-06-05 11:22:41 PM  

serial_crusher: Yawn, it's called an exaggeration. Every one of these threads you see somebody who's trying to support more than one person on one minimum wage job (like the lady here...2 jobs feeding 3 people).


see those goalposts? the ones waaaaaaay over there? yeah...we all saw you move them just now.
 
2011-06-05 11:24:03 PM  

serial_crusher: 2 jobs feeding 3 people


So you draw the line at one person and one half of one dependent?
 
2011-06-05 11:26:05 PM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: 2 jobs feeding 3 people

So you draw the line at one person and one half of one dependent?


No, I draw the line at 1 person. I've never heard the "living wage" lobby specify an actual limit on the number of people a minimum wage job should support, so I figured 10 was as good as any.
 
2011-06-05 11:27:40 PM  

serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: 2 jobs feeding 3 people

So you draw the line at one person and one half of one dependent?

No, I draw the line at 1 person. I've never heard the "living wage" lobby specify an actual limit on the number of people a minimum wage job should support, so I figured 10 was as good as any.


so one person shouldn't contribute to the welfare of anyone else ever under any circumstances?
 
2011-06-05 11:29:56 PM  

serial_crusher: No, I draw the line at 1 person.


At what standard of living?
 
2011-06-05 11:30:59 PM  

Weaver95: serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: 2 jobs feeding 3 people

So you draw the line at one person and one half of one dependent?

No, I draw the line at 1 person. I've never heard the "living wage" lobby specify an actual limit on the number of people a minimum wage job should support, so I figured 10 was as good as any.

so one person shouldn't contribute to the welfare of anyone else ever under any circumstances?


I can't even begin to imagine what amount of crazy caused you to interpret what I said that way, so I'll just assume you meant to say something that made sense and it came out wrong. Can you please restate the question?
 
2011-06-05 11:32:11 PM  

serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: What I'm saying is that there should be help available for people in extraordinary circumstances who want to make life better (and already is to an extent).

So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.

Well, just like it's unfair to expect a business to have to pay a high school student enough to support a family of 10, it could be similarly unfair to force the business to give an employee a raise just because they're having yet another baby.

I do see the need for a minimum wage in general though. Somebody who doesn't have any extraordinary circumstances should be able to make a "living wage" off any job, provided a reasonable definition of "living wage". i.e. you're only supporting yourself, you split your rent/bills among multiple roommates who all work, that sort of thing. For everybody else, limited welfare or life on the streets if you're squandering it.


Of course you don't see a need for a minimum wage, you're a corporate cock-sucking conservative. You cut benefits, make people work longer and for less. Then you cut welfare and social spending so people work even harder while you blame them for your greed. Then you complain about "wealth redistribution" and "socialism" while the richest 1% acquire even more wealth, and hoard it, while worshiping at the altar of the "free" market.

jungcurrents.com
 
2011-06-05 11:32:50 PM  

Occam's Chainsaw: So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.


Privatize profits, socialize costs - it's the "conservative" way!
 
2011-06-05 11:33:44 PM  

Weaver95: so one person shouldn't contribute to the welfare of anyone else ever under any circumstances?


Your kids should go get their own damn jobs down at the mills!!!!111!!
 
2011-06-05 11:33:50 PM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: No, I draw the line at 1 person.

At what standard of living?


Yes, that's the other problem they have. Even when they want an example of a single person who "can't make ends meet", he's living by himself in a nice apartment, has cable tv, drives an SUV to work instead of taking the bus or riding a bike.

Minimum wage == minimum lifestyle.
 
2011-06-05 11:36:58 PM  

serial_crusher: Weaver95: serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: 2 jobs feeding 3 people

So you draw the line at one person and one half of one dependent?

No, I draw the line at 1 person. I've never heard the "living wage" lobby specify an actual limit on the number of people a minimum wage job should support, so I figured 10 was as good as any.

so one person shouldn't contribute to the welfare of anyone else ever under any circumstances?

I can't even begin to imagine what amount of crazy caused you to interpret what I said that way, so I'll just assume you meant to say something that made sense and it came out wrong. Can you please restate the question?


ok, I can try this again. maybe something more down at your level of intelligence.

people BAD! fire GOOD! hit people with ROCK! rock GOOD!

[thump chest] [roar loudly] [primal scream]

it loses something in translation, but I hope I was able to dumb that down enough for you.
 
2011-06-05 11:37:00 PM  
serial_crusher: I did not ask you for platitudes, sir.

At what standard of living?
 
2011-06-05 11:42:34 PM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: I did not ask you for platitudes, sir.

At what standard of living?


I already said in my earlier post, multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills. On top of that, I'd say enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance. Not necessarily anything by way of saving money for college, etc. Bootstrappiness step 1 is to earn yourself a promotion above minimum wage. I don't know, what other specifics are you concerned with?
 
2011-06-05 11:46:15 PM  

serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: I did not ask you for platitudes, sir.

At what standard of living?

I already said in my earlier post, multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills. On top of that, I'd say enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance. Not necessarily anything by way of saving money for college, etc. Bootstrappiness step 1 is to earn yourself a promotion above minimum wage. I don't know, what other specifics are you concerned with?


Implying you've given any.
 
2011-06-05 11:47:48 PM  

serial_crusher: I do see the need for a minimum wage in general though. Somebody who doesn't have any extraordinary circumstances should be able to make a "living wage" off any job, provided a reasonable definition of "living wage".


Fark It: Of course you don't see a need for a minimum wage


Well, I guess all those other things you said about me are true too.
 
2011-06-05 11:49:00 PM  

Fark It: serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: I did not ask you for platitudes, sir.

At what standard of living?

I already said in my earlier post, multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills. On top of that, I'd say enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance. Not necessarily anything by way of saving money for college, etc. Bootstrappiness step 1 is to earn yourself a promotion above minimum wage. I don't know, what other specifics are you concerned with?

Implying you've given any.


Let's try leading by example then. How many people do you think minimum wage should support, and at what standard of living?
 
2011-06-05 11:50:58 PM  

serial_crusher: multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills.


And when this luxury is unavailable and you must solo it? Your solution is to starve?

serial_crusher: enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance.


Does this include health care? What measure of sustenance? Is borderline starvation enough, or can you afford meat? And if you get proper nutrition and health care, how would forgoing this not pay for the additional half-dependent discussed above?

serial_crusher: Not necessarily anything by way of saving money for college, etc.


Zero ability to save money. So every unscheduled expenditure would lead to insolvency? That's the scenario I describe above, where you do just fine at or near minimum wage, until the unexpected cuts your throat. Congratulations, you want the status quo. And it's working just fine, ain't it?
 
2011-06-05 11:51:08 PM  

serial_crusher: Fark It: serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: I did not ask you for platitudes, sir.

At what standard of living?

I already said in my earlier post, multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills. On top of that, I'd say enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance. Not necessarily anything by way of saving money for college, etc. Bootstrappiness step 1 is to earn yourself a promotion above minimum wage. I don't know, what other specifics are you concerned with?

Implying you've given any.

Let's try leading by example then. How many people do you think minimum wage should support, and at what standard of living?


Minimum wage should support at least two people, their health care, transportation to and from work, insurance, food, clothing, shelter, and some post-secondary education at the junior college level.
 
2011-06-05 11:57:10 PM  

Fark It: serial_crusher: Fark It: serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: I did not ask you for platitudes, sir.

At what standard of living?

I already said in my earlier post, multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills. On top of that, I'd say enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance. Not necessarily anything by way of saving money for college, etc. Bootstrappiness step 1 is to earn yourself a promotion above minimum wage. I don't know, what other specifics are you concerned with?

Implying you've given any.

Let's try leading by example then. How many people do you think minimum wage should support, and at what standard of living?

Minimum wage should support at least two people, their health care, transportation to and from work, insurance, food, clothing, shelter, and some post-secondary education at the junior college level.


ok,that's less specific than what i said. no limitations on kinds of food, method of transportation.
When you say "at least" two people, do you mean people with different number of dependents should make different amounts of money? I like that better than the "give everybody moar" we usually hear.
 
2011-06-06 12:00:10 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance.

Does this include health care? What measure of sustenance? Is borderline starvation enough, or can you afford meat? And if you get proper nutrition and health care, how would forgoing this not pay for the additional half-dependent discussed above?


Going to blow your mind here, but I think we should have free public healthcare. You don't have to buy crime or fire insurance to get help from the police or fire departments when you need it.
 
2011-06-06 12:02:34 AM  

serial_crusher: I think we should have free public healthcare.


I'm in total agreement. However, that's not the environment that exists today. So what regulations should be placed upon businesses in the absence of universal health care? What does a business owe the least of its workers?
 
2011-06-06 12:04:37 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills.

And when this luxury is unavailable and you must solo it? Your solution is to starve?


serial_crusher: Somebody who doesn't have any extraordinary circumstances should be able to make a "living wage" off any job, provided a reasonable definition of "living wage". i.e. you're only supporting yourself, you split your rent/bills among multiple roommates who all work, that sort of thing. For everybody else, limited welfare or life on the streets if you're squandering it.

www.lrgiles.com
 
2011-06-06 12:16:24 AM  
No one has extraordinary circumstances UNTIL they have extraordinary circumstances.

That's the whole point of extraordinary circumstances.

If you're just making it, squeaking by with absolutely no cushion, you're not really making it.
 
2011-06-06 12:18:05 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: I think we should have free public healthcare.

I'm in total agreement. However, that's not the environment that exists today. So what regulations should be placed upon businesses in the absence of universal health care? What does a business owe the least of its workers?


Good point, but it's not the business's fault that the government is doing things wrong.
 
2011-06-06 12:18:35 AM  

serial_crusher: Somebody who doesn't have any extraordinary circumstances


Extra-ordinary implies that these circumstances are atypical. They are not. So what of those who endure them? And again, should you be punished for your inability to secure others who invest in your continued well-being (roommates who cover part of rent and bills)?

serial_crusher: For everybody else, limited welfare


Again, what standard of living?
 
2011-06-06 12:20:11 AM  

serial_crusher: it's not the business's fault that the government is doing things wrong.


So a business has zero moral responsibility to a community beyond that imposed by the government?
 
2011-06-06 12:29:22 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: it's not the business's fault that the government is doing things wrong.

So a business has zero moral responsibility to a community beyond that imposed by the government?


None that's relevant to a debate about how much minimum wage the government should impose.
 
2011-06-06 12:35:27 AM  

serial_crusher: None that's relevant to a debate about how much minimum wage the government should impose.


Then the only compulsion a business should be subject to is government regulation, and it is the duty of the government to impose such regulations as are moral.

Congratulations, you're a socialist.
 
2011-06-06 01:51:20 AM  
Cameo Thomas of Jackson works two jobs as a nursing home aide to support her 4-year-old twin sons.

Poor people have to stop breeding, don;t breed!
 
2011-06-06 01:52:05 AM  
Cameo Thomas of Jackson works two jobs as a nursing home aide to support her 4-year-old twin sons.

Well, she should've thought about that before her zygote split into two.



Problem?
 
2011-06-06 01:53:47 AM  

Fizpez: A mother with two young children -- like Thomas -- needs $24.49 an hour to house, clothe and feed her children. That's three times the minimum wage.

That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????

I thought $50k per year was "outrageous teacher salary" range and $250k/year was "barely making it"..... damn this new math, the numbers just don't make sense any more.


it's a single mother. $50k is about the median household income and it's obviously doable. obviously those who make 12 bucks an hour and are single shouldn't be having children. kids are expensive. but that won't stop anyone.
 
2011-06-06 01:53:54 AM  

RandomAxe: And the rich love that, they perpetuate that, they tell you that if you just keep believing, well, gosh, you too can become rich. (Only in America!)


They've also conditioned people to believe that capitalism and personal freedom are irrevocably intertwined.
 
2011-06-06 01:55:06 AM  

RandomAxe: A lot of people subconsciously believe if they act like they're running with the big dogs, they'll somehow turn into big dogs, too. It's sympathetic magic, like supply-side economics.


Worked for Palin.
 
2011-06-06 01:57:33 AM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


tellitlikeitis.files.wordpress.com

"In American politics, the Southern strategy (new window) refers to the late-20th century Republican Party strategy of winning elections in Southern states by exploiting anti-African American racism among Southern white voters..."
 
2011-06-06 01:58:05 AM  

itazurakko: Weaver95: so one person shouldn't contribute to the welfare of anyone else ever under any circumstances?

Your kids should go get their own damn jobs down at the mills!!!!111!!


HEYAA! (new window)
 
2011-06-06 01:59:26 AM  
But on a serious note,

"Sometimes I get off work and think, 'Man, I'm going to need a new pair of shoes,' " the 23-year-old said.

You can't have children at 19 (or even 18?) and expect to get by in today's society. Sure, teen pregnancy worked for 100s of years and even up until the 80's..possibly the 90's (as my half-sister will attest). But now? No. Forget it. I'm 27 and I can't afford a kid mentally and financially. Granted I'm in medical school (and I won't have kids, ever). People have bred themselves retarded and it won't stop. It's hard to have sympathy.
 
2011-06-06 01:59:34 AM  
GOPers want slave labor. This is all they ever have wanted
 
2011-06-06 02:01:25 AM  

LordZorch: And then there was the guy who, after a year, had a home, car and savings....


First of all, that guy walked around with a credit card in his pocket in case of a serious emergency, which is essentially admitting you can't accomplish what he did without a safety net. He was also white, educated, and of sound mental and physical health. Most people who are on the brink of homelessness do not have anywhere near the kinds of resources this person had access to.

In achievement of his goal, Shepard resolved not to use his college education, credit history, or any of his previous contacts to help himself. Additionally, he would not beg for money or use services that were not available to others. (new window)

How can you not use your education? I'm sure that the success of Shepard had nothing to do with being polite, well-spoken, or any of the multitude of behavioral norms that come with an education. He also went into his little sojourn into poverty tourism with a plan. Poor people often don't have plans. They're too farking exhausted, sick, and stressed to have them.

You mean to tell me a healthy, sane, educated, white guy with a plan was able to go on a poverty tour where he didn't experience real stress because he had a credit card in his pocket, was able to find a job, network, and get a place to live? Holy mother farking shiat.
 
2011-06-06 02:01:56 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: in today's society


Which mind you, is the product of republican control over the past 8 years

(replying to myself)
 
2011-06-06 02:03:29 AM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


It's called branding. The R's have done a great job at making people believe they are the real Americans. In reality their entire platform is nothing more than a play on people's fears and bigotries. There is no real substance.

• Dark skinned crazy people from around the world are trying to kill your children. Give is more money for guns. And if you criticize us, then you hate the troops and baby Jesus.
• Dark skinned people around the corner want your entire paycheck. Help us stop them.
• Democrats want to take your guns away. Then you'll be helpless against darkie.
• Gay people want to have sex with your children. Help us stop them.
• Democrats want to tax rich people and corporations to the point they will have no money and have to fire you. Then you'll not be able to buy the GI Joe with the Kung Fu grip for your kid at Christmas.

Did I miss any?
 
2011-06-06 02:05:04 AM  

RandomAxe: A lot of people subconsciously believe if they act like they're running with the big dogs, they'll somehow turn into big dogs, too. It's sympathetic magic, like supply-side economics.


This concept is the only way I can sanely fathom how illogically middle America (and Florida) has farked up this country
 
2011-06-06 02:07:43 AM  

LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS as if anyone was ever meant to.

Your FAIL is strong, libtards...


I understand where you are coming from, but when we put our labor in direct competition with nations that use slave labor, like China's Lao Gai system, we artificially deflate wages of more skilled positions down to minimum wage or near minimum-wage standards. The reality is that this "free trade" crap is anything but free... We can't hope to fix problems like poverty without dealing with things like the number one cause of personal bankruptcy (health costs), wage deflation drivers like slave-labor (tariff issue), and a multitude of other factors... but I suppose it's easier to just call someone a name and talk about how strong their fail is... I mean, it's not productive, but it sure is easier.
 
2011-06-06 02:12:41 AM  

CayceP: You mean to tell me a healthy, sane, educated, white guy with a plan was able to go on a poverty tour where he didn't experience real stress because he had a credit card in his pocket, was able to find a job, network, and get a place to live? Holy mother farking shiat.


And now you know why I love you, Cayce. ^_^
 
2011-06-06 02:13:26 AM  

serial_crusher: Fark It: serial_crusher: Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: I did not ask you for platitudes, sir.

At what standard of living?

I already said in my earlier post, multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills. On top of that, I'd say enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance. Not necessarily anything by way of saving money for college, etc. Bootstrappiness step 1 is to earn yourself a promotion above minimum wage. I don't know, what other specifics are you concerned with?

Implying you've given any.

Let's try leading by example then. How many people do you think minimum wage should support, and at what standard of living?


Minimum wage should start at $20/hr and everyone else goes up from there.

Everyone making over $5 million a year pays the rest in taxes.

Execute the bastards that complain about it.
 
2011-06-06 02:13:48 AM  

Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?


This is why we need to fund trade and vocational schools, but more than that, is why we need to stop pretending that hard work is somehow lesser than desk jockeying. Kids with mechanical aptitude need to be taught that there's nothing bad about loving playing in the dirt and building stuff. We need to change the conversation to where little Timmy knows that being a doctor and a lawyer aren't necessarily the goal, and that he can be a plumber and mom and dad will be just as proud. Hard work is what made this nation great, and the fact that now even the people who do the hard jobs in our country think of them as less important is just a big shame. The walls of Jericho didn't fall because God was pissed, they fell because all the people who should have been told that masonry is a good and honorable profession were off begging in the streets none the wiser that they could be doing so much better.
 
2011-06-06 02:16:01 AM  

CayceP: LordZorch: And then there was the guy who, after a year, had a home, car and savings....

First of all, that guy walked around with a credit card in his pocket in case of a serious emergency, which is essentially admitting you can't accomplish what he did without a safety net. He was also white, educated, and of sound mental and physical health. Most people who are on the brink of homelessness do not have anywhere near the kinds of resources this person had access to.

In achievement of his goal, Shepard resolved not to use his college education, credit history, or any of his previous contacts to help himself. Additionally, he would not beg for money or use services that were not available to others. (new window)

How can you not use your education? I'm sure that the success of Shepard had nothing to do with being polite, well-spoken, or any of the multitude of behavioral norms that come with an education. He also went into his little sojourn into poverty tourism with a plan. Poor people often don't have plans. They're too farking exhausted, sick, and stressed to have them.

You mean to tell me a healthy, sane, educated, white guy with a plan was able to go on a poverty tour where he didn't experience real stress because he had a credit card in his pocket, was able to find a job, network, and get a place to live? Holy mother farking shiat.


I just looked up the link. Thanks. Here is what he ended up with:
A February 11, 2008 article about the book in The Christian Science Monitor states, "During his first 70 days in Charleston, Shepard lived in a shelter and received food stamps. He also made new friends, finding work as a day laborer, which led to a steady job with a moving company. Ten months into the experiment, he decided to quit after learning of an illness in his family. But by then he had moved into an apartment, bought a pickup truck, and had saved close to $5,000."

So, he used government aid to get a start. Worked as a day worker (most likely illegally for tax free cash). Ended up with a place to live, basic (probably unreliable) transportation, and enough spare cash to visit the ER for a minor infection. Is it just me or did that pretty much prove the point about how hard it is? That's with the benefits that these people are so against! Then he quit after 10 months because he couldn't deal with the illness in his family with such a small amount of cash. What a joke!
 
2011-06-06 02:16:02 AM  

austin_millbarge: It's called branding. The R's have done a great job at making people believe they are the real Americans. In reality their entire platform is nothing more than a play on people's fears and bigotries. There is no real substance.

• Dark skinned crazy people from around the world are trying to kill your children. Give is more money for guns. And if you criticize us, then you hate the troops and baby Jesus.
• Dark skinned people around the corner want your entire paycheck. Help us stop them.
• Democrats want to take your guns away. Then you'll be helpless against darkie.
• Gay people want to have sex with your children. Help us stop them.
• Democrats want to tax rich people and corporations to the point they will have no money and have to fire you. Then you'll not be able to buy the GI Joe with the Kung Fu grip for your kid at Christmas.
Abortion is the root of all your problems
Did I miss any?


there
 
2011-06-06 02:17:19 AM  

CayceP: You mean to tell me a healthy, sane, educated, white guy with a plan was able to go on a poverty tour where he didn't experience real stress because he had a credit card in his pocket, was able to find a job, network, and get a place to live? Holy mother farking shiat.


Don't forget he also quit because of a family emergency. I'm sure most people on minimum wage would love to be able to call a time out on being poor when something unexpected occurs.
 
2011-06-06 02:18:39 AM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


Because they believe... Everyone hates tyranny, but if you tell them one day they might have a chance to be the tyrant, they'll do nothing to reign in the insanity.
 
2011-06-06 02:20:16 AM  
Occam's Chainsaw:

So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.

Employers as a part of the economic system are supposed to pay the going wage of the market. If society decides that people should be paid according to their needs instead of according to the value of their work then society as a whole has to provide it. Of course, if you don't have any education you shouldn't get children if you don't have a supportive mate. It's called personal responsibility, but many people prefer to place the burden of raising children on society as a whole. Privatize the joy of making children, socialize the burden of living with the consequences.
 
2011-06-06 02:20:40 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: austin_millbarge: It's called branding. The R's have done a great job at making people believe they are the real Americans. In reality their entire platform is nothing more than a play on people's fears and bigotries. There is no real substance.

• Dark skinned crazy people from around the world are trying to kill your children. Give is more money for guns. And if you criticize us, then you hate the troops and baby Jesus.
• Dark skinned people around the corner want your entire paycheck. Help us stop them.
• Democrats want to take your guns away. Then you'll be helpless against darkie.
• Gay people want to have sex with your children. Help us stop them.
• Democrats want to tax rich people and corporations to the point they will have no money and have to fire you. Then you'll not be able to buy the GI Joe with the Kung Fu grip for your kid at Christmas.
• Abortion is the root of all your problems
• Aborting poor kids is bad
• Making them suffer with no help is better
Did I miss any?

there


FTFY
 
2011-06-06 02:21:59 AM  

odinsposse: CayceP: You mean to tell me a healthy, sane, educated, white guy with a plan was able to go on a poverty tour where he didn't experience real stress because he had a credit card in his pocket, was able to find a job, network, and get a place to live? Holy mother farking shiat.

Don't forget he also quit because of a family emergency. I'm sure most people on minimum wage would love to be able to call a time out on being poor when something unexpected occurs.


If I quit my job, I lose my health insurance immediately, then I would quickly need to come to terms with the fact that the drugs that keep me alive cost twice what I make in a month... so I'd die.

I mean, I appreciate the guy's social experiment, but to say that he experienced what it is to be poor in America is just delusional.
 
2011-06-06 02:23:50 AM  

Monophtalmos: Occam's Chainsaw:

So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.

Employers as a part of the economic system are supposed to pay the going wage of the market. If society decides that people should be paid according to their needs instead of according to the value of their work then society as a whole has to provide it. Of course, if you don't have any education you shouldn't get children if you don't have a supportive mate. It's called personal responsibility, but many people prefer to place the burden of raising children on society as a whole. Privatize the joy of making children, socialize the burden of living with the consequences.


If society wants to set the pay rate by the value of their labor then shouldn't they provide the means for you to improve the value of your labor? Including the necessities in life that allow you to do so?
 
2011-06-06 02:25:47 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: RandomAxe: A lot of people subconsciously believe if they act like they're running with the big dogs, they'll somehow turn into big dogs, too. It's sympathetic magic, like supply-side economics.

This concept is the only way I can sanely fathom how illogically middle America (and Florida) has farked up this country



I don't know if it is because you are in your own little fark bubble, or if you are too young to remember (actually I was kind of young back then too) but there were a lot of conservative ideas that resonated with middle class back during the late 90's because they were simply better than the alternative.
the country came to look upon some forms of abortion unfavorably, gun control became a loser, less taxes, generally *less regulation*, an end to cradle to grave welfare for the the poor.
the democrats lost the battle of ideas on a lot of stuff for quite a while. that's why nationally democrats went to the right on a lot of things. welfare was reformed. no one dares f*ck with guns anymore. no one will dare even bring up taxes for 98% of population (although this one sucks now). more people view abortion unfavorably than ever. everyone is a free trader.
you still couldn't get people to think going back on these ideas would be good for them. that's why democrats gave them up largely.
 
2011-06-06 02:26:49 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Monophtalmos: Occam's Chainsaw:

So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.

Employers as a part of the economic system are supposed to pay the going wage of the market. If society decides that people should be paid according to their needs instead of according to the value of their work then society as a whole has to provide it. Of course, if you don't have any education you shouldn't get children if you don't have a supportive mate. It's called personal responsibility, but many people prefer to place the burden of raising children on society as a whole. Privatize the joy of making children, socialize the burden of living with the consequences.

If society wants to set the pay rate by the value of their labor then shouldn't they provide the means for you to improve the value of your labor? Including the necessities in life that allow you to do so?


Maybe the problem is that we're artificially subsidizing labor so employers can pay lower wages? I mean by providing for emergency healthcare, food stamps for the working poor, and all that, we effectively guarantee the availability of a healthy and productive workforce... big businesses can count on taxpayers to foot the bill, so why should prices in the stores reflect the real costs of the inputs?

I mean, the whole of this argument boils down to market distortion and a lack of information symmetry... is a good topic, but not very good for sound bites.
 
2011-06-06 02:28:33 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: And now you know why I love you, Cayce. ^_^


How the heck have you been, anyway? You one of the daywalkers now?
 
2011-06-06 02:28:37 AM  
the dems have some winner ideas with gays and single payer now that the country will eventually embrace, hopefully sooner rather than later.
 
2011-06-06 02:30:21 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: You both forgot the most important factor: never, ever have anything go wrong. You cannot get sick, nor can your children or loved ones. Your car cannot break down. You cannot get pregnant, or get someone else pregnant. The price of basic commodities like foodstuffs, clothing, and gasoline cannot increase, or cannot outstrip the rate of inflation if you work for a semi-reputable employer. Your bills cannot increase. In short, you'd better live in Perfect Land, because something will go wrong, and you will go from living on the edge of the knife to being fish bait.


No kidding there Saw, I learned that one the hard way. Went from making maybe $14/hour or so in the late '90's and pretty much doing ok to picking up a lovely nerve pain condition and struggling like mad on disability in the mid-2k's on disability. Just a little note for the "Just do X and you'll be fine unless you're a lazy piece of shiat." Careful what you say kids, sometimes the gods have a REALLY nasty sense of humor. You may well be forced to practice what you preach. You will NOT like it. Trust me here.
 
2011-06-06 02:30:23 AM  

firefly212: Fail in Human Form: Monophtalmos: Occam's Chainsaw:

So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.

Employers as a part of the economic system are supposed to pay the going wage of the market. If society decides that people should be paid according to their needs instead of according to the value of their work then society as a whole has to provide it. Of course, if you don't have any education you shouldn't get children if you don't have a supportive mate. It's called personal responsibility, but many people prefer to place the burden of raising children on society as a whole. Privatize the joy of making children, socialize the burden of living with the consequences.

If society wants to set the pay rate by the value of their labor then shouldn't they provide the means for you to improve the value of your labor? Including the necessities in life that allow you to do so?

Maybe the problem is that we're artificially subsidizing labor so employers can pay lower wages? I mean by providing for emergency healthcare, food stamps for the working poor, and all that, we effectively guarantee the availability of a healthy and productive workforce... big businesses can count on taxpayers to foot the bill, so why should prices in the stores reflect the real costs of the inputs?

I mean, the whole of this argument boils down to market distortion and a lack of information symmetry... is a good topic, but not very good for sound bites.


Businesses have incentive to keep all wages as low as possible and could be sued by their shareholders for taking into account the living conditions of their workers when deciding pay rates. Welcome to America where taking care of it's citizens is always somebody else's problem.
 
2011-06-06 02:31:04 AM  

Fark It: Of course you don't see a need for a minimum wage, you're a corporate cock-sucking conservative.


While I agree that everyone -- or at least the vast majority of people who can show up for work on a regular basis and have some marketable skill -- should be able to provide for their family and live/eat/etc. without issue, I'm not sure that at general system of "minimum wage" is a good way to guarantee that.

For one thing, there are some jobs that just aren't worth that much. I don't think we should deny people looking for non-sustaniance labor that opportunity to do such jobs. If some 12-year-old is willing to cut my grass for $4/hour, why should the federal government care? He's not supporting children of his own, and he's certainly not taking useful employment from adults.

For another, "living wage" isn't the same for someone with no children, and a free, live-in childcare provider as it is for someone with 4 children and no child care. I think both those people should be able to live an independent, non-poverty-ridden life, but a minimum-wage-based economic system is not an efficient way to make that happen.
 
2011-06-06 02:31:39 AM  
Everyone in this thread who posted that a college education is the end-all solution for your money problems clearly hasn't read a newspaper in the past five years.
 
2011-06-06 02:32:10 AM  

Arthur Jumbles: Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?

Pay attention in high school, don't gangbang and keep your legs closed. Fill out the FAFSA in January and use your Pell grant and free state aid to go to your local community college. Get a work-study job and work like a dog during summer to avoid taking out loans. Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.


And what happens when your sibling gets hit by a bus, or your mom gets ovarian cancer, or you dad has a heart attack and can't work, or your house gets leveled by a fire, or your school's funding dries up and they kill your program? I know people who were forced to leave school at least temporarily for each and every one of those situations, and it's hard to get back. Life throws a lot of shiat at you, it's not fair but sometimes "just work hard, keep your head down, and keep going" isn't enough to get out of a hole.
 
2011-06-06 02:33:17 AM  

CayceP: How the heck have you been, anyway? You one of the daywalkers now?


Yes ma'am. I'm working for a non-profit and loving it. My hours are very not-LOO, so that's why I've been scarce.
 
2011-06-06 02:33:28 AM  

Fail in Human Form: firefly212: Fail in Human Form: Monophtalmos: Occam's Chainsaw:

So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.

Employers as a part of the economic system are supposed to pay the going wage of the market. If society decides that people should be paid according to their needs instead of according to the value of their work then society as a whole has to provide it. Of course, if you don't have any education you shouldn't get children if you don't have a supportive mate. It's called personal responsibility, but many people prefer to place the burden of raising children on society as a whole. Privatize the joy of making children, socialize the burden of living with the consequences.

If society wants to set the pay rate by the value of their labor then shouldn't they provide the means for you to improve the value of your labor? Including the necessities in life that allow you to do so?

Maybe the problem is that we're artificially subsidizing labor so employers can pay lower wages? I mean by providing for emergency healthcare, food stamps for the working poor, and all that, we effectively guarantee the availability of a healthy and productive workforce... big businesses can count on taxpayers to foot the bill, so why should prices in the stores reflect the real costs of the inputs?

I mean, the whole of this argument boils down to market distortion and a lack of information symmetry... is a good topic, but not very good for sound bites.

Businesses have incentive to keep all wages as low as possible and could be sued by their shareholders for taking into account the living conditions of their workers when deciding pay rates. Welcome to America where taking care of it's citizens is always somebody else's problem.


not how the law works.
 
2011-06-06 02:34:20 AM  

firefly212: Fail in Human Form: Monophtalmos: Occam's Chainsaw:

So you would absolve employers from the necessity to pay a living wage in order to grow their enterprise, placing the burden upon society as a whole.

Employers as a part of the economic system are supposed to pay the going wage of the market. If society decides that people should be paid according to their needs instead of according to the value of their work then society as a whole has to provide it. Of course, if you don't have any education you shouldn't get children if you don't have a supportive mate. It's called personal responsibility, but many people prefer to place the burden of raising children on society as a whole. Privatize the joy of making children, socialize the burden of living with the consequences.

If society wants to set the pay rate by the value of their labor then shouldn't they provide the means for you to improve the value of your labor? Including the necessities in life that allow you to do so?

Maybe the problem is that we're artificially subsidizing labor so employers can pay lower wages? I mean by providing for emergency healthcare, food stamps for the working poor, and all that, we effectively guarantee the availability of a healthy and productive workforce... big businesses can count on taxpayers to foot the bill, so why should prices in the stores reflect the real costs of the inputs?

I mean, the whole of this argument boils down to market distortion and a lack of information symmetry... is a good topic, but not very good for sound bites.


You're right, and of course we're also subsidizing big business on a regular basis, which feeds the beast at the expense of the common man. We're also replacing community responsibility with blind entitlement and dependence upon a poorly managed distant central government. I hate to say it, but I think a depression in which the govt. can't afford to fulfill its promises and people can't just drive all over the place buying crap and living segregated lives might actually be good for American society.
 
2011-06-06 02:34:30 AM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


Yeah, not that the democrats have all the answers (or many even), it absolutely boggles my mind that somehow poor whites are such a major voting block for the republicans.

God help us if they ever decide to remind everyone that Lincoln was a republican to go after the black vote. That would work, but (for now at least) they dont want it.


But yeah, the minimum wage needs to be raised. Its supposed to be a LIVING wage. I'm 24 years old, educated, middle class background... and i've never made more than $9 an hour. And i was a goddamn assistant store manager for a very large national retail chain...
 
2011-06-06 02:35:02 AM  
Wal Mart. Offering you 1970's prices so you can survive on our 1970's wages.®

"Hey, I got an idea.. let's find out what people are buying, make knockoffs of it in China for pennies on the dollar and flood the market, here with a bunch of big box stores. We buy in Yuan, we get paid in Dollars. I mean, who the f*ck needs the FOREX?"

"You think people will put up with that?"

"Sure, just sell them cheap, sh*tty food, too."
 
2011-06-06 02:37:26 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Monophtalmos:

If society wants to set the pay rate by the value of their labor then shouldn't they provide the means for you to improve the value of your labor? Including the necessities in life that allow you to do so?


Means to improve your work value like a public schooling system? That is - once again - not the responsibility of the economic subsystem. I think you should be able to survive on welfare. On the other hand am employer is not supposed to pay you wages according to the number of your children but according to the number of people with a similar skill and the demand of these skills. As a parent to be it pays to first switch on your brain: "Do I have a supportive mate? Do I have a good qualification to earn money and find a new job?" before deciding to have children. They will be a decades long investment and shouldn't be a burden on "society as a whole", i.e. other people.
 
2011-06-06 02:37:48 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: Yes ma'am. I'm working for a non-profit and loving it. My hours are very not-LOO, so that's why I've been scarce.


Wonderful! Glad you're doing okay.

Related to the thread, we're losing two of our best hotel people to a chemical company. They're going to be office monkeys for about $17/hr. Right now they're being paid $10/hr and treated like shiat. Management was all "OMG Y R U leaving??" today. It's pretty hilarious.

I think almost everyone here has a second job. I also love the suggestions in this thread about how to get out of shiatty situations: "Hey you! Don't make those terrible decisions you made years ago! That's the ticket!"
 
2011-06-06 02:38:02 AM  
profplump

For one thing, there are some jobs that just aren't worth that much. I don't think we should deny people looking for non-sustaniance labor that opportunity to do such jobs. If some 12-year-old is willing to cut my grass for $4/hour, why should the federal government care? He's not supporting children of his own, and he's certainly not taking useful employment from adults.

Well... when I was younger I remember going around and shoveling driveways for neighbors for 10 dollars a pop, 20 if it was a large driveway. And minimum wage existed then... so yeah. You're dumb. The Feds didn't and don't care about the money a 12 year old makes.
 
2011-06-06 02:38:31 AM  

profplump: If some 12-year-old is willing to cut my grass for $4/hour, why should the federal government care? He's not supporting children of his own, and he's certainly not taking useful employment from adults.


I'm going to assume you're not advocating for child labor so I can maintain my sanity. The reason the government cares is that we want our children learning in their off time, not taking labor jobs, so they don't end up pushing that same mower when he's 30.

/Whether or not that learning occurs is incumbent on the parents
 
2011-06-06 02:39:17 AM  

profplump: If some 12-year-old is willing to cut my grass for $4/hour, why should the federal government care?


What prevents the indigent 30-year-old from pursuing that same job?

Therein lays the problem: once you set the lowest common denominator, it applies to all workers. So the 15-year-old kid making minimum wage in an internship programming computers for end-users makes the same wage as the 35-year-old mother of two running an industrial punch to keep her two children fed.
 
2011-06-06 02:39:49 AM  

I Like Bread: Everyone in this thread who posted that a college education is the end-all solution for your money problems clearly hasn't read a newspaper in the past five years.


Ssshhh. It's about all the hope that working parents have for their offspring. If they find out they've been pulling two shifts just so their kindern can emerge into the glorious future - tens of thousands of dollars in debt and into a job market that has a "MOVED TO NEW LOCATION" sign on it, - they're gonna start burning sh*t down.

Can't have that.

Nope.

The wealthy aren't through stealing, yet. After that, sure, burn sh*t down.
 
2011-06-06 02:42:27 AM  

odinsposse: Don't forget he also quit because of a family emergency. I'm sure most people on minimum wage would love to be able to call a time out on being poor when something unexpected occurs.


I know! Right?

firefly212: I mean, I appreciate the guy's social experiment, but to say that he experienced what it is to be poor in America is just delusional.


Yeah, but he's completely the poster child for the bootstrap crowd. To be fair, I think Nickeled and Dimed is almost as bad with respect to its poverty tourism, but that author at least attempted to work within her given systems and not bail when things became difficult.
 
2011-06-06 02:47:35 AM  
This thread is depressing.

/minimum wage earner
//with a college degree
///to wipe my ass with
 
2011-06-06 02:48:13 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: profplump: If some 12-year-old is willing to cut my grass for $4/hour, why should the federal government care?

What prevents the indigent 30-year-old from pursuing that same job?

Therein lays the problem: once you set the lowest common denominator, it applies to all workers. So the 15-year-old kid making minimum wage in an internship programming computers for end-users makes the same wage as the 35-year-old mother of two running an industrial punch to keep her two children fed.


Cat came by the other day and brought all his goodies and turned my way too tall lawn onto a fu*king golf course. He asked 35.00. I gave him a fiddy. He earned it. You know, value for goods and services? If you are paying anybody 4.00 an hour to do your yard work, or anything else, you are a cheap sonofobiatch and you should look into a calendar.

Also... I don't think a bunch of grown men standing around saying "nuh UH! Timmy only paid four dollars an hour to get HIS punch presses running! No fair! No fair!" have no business being IN business. Greed will turn the septic tank you're trying to use greed to crawl out of into a septic sea, folks. Buy a history book.

/has run a couple of businesses
//more than a few punch presses
 
2011-06-06 02:48:20 AM  

CayceP: hey're going to be office monkeys for about $17/hr. Right now they're being paid $10/hr and treated like shiat. Management was all "OMG Y R U leaving??" today.


And that's the disconnect. Employers value their labor at X, because they have no reason to value them more. And they wonder why their employees clamor for better wages, better benefits, because they've grown accustomed to abusing their labor force. No wonder they fight tooth and nail against every labor concession; it directly impacts their ability to make money off the actions of their employees.

/Was back in C-bus a few weeks back
//Got me some Schmidt's brats while I was there
///They're obviously not needing more workers, as the register snatch failed to break up my brats into two packages as I asked.
////And I lost my ability to effect change when Schmidt's became a cultural landmark instead of a food vendor
\C-bus flavored slashies!
 
2011-06-06 02:48:28 AM  

Monophtalmos: Fail in Human Form: Monophtalmos:

If society wants to set the pay rate by the value of their labor then shouldn't they provide the means for you to improve the value of your labor? Including the necessities in life that allow you to do so?

Means to improve your work value like a public schooling system? That is - once again - not the responsibility of the economic subsystem. I think you should be able to survive on welfare. On the other hand am employer is not supposed to pay you wages according to the number of your children but according to the number of people with a similar skill and the demand of these skills. As a parent to be it pays to first switch on your brain: "Do I have a supportive mate? Do I have a good qualification to earn money and find a new job?" before deciding to have children. They will be a decades long investment and shouldn't be a burden on "society as a whole", i.e. other people.


A HS degree is practically worthless and people are going to breed. You try to prevent it as much as possible through education but at the end of the day people's poor decisions are a problem we just need to deal with. Businesses shouldn't have to consider a person's living situation when determining wages. That's the government's job but it has apparently abdicated the responsibility.
 
2011-06-06 02:50:03 AM  

themistergraves: This thread is depressing.

/minimum wage earner
//with a college degree
///to wipe my ass with


I'm not quite at minimum wage, but I feel your pain. I think about getting a second degree all the time, but I have no idea what it would be.
 
2011-06-06 02:51:58 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: /Was back in C-bus a few weeks back


Let me know next time you're in town. We shall have a tasty beverage, sir.
 
2011-06-06 02:53:32 AM  

CayceP: themistergraves: This thread is depressing.

/minimum wage earner
//with a college degree
///to wipe my ass with

I'm not quite at minimum wage, but I feel your pain. I think about getting a second degree all the time, but I have no idea what it would be.


Chinese.
 
2011-06-06 02:54:58 AM  

CayceP: Let me know next time you're in town. We shall have a tasty beverage, sir.


Yes ma'am. The g-parents are getting old, and me getting to town is more and more of a driving force.

If it makes you feel any better, I was only in town for a day, and only in Worthington.
 
2011-06-06 02:57:16 AM  
Yes folks, even the bootstrap market has barriers to entry. "Get a better job" is a fantastic soundbite for people who have never thought about the issue.

In theories of competition in economics, barriers to entry are obstacles that make it difficult to enter a given market. (new window)
 
2011-06-06 02:57:47 AM  

Cyno01: Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.

Yeah, not that the democrats have all the answers (or many even), it absolutely boggles my mind that somehow poor whites are such a major voting block for the republicans.

God help us if they ever decide to remind everyone that Lincoln was a republican to go after the black vote. That would work, but (for now at least) they dont want it.


But yeah, the minimum wage needs to be raised. Its supposed to be a LIVING wage. I'm 24 years old, educated, middle class background... and i've never made more than $9 an hour. And i was a goddamn assistant store manager for a very large national retail chain...


poor whites vote dem pretty heavily, or at least they used to.
the last breakdowns I could find were from the kerry/bush elections though (pew research). the obama breakdowns I saw were only $50, >$100k, >$150k, and that was it. they didn't get down into the nitty gritty like the kerry race which separated out those who make $15k
Anyway once whites started making over $30k a year they split evenly between dems and republicans IIRC (Actually I'm just about positive). (this could have changed somewhat during 08', since less educated tend to be more racist I imagine - but obama is probably a one off anyway).


here's something interesting I found while looking for the old pew study...


Personal Optimism a Dividing Line

Pro-Government Conservatives and Disadvantaged Democrats have similar socioeconomic backgrounds and confront many of the same financial struggles. Both groups are predominantly female, both are relatively poor, and large majorities in both groups express dissatisfaction with their financial circumstances.

But these groups have strikingly different outlooks on their lives and possibilities that go a long way toward explaining the differences in their political attitudes. Feelings about the power of the individual are a major factor in this division. Pro-Government Conservatives are defined, at least in part, by their optimism in this area. About three-quarters (76%) believe that most people can get ahead if they are willing to work hard and two-thirds (66%) strongly express that view. An even higher percentage of Pro-Government Conservatives (81%) say that everyone has it in his or her own power to succeed.

Disadvantaged Democrats have a gloomier outlook. Just 14% think that people can get ahead by working hard; 79% say that hard work is no guarantee of success, and 76% express that view strongly. Only 44% of Disadvantaged Democrats say that everyone has the power to succeed, while slightly more (47%) take the fatalistic view that success in life is determined by forces outside one's own control.

More broadly, opinions on personal empowerment deeply divide both the Democratic groups and independents. More than eight-in-ten Conservative Democrats (83%) think that most people who work hard can get ahead, while Liberals are somewhat less likely to subscribe to this view and Disadvantaged Democrats strongly disagree. Among center groups, Upbeats, by definition, are very optimistic on this point, and Disaffecteds much less so.

img src="http://people-press.org/files/legacy/242-12.gif">

/you can see this same sentiment represented everyday on fark. it would be interesting to follow these people and see if the attitude makes it any more likely for one group to succeed or fail in the future.
 
2011-06-06 03:00:50 AM  
the table that went with that little article.

people-press.org

and the url...

http://people-press.org/2005/05/10/part-3-demographics-lifestyle-and-news-cons um ption/ (new window)
 
2011-06-06 03:03:43 AM  
I don't see how an adult male US citizen could ever be satisfied making minimum wage no matter what it was. Imagine you're over 30 and making the lowest wage that can legally be paid. That's essentially a no-confidence vote by society. Even if it supported my family I'd be like wtf is wrong with me...I'm making minimum f'ing wage.
 
2011-06-06 03:06:02 AM  
Abox: I don't see how an adult male US citizen could ever be satisfied making minimum wage no matter what it was. I

Simple, their needs are met and that's enough for them. Not everyone always wants more and thinks making more says they're doing better at life.
 
2011-06-06 03:06:14 AM  
Nice isn't it? You work your arse off day in and day out only to discover that you're not getting anywhere.

Been there. Done that.

At one time, I worked three jobs. I averaged about 5 hours sleep a night. I was tired all of the time. I hated one job but stuck with it because it was the highest paying job I could find, even though I eventually found out it was a dead end one.

I recalled reading books and watching movies about poor folks who made the best out of what they had, usually for the better. Inspired, I plowed on and discovered that you can't make new 'rustic' furniture with the wrong tools, there's not much you can do to invigorate a worn out rug and even painting a room can cost you a bundle.

I did learn a lot about cheap cooking, flavoring rice and that you could dig out the moldy spots on a loaf of bread, if they're not too bad, and toast and eat it. Plus, if you're living in a month to month rental, you have to be a bit careful about what you ask the landlord to repair or next months rent can go up.

You learn that you can shut the pilot lights off on a cook stove and save quite a bit of gas. A cheap box of kitchen matches works just fine. Turning off unnecessary lights will save you VERY LITTLE on a power bill, since the majority of your bill comes from things like your refrigerator, washer, dryer, air conditioning and, if you have one, electric water heater.

It gets frustrating when you do manage to cut back and start having a little money then the price of food mysteriously goes up, followed by the price of gas.

Yeah. I can understand why so many folks prefer to sell drugs instead of getting a 'real' job flipping burgers for minimum wage.

Stay healthy also. Health insurance can take up to 1/4 of your monthly income. Then there's life insurance, followed by mandatory car insurance. If you have kids, expect costs to nearly quadruple.

Now there are hundreds of government back programs out there to help you out. Remember Matt Lesco and his 'free money' books? Every program he listed, and there were thousands, was real.

However, you don't qualify for 99% of them for various reasons, often because many are State specific and it seems the good ones are always in another state. There's usually about 10 different reasons why YOU will not qualify and if you do, applying for them can be a complex nightmare.

A large portion are race specific. There's a ton for native Americans, Hispanics and African Americans.

You can work your arse off and apply for a grant and find out that you work too well, in that your income is about $10 a year too much. (Really! Folks have been denied because they make $5.00 a month too much.)

Nine out of 10 advertised programs to help you get ahead, one's which you have to pay a fee for, are actually krap, just there to get the listing company money. Most of those rent to own stores, if not all, charge you more for a product than you would pay for it from a retail store plus there is always a minimum rental time, of at least two months.

Those days when you could bootstrap yourself up into at least lower middle class were also the days when a Dr. visit cost $10, a months supply of pill would be about $5.00, new glasses might run $50 and gas was $0.25 a gallon. A day in the hospital might cost about $100. You were also living very well if your home, brand new, cost $35,000. An efficiency apartment would run you about $110 a month.

In 1971 I went to college for about $600 a year. In 1975 I went back for $1800 for a couple of semesters. Now, in 2011, I don't even want to think what it must cost. Probably close to what used to be the National Debt.

Face it, folks, we're all pretty well screwed no matter how we cut it, unless things just happen to fall just right.

Hard work is no longer the way to a better life. However, it might just lead you to an early grave.
 
2011-06-06 03:07:12 AM  

CayceP: Occam's Chainsaw: Yes ma'am. I'm working for a non-profit and loving it. My hours are very not-LOO, so that's why I've been scarce.

Wonderful! Glad you're doing okay.

Related to the thread, we're losing two of our best hotel people to a chemical company. They're going to be office monkeys for about $17/hr. Right now they're being paid $10/hr and treated like shiat. Management was all "OMG Y R U leaving??" today. It's pretty hilarious.

I think almost everyone here has a second job. I also love the suggestions in this thread about how to get out of shiatty situations: "Hey you! Don't make those terrible decisions you made years ago! That's the ticket!"


who said that? people are saying *you probably made a series of awful decisions with your life starting at age 11 until the present moment. what do you expect? a life filled with opulence and tiny giraffes? thems the breaks. just be thankful you don't live in Timbuktu.* if you didn't then you can probably pull yourself out of it.
 
2011-06-06 03:08:07 AM  

Abox: I don't see how an adult male US citizen could ever be satisfied making minimum wage no matter what it was.


So how do you change that paradigm? When society judges you by what you've made and by what they think you can make, how do you break out of the paradigm which has already decided you're not worth anything but minimum wage?
 
2011-06-06 03:09:09 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: CayceP: hey're going to be office monkeys for about $17/hr. Right now they're being paid $10/hr and treated like shiat. Management was all "OMG Y R U leaving??" today.

And that's the disconnect. Employers value their labor at X, because they have no reason to value them more.


2 weeks ago, my employer sent out a mass email saying that they are likely to significantly reduce salaries, benefits and retirement July 1. Last week, the 68 most senior employees, including managerial staff, submitted their retirement forms, and a large number of those unable to retire began submitting resumes and applications elsewhere. All of the clerical staff in one department have already accepted other jobs. The wizards on the top floor and utterly baffled and more than a little pissed at the prospect of reduced productivity effecting next quarter's bonuses.
 
2011-06-06 03:09:18 AM  

bunner: The wealthy aren't through stealing, yet. After that, sure, burn sh*t down.


Sometimes I wish America had a more Greek strain to it.
 
2011-06-06 03:09:20 AM  

Abox: I don't see how an adult male US citizen could ever be satisfied making minimum wage no matter what it was. Imagine you're over 30 and making the lowest wage that can legally be paid. That's essentially a no-confidence vote by society. Even if it supported my family I'd be like wtf is wrong with me...I'm making minimum f'ing wage.


Actually if you're a male in America and supporting your family, that's not a no confidence vote at all. You're a Good Man who does the Right Thing. It's awesome you think a woman would be perfectly okay with minimum wage, though.
 
2011-06-06 03:10:15 AM  

Abox: I don't see how an adult male US citizen could ever be satisfied making minimum wage no matter what it was. Imagine you're over 30 and making the lowest wage that can legally be paid. That's essentially a no-confidence vote by society. Even if it supported my family I'd be like wtf is wrong with me...I'm making minimum f'ing wage.


No one wants to make minimum wage and the idea is if we make it so that he can support himself on that level of income and provide opportunities to improve himself he will. Voila, he's no longer making minimum wage and is now paying more taxes and buying more crap so the next guy has the same opportunity. If he's spending all his time working or has no pratical way to improve he never will. This seems lost on conservates who believe if you make his life miserable enough he'll magically change.

/Or die off, they don't really care either way
 
2011-06-06 03:10:21 AM  
What I love most is that the people who are calling for people to keep their legs shut tend to be the same people who are against abortion. Cause hey, they can give them up for adoption... that's not difficult to do at all! And there's a HUGE market for black babies, right?

And for the people who already have kids... well, fark them for the poor choices they've made and cannot change. They can just starve.
 
2011-06-06 03:10:57 AM  

relcec: not how the law works.


That's exactly how the law works. It's called shareholder primacy, and it means that companies have a fiduciary obligation to maximize profit and give it it ALL back to Shareholders. So, while the law probably explicitly says you shouldn't rape, murder pillage, and grind people into powder (all these being 'illegal') the subtext is clear: If you can make a profit putting babies on spikes than WHY AREN'T YOU PUTTING BABIES ON SPIKES? What? The Law doesn't allow that here? Well Farking Find some place where you can put babies on farking spikes or we will SUE YOU!

It's an amazing turn around for the 'little investor' from the stock market of the turn of the 20th century, and it's a mark of just how many corporations are making a business in investing. Want your rights to be defended? Be a corporation!
 
2011-06-06 03:11:25 AM  
Yes, the fear of perceived failure is a wonderful tool.

It allows pigsh*t rich people to raise the bar to ridiculous levels for even survival level incomes and then tell the people they shove out of the way "You don't want to be a FAILURE, do you?"

Ever hear the word "overqualified"?

I have heard it more times than I care to recount. I finally just got very good at something and then started telling people who wanted to use my services for dogsh*t that they were "underfunded". They found the money to pay my asking price pretty quickly. I guess they didn't want to be perceived as a failure. Chasing around IUOUs makes fools and whores of us all, and I for one, am pretty fed up with it.
 
2011-06-06 03:12:24 AM  
Rik01: Thank you, your insight is valuable. I see this in my everyday life, those who have no chance of getting past their current position, but who strive hard to push onwards, as though by force of will they could change reality.
 
2011-06-06 03:13:55 AM  
Minimum wage plus kids equals pretty much farked.

But the government shouldn't help the kids, should minimize education for them, demonize their parents, and eliminate planned parenthood.

But don't tell the people who believe that that you think they want a permanent underclass. They are working their asses off to get us some sweet manufacturing jobs. Wed have them back already if we could just stop regulating. No more FDA, no more FCC, no more osha,and we can have factories as full as any third world country around.
 
2011-06-06 03:16:22 AM  

relcec: CayceP: Occam's Chainsaw: Yes ma'am. I'm working for a non-profit and loving it. My hours are very not-LOO, so that's why I've been scarce.

Wonderful! Glad you're doing okay.

Related to the thread, we're losing two of our best hotel people to a chemical company. They're going to be office monkeys for about $17/hr. Right now they're being paid $10/hr and treated like shiat. Management was all "OMG Y R U leaving??" today. It's pretty hilarious.

I think almost everyone here has a second job. I also love the suggestions in this thread about how to get out of shiatty situations: "Hey you! Don't make those terrible decisions you made years ago! That's the ticket!"

who said that? people are saying *you probably made a series of awful decisions with your life starting at age 11 until the present moment. what do you expect? a life filled with opulence and tiny giraffes? thems the breaks. just be thankful you don't live in Timbuktu.* if you didn't then you can probably pull yourself out of it.


It's the same rationalization. "Everyone who is poor deserves it."

Oh, I almost missed that line about opulence. We're talking about a living wage (as opposed to a minimum wage) in this thread. It would help your argument if you didn't run to a laughable extreme (opulence).
 
2011-06-06 03:17:29 AM  

Notabunny: All of the clerical staff in one department have already accepted other jobs. The wizards on the top floor and utterly baffled and more than a little pissed at the prospect of reduced productivity effecting next quarter's bonuses.


That's awesome. I find the people who make those kinds of decisions have often never held a front line position or been clerical staff.
 
2011-06-06 03:17:39 AM  

rubi_con_man: relcec: not how the law works.

That's exactly how the law works. It's called shareholder primacy, and it means that companies have a fiduciary obligation to maximize profit and give it it ALL back to Shareholders. So, while the law probably explicitly says you shouldn't rape, murder pillage, and grind people into powder (all these being 'illegal') the subtext is clear: If you can make a profit putting babies on spikes than WHY AREN'T YOU PUTTING BABIES ON SPIKES? What? The Law doesn't allow that here? Well Farking Find some place where you can put babies on farking spikes or we will SUE YOU!

It's an amazing turn around for the 'little investor' from the stock market of the turn of the 20th century, and it's a mark of just how many corporations are making a business in investing. Want your rights to be defended? Be a corporation!


it's exactly not how the law works. there is something called the business judgment rule that is very difficult to overcome. so difficult to overcome suits are rather rare except in very extreme cases. you need to request a refund for your GED in law.
 
2011-06-06 03:17:45 AM  
relcec: you probably made a series of awful decisions with your life starting at age 11 until the present moment. what do you expect?

And what if he didn't make any bad decisions? Why is it always on those seeking employment and not employers?

Here's an example of how things have changed: up to about 20 years ago or so it was possible to talk your way into a job at one of the major advertising agencies. If you had a good head on your shoulders, that was it. Even the really big firms like Leo Burnett and Ogilvy and Mather were stocked with people who had talked their way into their jobs. Then bit by bit the big firms started merging and buying each other out, along with buying up a lot of smaller firms. So now you have big conglomerates and then smaller independent firms. The big ones decided, for no discernible reason and no obvious benefit, that the old way of doing things just wasn't the way to do it. So no more people just talking their way into jobs there. And the small firms have basically decided to ape the big ones. So now people who used to be able to get jobs in advertising, no longer can, unless they get whatever degrees the ad firms want. Granted we're not talking about very many people if we look only at advertising, but as it has happened in advertising it has happened elsewhere. Yet people consistently try to blame individuals for failing instead of employers, who never even get asked "What the hell are you thinking?".
 
2011-06-06 03:18:39 AM  

CayceP: themistergraves: This thread is depressing.

/minimum wage earner
//with a college degree
///to wipe my ass with

I'm not quite at minimum wage, but I feel your pain. I think about getting a second degree all the time, but I have no idea what it would be.


I figured Economics would be a funny one for me to get at this point, but you know those mistakes that successful people aren't allowed to make?... well, I let my loans default because I got sick of doing deferments. Will be tough (impossible) for me to get another degree without any sort of loan, given my current income.
 
2011-06-06 03:19:20 AM  

relcec: more people view abortion unfavorably than ever.


Generally those that don't favor choice out-breed those who are fine with choice.

Example: my mom raised us pro-choice. All 2 of us.
My g/f's step mom's mom had her at 16 and she was 1 of 8. She ended up having her first kid at 15 and ended up having 6 kids. 5 of her 6 kids have had 7,6,6,5,4,1 kids respectively (her youngest died after his first child). Her granddaughter is 18 and has 2 children (ages 3 and 1). Her GREAT grandaughter had her first kid at 14.

All of them are pro-life. They're not protest the womens shelter pro-life but they're prolife.

Grand total?
2 pro-choice sons (none of which have any kids) vs 6+7+6+6+5+4+1+1(for the great granddaugher).


I'm ignoring the kids too young to breed and those I haven't met.
 
2011-06-06 03:21:13 AM  
rubi_con_man: s. It's called shareholder primacy, and it means that companies have a fiduciary obligation to maximize profit and give it it ALL back to Shareholders.

Actually the law doesn't say that. There is the decision in Dodge v Ford, but that was a state decision ages ago and now is considered a dead letter. Also the emphasis on profits for shareholders is very recent, only got going in the 80s and didn't really kick into gear until the 90s. Plus, it's not universal, it's not something you find among public corporations in England, Japan, France or wherever else.
 
2011-06-06 03:22:15 AM  

Smackledorfer: But don't tell the people who believe that that you think they want a permanent underclass. They are working their asses off to get us some sweet manufacturing jobs. Wed have them back already if we could just stop regulating. No more FDA, no more FCC, no more osha,and we can have factories as full as any third world country around.


And once a week, we could have roadkill roasts and a "Most Uniquely Maimed" contest.

Winner gets a sandwich.

Of course, the sandwich will be tainted and they'll vomit until they hemorrhage...

...but it will sure taste good going down and will get some of the taste of their corporate feudal lord's dick out of their mouth. Maybe we can get some of those free suicide nets from Foxconn.
 
2011-06-06 03:22:52 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: relcec: more people view abortion unfavorably than ever.

Generally those that don't favor choice out-breed those who are fine with choice.

Example: my mom raised us pro-choice. All 2 of us.
My g/f's step mom's mom had her at 16 and she was 1 of 8. She ended up having her first kid at 15 and ended up having 6 kids. 5 of her 6 kids have had 7,6,6,5,4,1 kids respectively (her youngest died after his first child). Her granddaughter is 18 and has 2 children (ages 3 and 1). Her GREAT grandaughter had her first kid at 14.

All of them are pro-life. They're not protest the womens shelter pro-life but they're prolife.

Grand total?
2 pro-choice sons (none of which have any kids) vs 6+7+6+6+5+4+1+1(for the great granddaugher).


I'm ignoring the kids too young to breed and those I haven't met.


Wasn't that the premise to a movie?

/Gremlins?
 
2011-06-06 03:23:37 AM  

CayceP: Abox: I don't see how an adult male US citizen could ever be satisfied making minimum wage no matter what it was. Imagine you're over 30 and making the lowest wage that can legally be paid. That's essentially a no-confidence vote by society. Even if it supported my family I'd be like wtf is wrong with me...I'm making minimum f'ing wage.

Actually if you're a male in America and supporting your family, that's not a no confidence vote at all. You're a Good Man who does the Right Thing. It's awesome you think a woman would be perfectly okay with minimum wage, though.



I wouldn't hold it against a woman to be unemployed and sponging off some rich dude s'long as she makes him happy.
 
2011-06-06 03:25:42 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: relcec: more people view abortion unfavorably than ever.

Generally those that don't favor choice out-breed those who are fine with choice.


It's close, but more people consider themselves pro-choice, according to Gallup: pro-life declining by 2% (new window)

Thanks, Britney Spear's Speculum. I was trying to figure out why I had relece on ignore. I suppose this sort of thing is why.
 
2011-06-06 03:26:11 AM  

Abox: I wouldn't hold it against a woman to be unemployed and sponging off some rich dude s'long as she makes him happy.


They know.
 
2011-06-06 03:26:38 AM  

Baryogenesis: relcec: CayceP: Occam's Chainsaw: Yes ma'am. I'm working for a non-profit and loving it. My hours are very not-LOO, so that's why I've been scarce.

Wonderful! Glad you're doing okay.

Related to the thread, we're losing two of our best hotel people to a chemical company. They're going to be office monkeys for about $17/hr. Right now they're being paid $10/hr and treated like shiat. Management was all "OMG Y R U leaving??" today. It's pretty hilarious.

I think almost everyone here has a second job. I also love the suggestions in this thread about how to get out of shiatty situations: "Hey you! Don't make those terrible decisions you made years ago! That's the ticket!"

who said that? people are saying *you probably made a series of awful decisions with your life starting at age 11 until the present moment. what do you expect? a life filled with opulence and tiny giraffes? thems the breaks. just be thankful you don't live in Timbuktu.* if you didn't then you can probably pull yourself out of it.

It's the same rationalization. "Everyone who is poor deserves it."

Oh, I almost missed that line about opulence. We're talking about a living wage (as opposed to a minimum wage) in this thread. It would help your argument if you didn't run to a laughable extreme (opulence).


no it's not.
it's the theory that if you are actually poor you probably made some dumb mistakes.
you can work very hard your whole life and still be poor, but you are probably either very dumb or quite unlucky. if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.
how many people do you know that have busted there asses their entire lives that are still actually poor that aren't borderline retarded, chemical dependent, or have had some shiat luck along the way that would have probably put anyone down? I've never known anyone. I've known a lot of people that f*cked around in high school and college, were never given very much by anyone including family and never were the hardest workers in the world, and still ended up well north of the median income in this country.
 
2011-06-06 03:28:39 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Abox: I don't see how an adult male US citizen could ever be satisfied making minimum wage no matter what it was. Imagine you're over 30 and making the lowest wage that can legally be paid. That's essentially a no-confidence vote by society. Even if it supported my family I'd be like wtf is wrong with me...I'm making minimum f'ing wage.

No one wants to make minimum wage and the idea is if we make it so that he can support himself on that level of income and provide opportunities to improve himself he will. Voila, he's no longer making minimum wage and is now paying more taxes and buying more crap so the next guy has the same opportunity. If he's spending all his time working or has no pratical way to improve he never will. This seems lost on conservates who believe if you make his life miserable enough he'll magically change.



If the path to your happiness rests on the government raising minimum wage then you have failed brutha.
 
2011-06-06 03:29:06 AM  
To all of the pro choice folks.

Good idea.

I'm pro choice.

Going down to yon clinic for free rubbers is a choice, too. Grow the f*ck up.
 
2011-06-06 03:30:14 AM  

Rik01: You can work your arse off and apply for a grant and find out that you work too well, in that your income is about $10 a year too much. (Really! Folks have been denied because they make $5.00 a month too much.)


They've got so picky here in Washington that our office girl, who takes advantage of the state health care system (while I earn way too much to qualify but not enough to afford health insurance), has to reapply every other week when she gets her paycheck. Because she works between 38 and 42 hours a week, a ONE HOUR OF PAY is enough to change whether she qualifies for one rate or another.

It's effing stupid. The end result is that if she works one hour of overtime she loses all of money to her health insurance payment bump.
 
2011-06-06 03:30:22 AM  
relcec: . if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.

Tell that to the people of Appalachia.
 
2011-06-06 03:30:49 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: CayceP: You mean to tell me a healthy, sane, educated, white guy with a plan was able to go on a poverty tour where he didn't experience real stress because he had a credit card in his pocket, was able to find a job, network, and get a place to live? Holy mother farking shiat.

And now you know why I love you, Cayce. ^_^


Its cool that its still a possibility to escape poverty, but THIS.

You get sick and you are screwed. Your car breaks down and you end up well below your goals.

Poor people aren't by definition worse at life - they are doing the same thing most people would do if in the same circumstances. They'd try for a while, fall a few times, and stop working hard for the future.
 
2011-06-06 03:31:09 AM  

Abox: Fail in Human Form: Abox: I don't see how an adult male US citizen could ever be satisfied making minimum wage no matter what it was. Imagine you're over 30 and making the lowest wage that can legally be paid. That's essentially a no-confidence vote by society. Even if it supported my family I'd be like wtf is wrong with me...I'm making minimum f'ing wage.

No one wants to make minimum wage and the idea is if we make it so that he can support himself on that level of income and provide opportunities to improve himself he will. Voila, he's no longer making minimum wage and is now paying more taxes and buying more crap so the next guy has the same opportunity. If he's spending all his time working or has no pratical way to improve he never will. This seems lost on conservates who believe if you make his life miserable enough he'll magically change.


If the path to your happiness rests on the government raising minimum wage then you have failed brutha.


I make more than min wage and do ok for myself but I do believe the underlying principle would lead to greater prosperity for our country.
 
2011-06-06 03:33:04 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: relcec: more people view abortion unfavorably than ever.

Generally those that don't favor choice out-breed those who are fine with choice.

Example: my mom raised us pro-choice. All 2 of us.
My g/f's step mom's mom had her at 16 and she was 1 of 8. She ended up having her first kid at 15 and ended up having 6 kids. 5 of her 6 kids have had 7,6,6,5,4,1 kids respectively (her youngest died after his first child). Her granddaughter is 18 and has 2 children (ages 3 and 1). Her GREAT grandaughter had her first kid at 14.

All of them are pro-life. They're not protest the womens shelter pro-life but they're prolife.

Grand total?
2 pro-choice sons (none of which have any kids) vs 6+7+6+6+5+4+1+1(for the great granddaugher).


I'm ignoring the kids too young to breed and those I haven't met.


that has nothing to do with it.
it has everything to do with the technology that allowed people to see late term development in the last few decades. maybe a little something to do with apathy on the pro choice side since the battle had been won.
 
2011-06-06 03:34:19 AM  

WhyteRaven74: relcec: . if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.

Tell that to the people of Appalachia.


that isn't even the real world. might as well say tell it to Somalia.
 
2011-06-06 03:35:37 AM  
if Appalachia is really like deliverance, and coal miners daughter, and that movie about the white lightning making bastard and all.
 
2011-06-06 03:37:31 AM  
relcec: that isn't even the real world

It is very much the real world. More to the point, it's a part of the United States.
 
2011-06-06 03:38:21 AM  

relcec: WhyteRaven74: relcec: . if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.

Tell that to the people of Appalachia.

that isn't even the real world. might as well say tell it to Somalia.


The avg income here, according to Wikipedia, is about 17.5k a year. Better than Somalia but give it a few more years for the last of the mills to shut down and check back in.
 
2011-06-06 03:38:23 AM  

CayceP: It's close, but more people consider themselves pro-choice, according to Gallup: pro-life declining by 2% (new window)


I wonder what the specific circumstances are? If they mean illegal except in cases of rape/incest then that's total hypocrisy. Since the anti-choice brigade equates abortion with murder, why does rape and incest get a pass? It's still a "human," right?

So if exceptions should be made for rape and incest then they should support the murder the born children that are the product of rape/incest.
 
2011-06-06 03:39:07 AM  
The wealthy don't want greater prosperity for our country.

It's not necessary anymore. They have over .75 billion people who will bust ass for pretty much enough money to buy corn dogs, here. They want to keep our currency juuuust healthy enough to keep their headquarters here, keep oil traded in that currency and put the difference in their pockets.

They only want America healthy enough to have about 60% of the population to be able to afford the trash they import and pay their corporate expenses with taxes. The other 39% can go sleep in the streets.

The people who approve of this economy are the other 1%.
 
2011-06-06 03:39:55 AM  

Fail in Human Form: relcec: WhyteRaven74: relcec: . if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.

Tell that to the people of Appalachia.

that isn't even the real world. might as well say tell it to Somalia.

The avg income here, according to Wikipedia, is about 17.5k a year. Better than Somalia but give it a few more years for the last of the mills to shut down and check back in.


that isn't as bad as I suspected. what is the median?
 
2011-06-06 03:40:53 AM  

Fukuzawa: profplump

For one thing, there are some jobs that just aren't worth that much. I don't think we should deny people looking for non-sustaniance labor that opportunity to do such jobs. If some 12-year-old is willing to cut my grass for $4/hour, why should the federal government care? He's not supporting children of his own, and he's certainly not taking useful employment from adults.

Well... when I was younger I remember going around and shoveling driveways for neighbors for 10 dollars a pop, 20 if it was a large driveway. And minimum wage existed then... so yeah. You're dumb. The Feds didn't and don't care about the money a 12 year old makes.


LOL @ twenty for a driveway. I think we have an idea of your daddy's income level. Go to Detroit and ask for twenty bucks for a half hours work.
 
2011-06-06 03:43:04 AM  

relcec: that has nothing to do with it.


New math people. 2=36. You heard it here first

it has everything to do with the technology that allowed people to see late term development in the last few decades.
Abortions don't occur "late term." Get a new talking point.

maybe a little something to do with apathy on the pro choice side
Sure.


since the battle had been won.
Nope. Abortion is still legal in the US.
 
2011-06-06 03:43:11 AM  

relcec: Fail in Human Form: relcec: WhyteRaven74: relcec: . if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.

Tell that to the people of Appalachia.

that isn't even the real world. might as well say tell it to Somalia.

The avg income here, according to Wikipedia, is about 17.5k a year. Better than Somalia but give it a few more years for the last of the mills to shut down and check back in.

that isn't as bad as I suspected. what is the median?


Donno but if you make 30k here, and you're not one of the few steel workers still employed, you're doing much better than most. If nothing comes in to replace the jobs in the next 5-10 years it'll be Detroit writ large.
 
2011-06-06 03:45:03 AM  

CayceP: I was trying to figure out why I had relece on ignore. I suppose this sort of thing is why.


The dumb talking points? Yeah. I see your point regarding him.
 
2011-06-06 03:45:34 AM  
relcec: that isn't even the real world. might as well say tell it to Somalia.

You want to know how I know you live in a suburb ?
 
2011-06-06 03:45:57 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: I wonder what the specific circumstances are?


There's a breakdown of some of the circumstances at the link. Abortion is a weird item to poll; most respondents are overburdened by the questions associated with the subject. The average person who is interrupted by a Gallup call isn't going to have the answer to "When does life begin?" at the ready. Unless they're conservative or whatever, in which case it's probably oversampling pro-life respondents.

/csb, etc
 
2011-06-06 03:47:13 AM  

relcec: It's the same rationalization. "Everyone who is poor deserves it."

Oh, I almost missed that line about opulence. We're talking about a living wage (as opposed to a minimum wage) in this thread. It would help your argument if you didn't run to a laughable extreme (opulence).

no it's not.
it's the theory that if you are actually poor you probably made some dumb mistakes.
you can work very hard your whole life and still be poor, but you are probably either very dumb or quite unlucky. if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.
how many people do you know that have busted there asses their entire lives that are still actually poor that aren't borderline retarded, chemical dependent, or have had some shiat luck along the way that would have probably put anyone down? I've never known anyone. I've known a lot of people that f*cked around in high school and college, were never given very much by anyone including family and never were the hardest workers in the world, and still ended up well north of the median income in this country
. Everyone who is poor deserves it.


FTFY

Restate your initial position (everyone who is poor deserves it) with different wording and include a fantastic anecdote about people you know. Perhaps I should counter with an anecdote of my own!

All you're doing is constructing elaborate rationalizations (your words: dumb, retarded, chemically dependent) as to why people deserve their lot in life regardless of whether they do or not. The reality is hard work isn't an automatic path to success, people do make mistakes but that doesn't mean they should spend the rest of their lives paying for them and life will shiat on you.

"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members."
 
2011-06-06 03:49:13 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: CayceP: It's close, but more people consider themselves pro-choice, according to Gallup: pro-life declining by 2% (new window)

I wonder what the specific circumstances are? If they mean illegal except in cases of rape/incest then that's total hypocrisy. Since the anti-choice brigade equates abortion with murder, why does rape and incest get a pass? It's still a "human," right?

So if exceptions should be made for rape and incest then they should support the murder the born children that are the product of rape/incest.


for a supposedly smart guy you sure fark around with a lot of derp. How do you get into med school without understanding what total hypocrisy means? what school do you go to?
 
2011-06-06 03:49:23 AM  

Fukuzawa: And minimum wage existed then... so yeah. You're dumb. The Feds didn't and don't care about the money a 12 year old makes.


Your employer was breaking the law. And you let him. So you're dumb.
 
2011-06-06 03:50:16 AM  
I didn't parse the quote in my previous comment correctly. The lines above the strikeout are my words, not relcec's.
 
2011-06-06 03:51:01 AM  

WhyteRaven74: relcec: . if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.

Tell that to the people of Appalachia.


This.

I see it every f*cking day: the people of Appalachia, and the sea that submerges them. I see the Floridiots that bring marginal economic survival, and who destroy it in the same breath. I see the local economy subsumed beneath the belief that tourism will bring survival, and I see the skew that tourism imposes upon our local economy, our ability to buy groceries and basic commodities and the land your family stood on for generations. And our local governments, they have no clue how to balance tourism dollars against a robust local economy, so they drive the whole enterprise against the rocks in hope that outsiders will continue to blow their money on frippery. And they reap the rewards: Maggie Valley is dead. Balsam is a shadow. Waynesville is the arts community ex-pats from Asheville proper, trying to simultaneously justify their existence and build up something, while the local CoC and the tourism board burn the county down around them in hopes they can fertilize their own holdings.

What do you do when the well-to-do in your community are content to commit long-term suicide, and the rest have no voice?
 
2011-06-06 03:51:16 AM  

Fail in Human Form: I'm going to assume you're not advocating for child labor so I can maintain my sanity. The reason the government cares is that we want our children learning in their off time, not taking labor jobs, so they don't end up pushing that same mower when he's 30.


A) Children do work. I have worked continuously since I was 14, and intermittently since I was 11.. Ignoring that is bad economics.
B) I agree, education is good, and children (and adults) should have access to education. None of that changes what I said.
 
2011-06-06 03:52:53 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: relcec: that has nothing to do with it.

New math people. 2=36. You heard it here first

it has everything to do with the technology that allowed people to see late term development in the last few decades.
Abortions don't occur "late term." Get a new talking point.

maybe a little something to do with apathy on the pro choice side
Sure.


since the battle had been won.
Nope. Abortion is still legal in the US.


no way are you going to med school. just way too stupid. you misunderstood almost everyone of those arguments. unless you're medical school is in Antigua. you go to school offshore, right? what did you get one your mcats?
 
2011-06-06 03:53:08 AM  

profplump: Fukuzawa: And minimum wage existed then... so yeah. You're dumb. The Feds didn't and don't care about the money a 12 year old makes.

Your employer was breaking the law. And you let him. So you're dumb.


The below ground economy has always been alive and well.

And that's a shame because the more money that flows safely and profitably above the radar, the more healthy the economy is and the more there is for capital investment.

Of course, the more money that flows above the radar, the more is sucked into revenue holes to fund 4 year studies on the composition of hamster sh*t, replete with 14 day junkets to Venezuela, or gets pocketed by corporate welfare queens.

That's a shame, too...
 
2011-06-06 03:53:15 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: What prevents the indigent 30-year-old from pursuing that same job?


That's my whole point -- some work isn't worth "minimum wage". if you set that rate to be a rate that would support an adult living independently. I think all adults should be able to live independently on their own labor, I just don't think a minimum-wage-based system is an efficient way to accomplish that.
 
2011-06-06 03:55:12 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: What do you do when the well-to-do in your community are content to commit long-term suicide, and the rest have no voice?


T H I S
 
2011-06-06 03:55:59 AM  

bunner: The below ground economy has always been alive and well.

And that's a shame because the more money that flows safely and profitably above the radar, the more healthy the economy is and the more there is for capital investment.


I agree. And that's why I don't think raising the minimum wage is the ultimate solution to the problem.
 
2011-06-06 03:56:25 AM  

relcec: Britney Spear's Speculum: CayceP: It's close, but more people consider themselves pro-choice, according to Gallup: pro-life declining by 2% (new window)

I wonder what the specific circumstances are? If they mean illegal except in cases of rape/incest then that's total hypocrisy. Since the anti-choice brigade equates abortion with murder, why does rape and incest get a pass? It's still a "human," right?

So if exceptions should be made for rape and incest then they should support the murder the born children that are the product of rape/incest.

for a supposedly smart guy you sure fark around with a lot of derp. How do you get into med school without understanding what total hypocrisy means? what school do you go to?


The argument goes like this.

A fetus is the same as a person and killing a person is murder. If you make an exception for killing a fetus when it is the product of rape or incest then the exception also applies to the child after it is born because you've already called a fetus and a person equivalent.

If you're comfortable making a distinction between a fetus and person in the case of rape and incest then it's reasonable to make other distinctions as well.
 
2011-06-06 03:56:44 AM  

Baryogenesis: relcec: It's the same rationalization. "Everyone who is poor deserves it."

Oh, I almost missed that line about opulence. We're talking about a living wage (as opposed to a minimum wage) in this thread. It would help your argument if you didn't run to a laughable extreme (opulence).

no it's not.
it's the theory that if you are actually poor you probably made some dumb mistakes.
you can work very hard your whole life and still be poor, but you are probably either very dumb or quite unlucky. if you work very hard your whole life, starting with school on forward, you have a great shot at having a home and live the median life stile at least.
how many people do you know that have busted there asses their entire lives that are still actually poor that aren't borderline retarded, chemical dependent, or have had some shiat luck along the way that would have probably put anyone down? I've never known anyone. I've known a lot of people that f*cked around in high school and college, were never given very much by anyone including family and never were the hardest workers in the world, and still ended up well north of the median income in this country. Everyone who is poor deserves it.

FTFY

Restate your initial position (everyone who is poor deserves it) with different wording and include a fantastic anecdote about people you know. Perhaps I should counter with an anecdote of my own!

All you're doing is constructing elaborate rationalizations (your words: dumb, retarded, chemically dependent) as to why people deserve their lot in life regardless of whether they do or not. The reality is hard work isn't an automatic path to success, people do make mistakes but that doesn't mean they should spend the rest of their lives paying for them and life will shiat on you.

"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members."


how many people do you know that have busted there asses their entire lives that are still actually poor that aren't borderline retarded, chemical dependent, or have had some shiat luck along the way that would have probably put anyone down? why don't you answer the question? because you either have to lie, or you have to say that you can probably have a decent life if you bust your ass. you people are such f*cking babies. your life sucks because you didn't try hard. get over it. it will be over soon.
 
2011-06-06 03:57:46 AM  

FredaDeStilleto: In PA, if you make federal minimum wage you may be eligible for public assistance, depending upon the number of family members you support. I'm sure that's true in many states.

So, what happens is the burden of providing for the working poor is shifted from the employer to the state. What's wrong with this picture?



i632.photobucket.com
 
2011-06-06 04:00:44 AM  
relcec: how many people do you know that have busted there asses their entire lives that are still actually poor that aren't borderline retarded, chemical dependent, or have had some shiat luck along the way that would have probably put anyone down?

I've met quite a few people like that. As for those afflicted by some bad luck, there's next to think offered to right things to get them past whatever bad luck has thrown their way.
 
2011-06-06 04:02:03 AM  

In Allah We Trust: Bathia_Mapes: Weaver95: And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?

Exactly.

Getting an education is easy. Paying for it is another issue altogether. Sallie Mae will give a loan to anyone. She will also pursue you till your death to get it back, but throw her a few hundred $$$'s every quarter and she'll stay off your back.
My point is that anyone can get an education. Not everyone will succeed.


Sounds great - so when you're working one full time and another part time job to make ends meet, where do you fit in those college classes? No matter how sweetly you smile when you ask if they'd like fries with that, minimum wage is still minimum wage.

This idea that you can just go to college and start making a middle class income is a fantasy. Even if you can fit the classes into your day, when you finally graduate you'll have a huge debt load from the student loans - and you'll quickly find that an applicant with a shiny new degree and no experience in the field has a very hard time finding a job. Those grants are great if you can get them but they won't pay the bills.

That "trickle down" thing really means that the middle class citizens trickle down to the lower class. Do all the right things and soon you'll be able to hear about how you're overqualified for those minimum wage jobs.

For a big reality check, visit your favorite fast food restaurant and ask the crew how many of them have a college degree or are working towards one.
 
2011-06-06 04:02:24 AM  

profplump: I agree. And that's why I don't think raising the minimum wage is the ultimate solution to the problem.


What it would do would allow people who have no access to any sort of via investment capital to pay their bills, live indoors, and perchance invest into something that would allow them to leverage a return that is greater than the outlay. You know, get more back than you put in, minus labor. That *is* the game, here, isn't it? Only if you start letting the monkeys in the game, you might run out of monkeys. The most worthwhile education in the world is to teach somebody how to turn 20.00 into 25.00 without dying of a heart attack and them letting them on the trading floor. Too bad that game needs suckers to survice. Or Chinese people who think that 34.00 a week is fu*king Bill Gates money.
 
2011-06-06 04:02:25 AM  

relcec: you have to say that you can probably have a decent life if you bust your ass. you people are such f*cking babies. your life sucks because you didn't try hard. get over it. it will be over soon.


Ah, now I remember why I have you on ignore. Not because you can't make a point, which was perplexing me, but because you're an abrasive asshole. Thanks for clearing up that cognitive dissonance I was having.
 
2011-06-06 04:02:26 AM  

relcec: how many people do you know that have busted there asses their entire lives that are still actually poor that aren't borderline retarded, chemical dependent, or have had some shiat luck along the way that would have probably put anyone down? why don't you answer the question? because you either have to lie, or you have to say that you can probably have a decent life if you bust your ass. you people are such f*cking babies. your life sucks because you didn't try hard. get over it. it will be over soon.


I refer you to the article this thread is about.

But it's nice to see you can construct a well reasoned argument.

[youmad.jpg]
 
2011-06-06 04:05:18 AM  

Baryogenesis: relcec: Britney Spear's Speculum: CayceP: It's close, but more people consider themselves pro-choice, according to Gallup: pro-life declining by 2% (new window)

I wonder what the specific circumstances are? If they mean illegal except in cases of rape/incest then that's total hypocrisy. Since the anti-choice brigade equates abortion with murder, why does rape and incest get a pass? It's still a "human," right?

So if exceptions should be made for rape and incest then they should support the murder the born children that are the product of rape/incest.

for a supposedly smart guy you sure fark around with a lot of derp. How do you get into med school without understanding what total hypocrisy means? what school do you go to?

The argument goes like this.

A fetus is the same as a person and killing a person is murder. If you make an exception for killing a fetus when it is the product of rape or incest then the exception also applies to the child after it is born because you've already called a fetus and a person equivalent.

If you're comfortable making a distinction between a fetus and person in the case of rape and incest then it's reasonable to make other distinctions as well.


I was wondering why he doesn't understand what hypocrisy means. can you explain that?
also when opinion polls make people choose between pro choice and pro life, you can end up in some weird places. people that might describe themselves as prolife when they are forced to choose between one of the labels do not all necessarily believe life begins at conception. you people are making a lot of presumptions, and that can be stupid. there can be morality without religion.
 
2011-06-06 04:06:51 AM  
Minimum wage is for UNSKILLED labor - flipping burgers, digging ditches, stocking shelves. That kind of work does NOT deserve higher wages because any farking idiot can do it, from teenagers, to the 2-digit-IQ crowd, to skilled workers who are between decent jobs. There is never any shortage of warm bodies to fill those positions, so the market has decreed that they don't pay shiat.

Tired of operating a shovel for minimum wage? Get out of the ditch and persuade someone to show you how to run the backhoe instead. You just doubled your wages. Still not enough for you? Get someone to show you how to read the blueprints and head up the crew. BAM, there's another raise. Want even more? Well, now you have to actually get a real education so you can be the guy who designs the stuff on the the blueprints. See how that works? The more skills you have, the more you get paid.

The people whining about minimum wage not being a "living wage" can go suck a dick. If that's all your earning, you don't get to act like you're middle class. Your income dictates your lifestyle, not your desires. You don't get to drink. You don't get to smoke. You don't get to eat in restaurants several times a week. You don't get to buy a new car. You don't get to buy a 60 inch TV and drop half your paycheck on video games and Blu-ray movies.

Most importantly, you don't get to live in a house by yourself. There isn't a city in this entire country that doesn't have hundreds of "roommate wanted" ads running on CL or the local Nickel rag. Shack up with 2 or 3 other people and your individual expenses drop like a rock. Maybe one of them can look after your crotchfruit so you don't have to pay full price for child care. Maybe one of them has a car and will take you to work if you chip in for gas so you don't have to shoulder the entire expense of maintaining your own vehicle. Best of all, maybe one of them knows somebody who knows about a job opening somewhere for better wages.

It wasn't that many generations ago that hardly anyone lived on their own or got married/had kids until AFTER they locked down a good job and had been there a couple of years. Somehow the American Dream changed from "Work hard so your kids can have a better life than you" to "Every knuckle-dragging retard who dropped out of high school and started reproducing indiscriminately should be given a car, a house, an X-box, and a TV the size of a billboard without requiring them to have any skills whatsoever"
 
2011-06-06 04:07:50 AM  

bunner: What it would do would allow people who have no access to any sort of via investment capital to pay their bills,


I'm suggesting that the labor market may not be the ultimate solution to the problem -- there are other ways to transfer capital. If you support 4 children and are a single parent it's probably more efficient just to transfer capital to you directly via taxes/etc. than to subsidize the minimum wage.

I know that's not consistent with current political thinking from either major party, but it seems more economically efficient to me than just assuming that all laborers are in the worst-case scenario and setting the minimum wage to that level.

Also, finding ways to prevent single parents from supporting 4 children, and/or reducing the cost of child care are also good ideas, neither of which are related to increasing the minimum wage.
 
2011-06-06 04:08:23 AM  

profplump: some work isn't worth "minimum wage".


The minimum wage is the bottom threshold past which no human should do a job. Some will, out of desperation. But automation and socialization should drive those jobs out of the realm of those which humans should have to submit to.

bunner: And here I sit, unable to affect change, and tomorrow I go to my job. And tomorrow I get to tell the girl that called me yesterday, begging for help, that my organization has nothing for her; that her mother turning her out is not our problem, and I'll give her a list of local organizations that just may help her with her plight. May, or may not. And that's the absolute best I can do. And tomorrow, I'll probably drink myself to sleep, so that I can pretend that the good we do far outweighs the good we fail to do, and my only comfort is that I work for an organization that pays my bills instead of demanding that I volunteer all my time. But working for next to nothing, it's all I can do.
 
2011-06-06 04:11:15 AM  
soundguy: It wasn't that many generations ago that hardly anyone lived on their own or got married/had kids until AFTER they locked down a good job and had been there a couple of years. Somehow the American Dream changed from "Work hard so your kids can have a better life than you" to "Every knuckle-dragging retard who dropped out of high school and started reproducing indiscriminately should be given a car, a house, an X-box, and a TV the size of a billboard without requiring them to have any skills whatsoever"

Thank for contributing absolutely nothing worthwhile to the topic at hand. Your contribution is duly noted.
 
2011-06-06 04:11:34 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: The minimum wage is the bottom threshold past which no human should do a job. Some will, out of desperation. But automation and socialization should drive those jobs out of the realm of those which humans should have to submit to.


That's a great idea, in theory, but it assumes that all humans have the same threshold for a willingness to do labor. Someone desperate for food does not have the same threshold as someone who wants another $20 to buy a new video game. Setting the threshold at the higher level means the lower level cannot exist, even if everyone at the higher level was already employed.
 
2011-06-06 04:11:54 AM  

soundguy: See how that works? The more skills you have, the more you get paid.


Appalachia is the real world.

Sadly, that is not.

There is a direct connection between your quality of life and who you blow and who your mommy and daddy know.

Ignoring that, sadly, does not make it irrelevant or not a fact.
 
2011-06-06 04:12:56 AM  

WhyteRaven74: relcec: how many people do you know that have busted there asses their entire lives that are still actually poor that aren't borderline retarded, chemical dependent, or have had some shiat luck along the way that would have probably put anyone down?

I've met quite a few people like that. As for those afflicted by some bad luck, there's next to think offered to right things to get them past whatever bad luck has thrown their way.


you personally know people that from a young age worked their asses off in school, and at every job they ever had. that have never had chemical dependency issues, never had bad luck, and are not stupid (or have a learning disability), yet still are actually POOR. you know people that fulfill all these requirements and make 15k a year r less and are not just going through a rough patch maybe? they are destitute and have always been this way?
 
2011-06-06 04:14:10 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: bunner: And here I sit, unable to affect change, and tomorrow I go to my job. And tomorrow I get to tell the girl that called me yesterday, begging for help, that my organization has nothing for her; that her mother turning her out is not our problem, and I'll give her a list of local organizations that just may help her with her plight. May, or may not. And that's the absolute best I can do. And tomorrow, I'll probably drink myself to sleep, so that I can pretend that the good we do far outweighs the good we fail to do, and my only comfort is that I work for an organization that pays my bills instead of demanding that I volunteer all my time. But working for next to nothing, it's all I can do.


yeah.... : (

*sigh*
 
2011-06-06 04:14:57 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: The minimum wage is the bottom threshold past which no human should do a job. Some will, out of desperation. But automation and socialization should drive those jobs out of the realm of those which humans should have to submit to.


Also, I agree, we should get all humans out of menial jobs AND pay all people enough to support themselves/their family. I just don't think setting a minimum wage makes that happen in any efficient/effective way.
 
2011-06-06 04:16:21 AM  
relcec: yet still are actually POOR.

Yeah I've come across such people. Also not all were always this way. And it doesn't always have to do with luck in any definable sense. You would do well for yourself to go out into the world and actually talk to different people and see what goes on. And realize that for a lot of people there is no help, there is nowhere to turn and then they get people talking about how they deserve it and how they've failed.
 
2011-06-06 04:18:10 AM  

profplump: it assumes that all humans have the same threshold for a willingness to do labor


No, it assumes that we value human life at an equal level, and that we as a society are past the point where we'll exploit the vulnerable for our own benefit. Those who are desperate are those who most need those protections which we engender.
 
2011-06-06 04:18:17 AM  
I don't believe it. the percentage of the population that actually busts their ass their whole life has got to be south of 20%. I don't believe you happen to know a bunch of people that are destitute, that are among the hardest workers in America and have always been that way, and that haven't had some extraordinarily bad luck along the way.
 
2011-06-06 04:18:35 AM  
the best part about those who mock the rich? They will never do more than mock.
 
2011-06-06 04:19:06 AM  
relcec: they are destitute and have always been this way

Read what Occam's Chainsaw posted just a minute ago. All the wishing everyone who is poor is stupid or an addict doesn't change what reality is and you seem completely uninterested in that reality so long as you can keep thinking that no one who isn't stupid or an addict isn't poor or doesn't stay poor. What's more you seem to think it's ok for the dumb and addicted to remain poor as well.
 
2011-06-06 04:19:45 AM  

profplump: Also, I agree, we should get all humans out of menial jobs AND pay all people enough to support themselves/their family. I just don't think setting a minimum wage makes that happen in any efficient/effective way.


News flash. Shoving billions in corporate welfare up the asses of fat, rich old men who spend it all on Chinese whores doesn't, either. This just in, neither abject poverty nor vomitous greed serve that from whence comes their sustenance.
 
2011-06-06 04:20:23 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: No, it assumes that we value human life at an equal level, and that we as a society are past the point where we'll exploit the vulnerable for our own benefit.


No, it assumes a 12-year-old who wants a new video game should get the same wage as a 30-year-old trying to feed his children. Those two people do not deserve the same pay in your developed society, and we shouldn't require society to pay the already-fed, already-housed, already-clothed 12-year-old the same amount.
 
2011-06-06 04:21:22 AM  
relcec: . the percentage of the population that actually busts their ass their whole life has got to be south of 20%

And funny enough among those who earn the most you wouldn't find many in that 20%. Except you think far too little of your fellow Americans. Which is kind of the problem. Well, no, it's your problem.

Yogimus: the best part about those who mock the rich? They will never do more than mock.

Someone named Johnny Rotten would like a word with you.
 
2011-06-06 04:21:39 AM  

bunner: News flash. Shoving billions in corporate welfare up the asses of fat, rich old men who spend it all on Chinese whores doesn't, either.


I didn't say corporate welfare was the answer. I don't even know that I have a better solution than raising the minimum wage. I'm just saying the minimum wage isn't a good solution the underlying problem.
 
2011-06-06 04:23:09 AM  

profplump: we shouldn't require society to pay the already-fed, already-housed, already-clothed 12-year-old the same amount.


And how do we concretely prevent the 12-year-old standard from being applied to the 30-year-old, in a world where the user will do anything to exploit the used?
 
2011-06-06 04:24:41 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: And how do we concretely prevent the 12-year-old standard from being applied to the 30-year-old, in a world where the user will do anything to exploit the used?


That's why I'm suggesting that the labor market is not the end-all, be-all solution to the problem. I don't think the labor market alone can solve the problem. That's why I don't think a minimum wage is a good plan.
 
2011-06-06 04:25:33 AM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


I would strongly recommend reading Deer Hunting with Jesus - it's a decent read and explains why my better half won't move back to the US after a few years of living in a pinko-communist-liberal nation like Norway.
 
2011-06-06 04:25:42 AM  

profplump: Occam's Chainsaw: No, it assumes that we value human life at an equal level, and that we as a society are past the point where we'll exploit the vulnerable for our own benefit.

No, it assumes a 12-year-old who wants a new video game should get the same wage as a 30-year-old trying to feed his children. Those two people do not deserve the same pay in your developed society, and we shouldn't require society to pay the already-fed, already-housed, already-clothed 12-year-old the same amount.


I agree with that but don't we already allow businesses to pay 16 yr olds less than 18 yr olds.

/I honestly don't recall
 
2011-06-06 04:26:00 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: profplump: some work isn't worth "minimum wage".

The minimum wage is the bottom threshold past which no human should do a job. Some will, out of desperation. But automation and socialization should drive those jobs out of the realm of those which humans should have to submit to.


That's absolutely false. If that were the case, the minimum wage should have been steadily increasing (to counter inflation). And watch it with the loaded language; people don't submit to employment, they search for it and they settle for it, but they aren't usually hired at gunpoint.

I'm no bootstrapper, but it's pretty clear that an hour of burger flipping isn't inherently deserving of $7 in pay. Instead, the wage should be whatever the guy who'll do it for the least amount of money (and do a competent job) accepts. You can argue that there should be a floor on the allowable wage, but it's going to cause unemployment.

It would be more equitable to reduce cost of living expenses (effectively increasing the income of people earning minimum wage) such as healthcare, childcare, transportation, etc.
 
2011-06-06 04:28:29 AM  

Fail in Human Form: I agree with that but don't we already allow businesses to pay 16 yr olds less than 18 yr olds.


We do, but my point isn't related to age -- from a humanitarian standpoint shouldn't we pay more to a 16-year-old trying to support his child than a 19-year-old living with his parents?

My whole point is a minimum wage doesn't solve the problem, and might, in fact, make it worse.
 
2011-06-06 04:28:57 AM  
Aschlafly: but it's going to cause unemployment.

Actually there's no proof of that. Indeed the opposite appears to be true. A bunch of years back New Jersey raised it's min wage to be more than Pennsylvania. People said Jersey would lose jobs at the bottom of the pay scale. Turns out that not only weren't jobs lost, new jobs were created. Granted at the bottom of the pay scale, but all the same, increasing the minimum wage had a positive, not negative, effect on employment.
 
2011-06-06 04:29:49 AM  
Unamerican socialist educations seem to be just fine for the wealth of american companies who have taken jobs overseas, or need to import workers to the states. I noticed dictatorships don't faze said company owners, when it comes to deciding where to built new plants.
 
2011-06-06 04:30:46 AM  

WhyteRaven74: relcec: yet still are actually POOR.

Yeah I've come across such people. Also not all were always this way. And it doesn't always have to do with luck in any definable sense. You would do well for yourself to go out into the world and actually talk to different people and see what goes on. And realize that for a lot of people there is no help, there is nowhere to turn and then they get people talking about how they deserve it and how they've failed.


I know people that have picked themselves up. I guess you only know people that sink to the bottom.
you people are arguing that life is unfair, that you have no control over it. that is fundamentally what you are always tossing around in here. that there is no point even trying. I want the government to provide more services and I'm gonna advocate for more at every opportunity I can, but I'm tired of hearing this shiat specifically it. I'm really sick of your bellyaching. 99.9% of life is what you make of it. you only have this one shot and you will not get another. nothing is fated. go on thinking it sucks and you are doomed no matter what you do and even if you try as hard as you possibly can you are f*cked because of someone else. go on wallowing in your self pitty with these fools. I really feel bad for you all.
 
2011-06-06 04:30:49 AM  

Aschlafly: Occam's Chainsaw: profplump: some work isn't worth "minimum wage".

The minimum wage is the bottom threshold past which no human should do a job. Some will, out of desperation. But automation and socialization should drive those jobs out of the realm of those which humans should have to submit to.

That's absolutely false. If that were the case, the minimum wage should have been steadily increasing (to counter inflation). And watch it with the loaded language; people don't submit to employment, they search for it and they settle for it, but they aren't usually hired at gunpoint.

I'm no bootstrapper, but it's pretty clear that an hour of burger flipping isn't inherently deserving of $7 in pay. Instead, the wage should be whatever the guy who'll do it for the least amount of money (and do a competent job) accepts. You can argue that there should be a floor on the allowable wage, but it's going to cause unemployment.

It would be more equitable to reduce cost of living expenses (effectively increasing the income of people earning minimum wage) such as healthcare, childcare, transportation, etc.


So then you support paying people $1/hour and have them living under a bridge in tent cities. That's where your plan ends up.
 
2011-06-06 04:33:05 AM  
profplump: My whole point is a minimum wage doesn't solve the problem, and might, in fact, make it worse.

You can fix a lot of the problem making sure no one who works 40 hours a week ends up without a proper roof over their head, a suitable amount of food and some other necessities. Germany, Italy, England, France etc figured this out long ago. Hell in Sweden no one even had to do anything really because making sure people have enough is just a part of their culture. The who have plenty don't see it as their goal to retain as much as they can if it means someone might, not will but just might, go without enough. And this doesn't mean they'd be starving or otherwise destitute, or even necessarily close to it, they just simply wouldn't have enough.
 
2011-06-06 04:33:33 AM  

relcec: some extraordinarily bad luck along the way.


Redlining-> low property values-> no collateral for loans-> difficulty financing education/investment-> lower inherited wealth (both capital and education)-> lower earnings-> lower property values and so on and so on.

Read a little, shiathead.
 
2011-06-06 04:35:27 AM  

missiv: Unamerican socialist educations seem to be just fine for the wealth of american companies who have taken jobs overseas, or need to import workers to the states. I noticed dictatorships don't faze said company owners, when it comes to deciding where to built new plants.


They never have. Historically it's better for business.
 
2011-06-06 04:36:37 AM  
Aschlafly: Read a little, shiathead.

Also if you own your own residence you're farked as far as any assistance goes. Cruel irony is a great many among the poorest of the poor in places like Appalachia or the deep south is, they own their homes and because of that, no matter how poor they actually are, they can't get any assistance.
 
2011-06-06 04:37:51 AM  

WhyteRaven74: You can fix a lot of the problem making sure no one who works 40 hours a week ends up without a proper roof over their head, a suitable amount of food and some other necessities.


I'm not saying we shouldn't construct a society where someone working full-time cannot live independently. I'm just saying that if/when you assume all work is sustenance work you immediately remove the market for sub-sustiance work, even for workers that are legitimately in the sub-sustiance market (i.e. that are supported outside their own labor).

I'm not saying that we should let people working 40 hours/week starve to death, I'm just saying that setting a minimum wage is not an economically efficient way to ensure that everyone eats/has housing/etc. And if you actually look at the economies of Germany or the UK you'll see they don't rely on an minimum wage to achieve that outcome either.
 
2011-06-06 04:39:46 AM  

Fail in Human Form: Aschlafly: Occam's Chainsaw: profplump: some work isn't worth "minimum wage".

The minimum wage is the bottom threshold past which no human should do a job. Some will, out of desperation. But automation and socialization should drive those jobs out of the realm of those which humans should have to submit to.

That's absolutely false. If that were the case, the minimum wage should have been steadily increasing (to counter inflation). And watch it with the loaded language; people don't submit to employment, they search for it and they settle for it, but they aren't usually hired at gunpoint.

I'm no bootstrapper, but it's pretty clear that an hour of burger flipping isn't inherently deserving of $7 in pay. Instead, the wage should be whatever the guy who'll do it for the least amount of money (and do a competent job) accepts. You can argue that there should be a floor on the allowable wage, but it's going to cause unemployment.

It would be more equitable to reduce cost of living expenses (effectively increasing the income of people earning minimum wage) such as healthcare, childcare, transportation, etc.

So then you support paying people $1/hour and have them living under a bridge in tent cities. That's where your plan ends up.


you think anyone's going to work for a dollar an hour? I know the job market is bad, but it's not so bad that people are going to accept a wage that low.

But that's missing the point: the actual dollar figure isn't that important, it's how that relates to a person's costs. Right now, even if you raised the federal min. wage to California levels, people are still going to be in dire straits because they can't afford health care and childcare and rent. If you subsidize those things, even if they're only earning 4 dollars an hour, they'd be better off than they are now.
 
2011-06-06 04:42:13 AM  

Fail in Human Form: have them living under a bridge in tent cities.


You must have some huge bridges up your own ass if you can fit a whole tent city under them.

/Sorry I missed that the first time
 
2011-06-06 04:42:42 AM  

Aschlafly: Fail in Human Form: Aschlafly: Occam's Chainsaw: profplump: some work isn't worth "minimum wage".

The minimum wage is the bottom threshold past which no human should do a job. Some will, out of desperation. But automation and socialization should drive those jobs out of the realm of those which humans should have to submit to.

That's absolutely false. If that were the case, the minimum wage should have been steadily increasing (to counter inflation). And watch it with the loaded language; people don't submit to employment, they search for it and they settle for it, but they aren't usually hired at gunpoint.

I'm no bootstrapper, but it's pretty clear that an hour of burger flipping isn't inherently deserving of $7 in pay. Instead, the wage should be whatever the guy who'll do it for the least amount of money (and do a competent job) accepts. You can argue that there should be a floor on the allowable wage, but it's going to cause unemployment.

It would be more equitable to reduce cost of living expenses (effectively increasing the income of people earning minimum wage) such as healthcare, childcare, transportation, etc.

So then you support paying people $1/hour and have them living under a bridge in tent cities. That's where your plan ends up.

you think anyone's going to work for a dollar an hour? I know the job market is bad, but it's not so bad that people are going to accept a wage that low.

But that's missing the point: the actual dollar figure isn't that important, it's how that relates to a person's costs. Right now, even if you raised the federal min. wage to California levels, people are still going to be in dire straits because they can't afford health care and childcare and rent. If you subsidize those things, even if they're only earning 4 dollars an hour, they'd be better off than they are now.


Under your system, I guarantee it. There's always someone more desperate and the cost of living would never drop low enough to compensate for it. That's not a system I would ever want to see implemented.
 
2011-06-06 04:43:35 AM  

relcec: WhyteRaven74: relcec: yet still are actually POOR.

Yeah I've come across such people. Also not all were always this way. And it doesn't always have to do with luck in any definable sense. You would do well for yourself to go out into the world and actually talk to different people and see what goes on. And realize that for a lot of people there is no help, there is nowhere to turn and then they get people talking about how they deserve it and how they've failed.

I know people that have picked themselves up. I guess you only know people that sink to the bottom.
you people are arguing that life is unfair, that you have no control over it. that is fundamentally what you are always tossing around in here. that there is no point even trying. I want the government to provide more services and I'm gonna advocate for more at every opportunity I can, but I'm tired of hearing this shiat specifically it. I'm really sick of your bellyaching. 99.9% of life is what you make of it. you only have this one shot and you will not get another. nothing is fated. go on thinking it sucks and you are doomed no matter what you do and even if you try as hard as you possibly can you are f*cked because of someone else. go on wallowing in your self pitty with these fools. I really feel bad for you all.


Nice strawman. It must be nice to live in your black and white world. Is there even a point in telling you that there's a difference between "hard work doesn't always translate to success" and "there's no point in even trying"? You're just going to take it to one extreme or the other.
 
2011-06-06 04:43:54 AM  

CayceP: They never have. Historically it's better for business.


There will never be useful dialogue between the greedy and the ill used until we stop using "business" and a euphemism for "greed" "theft" or "legislative manipulation. That blanket you're trying to throw over the eviscerated and poverty stricken isn't wide enough, and never will be, mister corporate whore man.
 
2011-06-06 04:45:34 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Also if you own your own residence you're farked as far as any assistance goes. Cruel irony is a great many among the poorest of the poor in places like Appalachia or the deep south is, they own their homes and because of that, no matter how poor they actually are, they can't get any assistance.


Sure they can.

Just sell it and the land to the nearest vulture.

Scads of assistance!

Rent money! Revenue! Git yerself an SUV and some sammiches! Sign here.
 
2011-06-06 04:46:50 AM  
profplump: And if you actually look at the economies of Germany or the UK you'll see they don't rely on an minimum wage to achieve that outcome either.

True enough
 
2011-06-06 04:46:55 AM  

Baryogenesis:
Nice strawman. It must be nice to live in your black and white world. Is there even a point in telling you that there's a difference between "hard work doesn't always translate to success" and "there's no point in even trying"? You're just going to take it to one extreme or the other.


He's a product of magical thinking. There's no explaining how the real world functions to a person who thinks Appalachia isn't.
 
2011-06-06 04:48:21 AM  

bunner: CayceP: They never have. Historically it's better for business.

There will never be useful dialogue between the greedy and the ill used until we stop using "business" and a euphemism for "greed" "theft" or "legislative manipulation. That blanket you're trying to throw over the eviscerated and poverty stricken isn't wide enough, and never will be, mister corporate whore man.


But but but...business...capitalism...lily white and pure...

/puke
 
2011-06-06 04:49:12 AM  

relcec: I don't believe it. the percentage of the population that actually busts their ass their whole life has got to be south of 20%. I don't believe you happen to know a bunch of people that are destitute, that are among the hardest workers in America and have always been that way, and that haven't had some extraordinarily bad luck along the way.


Define busting your ass, then defend why human beings, with all our technology, ought to be working ten times harder than a hunter-gatherer.

I mean what are you expecting of a teenager growing up in Detroit?
Specifically
 
2011-06-06 04:50:42 AM  

WhyteRaven74: profplump: And if you actually look at the economies of Germany or the UK you'll see they don't rely on an minimum wage to achieve that outcome either.

True enough


They also don't rely on a "system" wherein the CEO's of their corporations export all the work to other countries and then take the 700% profit upticks to buy small countries and use the locals for toilets and grope little boys while they feed them martini enemas.

Knowhamsayin?

www.usul.net

Just sayin'
 
2011-06-06 04:51:29 AM  
Hey guys, lets keep the minimum wage down to seven bucks an hour so as to breed desperation and then make sure everyone has access to guns. Its your second amendment right to shoot somebody in the face and take their stuff . America - fark Yeah!
 
2011-06-06 04:53:17 AM  
Fail in Human Form:
Under your system, I guarantee it. There's always someone more desperate and the cost of living would never drop low enough to compensate for it. That's not a system I would ever want to see implemented.


Sweden doesn't seem to have a lot of that. Italy, Switzerland, Denmark also don't have national minimum wages, and none of those countries have tent cities under giant bridges. What they do have is collective bargaining agreements about wages by industry, combined with social safety nets like the one I mentioned.
 
2011-06-06 04:54:47 AM  

Aschlafly: Fail in Human Form:
Under your system, I guarantee it. There's always someone more desperate and the cost of living would never drop low enough to compensate for it. That's not a system I would ever want to see implemented.

Sweden doesn't seem to have a lot of that. Italy, Switzerland, Denmark also don't have national minimum wages, and none of those countries have tent cities under giant bridges. What they do have is collective bargaining agreements about wages by industry, combined with social safety nets like the one I mentioned.


www.anh-usa.org
 
2011-06-06 04:59:06 AM  
Comparing a comparison of policy in the US and Europe to "apples to oranges" is... like comparing apples and oranges, jackass.

Maybe there's a set of factors that really do make the much more successful Euro-style unworkable in the US, but unless you want to point them out, put away your pictures.
 
2011-06-06 05:04:44 AM  
Why should I pay for welfare sluts and their brats? The woman in the article, like way too many women in Detroit and some nearby cities, should not have spread her legs for unreliable males who come and then go in the night. And failing that, she should have stopped after the first bastard popped out but instead she goes and has another with no supporting baby daddy in sight.

Raising the minimum wage will make things worse, just like increasing handouts.

Face the truth, every single welfare and education program has failed. Every one of them! By any indicator: illegitimacy, crime, dependence, and multi-generational mooching -- all the Great Society programs have failed. And they have failed worst in the urban blighted areas where the recipients are many but where the decent people are few, having fled long ago taking their money and jobs with them.

None of the existing programs work, and keeping them in place expecting different results is insane. What to do?

1) Sterilization for all welfare recipients and their kids, or
2) Restitution of slavery, or
3) Soylent Green

You pick.
 
2011-06-06 05:05:26 AM  
I need a raise so I can buy a cool hat and chair like this guy.
img192.imageshack.us
 
2011-06-06 05:06:20 AM  
Fist of, suck a wet fart out of my ass you cheap, insulting, posturing, mouthy c*nt.

So, let's move on.

The apples and oranges come by way of the history of our respective economies and the social norms they produced. Sweden is a socialist country with regulated capitalist engine and that, pretty much, works and is about the only thing that does. Ours is founded on avarice, manipulation and robber barons the fact that - for a brief time - they actually needed strong backs and people who were good at math to turn our resources into things that would line their pockets and since dead people can't run a milling machine, they paid them and nice little stacked up houses from the Sears catalogue for them to live in. The divergent histories of the two prevents obvious solutions and socioeconomic constructs being implemented here outside of the academic construct you were positing. and academic constructs don't get sh* t done.

Now you go and you f*ck yourself until you can get some manners. Bye.
 
2011-06-06 05:08:42 AM  

SystemFault: Why should I pay for welfare sluts and their brats? The woman in the article, like way too many women in Detroit and some nearby cities, should not have spread her legs for unreliable males who come and then go in the night. And failing that, she should have stopped after the first bastard popped out but instead she goes and has another with no supporting baby daddy in sight.


Do you not understand what twins are?
 
2011-06-06 05:09:03 AM  
Fail in Human Form: There's always someone more desperate and the cost of living would never drop low enough to compensate for it.

Make sure anyone who works full time has their needs met and there are no more desperate people.

SystemFault: Face the truth, every single welfare and education program has failed.

They haven't. Also what's it like to be a complete farking moron with no consideration of those around them?
 
2011-06-06 05:13:02 AM  

WhyteRaven74: soundguy: It wasn't that many generations ago that hardly anyone lived on their own or got married/had kids until AFTER they locked down a good job and had been there a couple of years. Somehow the American Dream changed from "Work hard so your kids can have a better life than you" to "Every knuckle-dragging retard who dropped out of high school and started reproducing indiscriminately should be given a car, a house, an X-box, and a TV the size of a billboard without requiring them to have any skills whatsoever"

Thank for contributing absolutely nothing worthwhile to the topic at hand. Your contribution is duly noted.


------

You're welcome. Never let it be said that I don't do the absolute least I can do.
 
2011-06-06 05:15:58 AM  
You don't give people a basic wage to enjoy their lives, you do it so they let you enjoy yours.

You don't feed the poor with welfare because they are hungry, you do it so they don't kill your wife and family.
 
2011-06-06 05:26:27 AM  

zzrhardy: You don't give people a basic wage to enjoy their lives, you do it so they let you enjoy yours.

You don't feed the poor with welfare because they are hungry, you do it so they don't kill your wife and family.


seahawknationblog.com
 
2011-06-06 05:32:02 AM  
Damn, this thread sure has a lot of false dichotomies and let-them-eat-cakers in it...
 
2011-06-06 05:34:16 AM  

bunner: Fist of, suck a wet fart out of my ass you cheap, insulting, posturing, mouthy c*nt.

So, let's move on.

The apples and oranges come by way of the history of our respective economies and the social norms they produced. Sweden is a socialist country with regulated capitalist engine and that, pretty much, works and is about the only thing that does. Ours is founded on avarice, manipulation and robber barons the fact that - for a brief time - they actually needed strong backs and people who were good at math to turn our resources into things that would line their pockets and since dead people can't run a milling machine, they paid them and nice little stacked up houses from the Sears catalogue for them to live in. The divergent histories of the two prevents obvious solutions and socioeconomic constructs being implemented here outside of the academic construct you were positing. and academic constructs don't get sh* t done.

Now you go and you f*ck yourself until you can get some manners. Bye.


Yes, Americans are a terrible, cruel and greedy people, while human beings who are very much the same genetically and culturally are enlightened and generous, because they didn't cross the Atlantic.

Or something.

If you're going to claim that my ideal system (more welfare in specific areas) is somehow completely unworkable in the US, maybe you want to guess the odds on a massive minimum wage increase? Yeah, it's none.

Last I checked, people all over the world are pretty similar. Now, it may be the case that certain ideologies are stronger in some places that others, and it might make implementation of the European system less likely. However, it's pretty obvious that increasing the minimum wage a whole lot is a terrible way to help out the poorest people in this country, because 1. It's never going to happen, and 2. It causes unemployment.

Now, more to your ass-backwards point: if it's really just Sweden's history, WHY THE fark ARE THERE LIKE 10 WEALTHY EUROPEAN COUNTRIES WITH ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME SYSTEM, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT THEY'RE NOT ALL CULTURALLY SIMILAR?

And at what point in our history did we somehow create this wholly different system by which the 'robber-barons' were able to control everyone else? Was it when the declaration was signed? Or when Andrew Jackson was elected? Or during the Gilded Age? When did we become so much worse than every other country in existence?
 
2011-06-06 05:34:41 AM  
I'd like to address those who say the answer is to work harder.

I work hard. I have a decent job- I make more than minimum wage- enough to support my girlfriend whose college degree has disqualified her from the only available employment as overqualified.

I'm good at what I do, I'm productive, and at the end of a year I can get up to a 2% raise, because that's what my corporate overlords have decided upon as the ceiling (for us peons at least, their self determined raises and bonuses are, of course, undisclosed)

Gas, food, utilities, consumed in the same quanties as last year, cost more than 2% more this year. Making more money this year than I did last year, I am more poor this year than last- and that's before you even factor in the company deciding that the health care reform was a good excuse to pay for less of our health care than they used to.

I'm not lazy, I'm not stupid, and I'm not chemically dependant. I am still living paycheck to paycheck, with virtually no ability to contribute to my savings, and that's without any student loan payments (because I stopped going to college when I could no longer afford it up front, fortunately with enough education to get me the job I have) and it wouldn't take extrordinarily bad luck to result in me tumbling down well below the poverty line.

It's not about how hard you work, or how smart you are, it's about who you (or frequently, your parents) know- just ask the slew of people now running various departments in the company, despite having no understanding of the company itself, because their friends who bought the company gave them jobs.

//oh and you should really drop the chemical dependancy bit
//all those people with their zoloft / ridilin / valium (or whatever) scrips are just as chemically dependant as a heroin addict.
 
2011-06-06 05:38:57 AM  
It's only going to get worse.
 
2011-06-06 05:41:49 AM  

Jorn the Younger: It's not about how hard you work, or how smart you are, it's about who you (or frequently, your parents) know- just ask the slew of people now running various departments in the company, despite having no understanding of the company itself, because their friends who bought the company gave them jobs.


Let me see

*reaches into greedhead clichè bag*

"Harrumph! Anecdotal evidence! Harrumph! How do you know if they're qualified? Why should the people who sign your check disclose their raises and remuneration structure? HARRUMPH!"

How'midoin so far, ditoheads?
 
2011-06-06 05:43:32 AM  

Theory Of Null: It's only going to get worse.


always does. until it gets worse for the people causing it. but nobody ever thinks it applies to them.

www.solarnavigator.net
 
2011-06-06 05:52:12 AM  

Aschlafly: Fail in Human Form:
Under your system, I guarantee it. There's always someone more desperate and the cost of living would never drop low enough to compensate for it. That's not a system I would ever want to see implemented.

Sweden doesn't seem to have a lot of that. Italy, Switzerland, Denmark also don't have national minimum wages, and none of those countries have tent cities under giant bridges. What they do have is collective bargaining agreements about wages by industry, combined with social safety nets like the one I mentioned.


I missed the part about you subsidizing those people's necessities. I thought you were only calling for a removal of the min wage.
 
2011-06-06 05:58:42 AM  

bunner: Theory Of Null: It's only going to get worse.

always does.


Uh, yeah, because I'm way worse off with my cheap clothes and my shiatty car and my internet connection than I would've been as a farking serf. Or a slave. Or a 12 year old without half of my fingers.

Are you really so intent on doomsaying and being 'anti-' that you actually believe America, alone in the world, is some kind of malevolent cruelty machine, and that everything is always getting worse? I didn't put it together till now but: bunch of photo-based ad-hominem arguments, lack of perspective, absolute and unwavering negativity, and a really short fuse... You're a 16 year old!

Which also explains why you think that a little bit of economic thought and some evidence is some kind of posing.
 
2011-06-06 05:59:02 AM  

relcec: Britney Spear's Speculum: RandomAxe: A lot of people subconsciously believe if they act like they're running with the big dogs, they'll somehow turn into big dogs, too. It's sympathetic magic, like supply-side economics.

This concept is the only way I can sanely fathom how illogically middle America (and Florida) has farked up this country


I don't know if it is because you are in your own little fark bubble, or if you are too young to remember (actually I was kind of young back then too) but there were a lot of conservative ideas that resonated with middle class back during the late 90's because they were simply better than the alternative.
the country came to look upon some forms of abortion unfavorably, gun control became a loser, less taxes, generally *less regulation*, an end to cradle to grave welfare for the the poor.
the democrats lost the battle of ideas on a lot of stuff for quite a while. that's why nationally democrats went to the right on a lot of things. welfare was reformed. no one dares f*ck with guns anymore. no one will dare even bring up taxes for 98% of population (although this one sucks now). more people view abortion unfavorably than ever. everyone is a free trader.


Everyone PRETENDED to be a free trader, right up until the financial crisis.

/yes, both parties are at fault
 
2011-06-06 05:59:21 AM  
I get a kick out of how out of touch people are.

First, it used to be if you worked hard you'd advance in a company.
That doesn't apply anymore. There are people that bust their backs and don't make it.
Doesn't matter if you're a carpenter, electrician, project manager or burger flipper. 25 years ago it used to be. Today, Not for everyone. But maybe you. You have a right to marry and have kids. You have a right to try to be happy. Doesn't matter how much money you have, very few people can afford kids anyway. If you have a child at age 18, you get to spent your 40s with a 20 year old child. Think about how awesome that can be for a minute.

Second, some of the smartest people you'll ever find are flipping your burgers.
You can't judge a person based on what job they work. Sorry assholes, doesn't work that way.
Read up on empathy. Sad to say some monkeys have more of it than some of the people commenting.

Third, you get a fancy education and lots of debt. You're lucky if you get something. I know 4 guys with advanced engineering degrees. They can't even get a job at a fast food place.

Fourth, trickle down doesn't work if you put it all in the bank to earn interest.

Fifth, go to the hospital to get stitches. Watch them charge you 400$ for gauze they wrap your finger in. Get into a car accident and get a soft fluffy neck brace that costs 650$. Insurance companies can barter how much that stuff costs. You can't. Then tell me then the system isn't broken.

Sixth, what labor market? Oh, the one overseas? We have debt but also assets. Airport's an asset. Privatize assets?

Seventh, Exon mobile and General electric pay less taxes to the irs than that guy working in part-time at McDonalds. Yet record profits. But they waste the corn and drive your price of ethanol and soda pop up. Mission accomplished.

Eighth. The big fish eat the little fish and the ocean is over fished. Free market says people should starve. You say people should starve? Society won't work without the little people. Of course it's better to say the poor should die. It means you get more, even if you are poor. Lets eat babies like lobster. Crack the skull open and eat it with your fancy shrimp fork. Takes care of the problem right?
 
2011-06-06 06:12:04 AM  

Kazujin: Society won't work without the little people.


Society Is the "little" people.

Everybody else is either paid thug, a freelance thug, or somebody trying to pay the paid thug enough to keep the freelance thug out of their hair so they can steal with a briefcase.

I say we take the crips, blood, cops, crackheads, CEOs, CEO enablers, bankers, alphabet soup security theatre Nazis, shyster lawyers and con men and stick 'em in a roped off area of WY with enough guns and ammo to erase Switzerland. And some sammiches.

I don't know what would be left, but I know nobody would be trying to steal it from you.
 
2011-06-06 07:09:16 AM  
I do like these threads. It reminds me that no matter how unfortunate or unavoidable a situation might be, there are always trolls who never can see beyond their own noses. Even though none of us should ever be alarmed by the activities of a troll, we should all wisen up a little. Maybe that's the only way that person is able to keep their jobs...by trolling on everyone else in an effort to be the last to get fired. I also doubt anyone can find more than 100,000 people alive today who will never be on the dole in some form at some point in their lives. If you are 80 and on the dole, you can always find some troll to remind everyone how their grandfather worked everyday until he was 101 or something. Just get off of it already!
 
2011-06-06 07:10:17 AM  
I have worked my ass off since 1976. I have worked at least 50 hours a week since then. I scrimped and saved, and then lost over $100,000 and a house in a divorce (I'm female, by the way). Now I live in a studio apartment, and am terrified about my future. My 401(k) is so volatile that I trust it as much as I expect Anna Nicole Smith to rise from the grave and dance the Charleston at IHOP.

My brother married into money, got a cushy job as a hedge fund manager, and is now worth eight figures. Last time I saw him he spent the entire time whining about Obama, and sneering at me for my poverty. Yes, he's a Teabagger, but he also sneers at the vast majority of 'baggers as mindless drones who toe the party line, and he admits that they're being manipulated.

I worked just as hard as he did. True, he did "make the choice" to choose his mate primarily for the fact that he could use her financially (he cheats on her regularly). I chose my mate primarily for the fact that I loved him; he cheated on me regularly. So, yes, I made a worse choice in my life, but I don't think it's because I'm stupid, it's just that I wasn't as mercenary and amoral and relentlessly greedy as my brother is; he truly is a sociopath, since he lacks empathy for others. But, that makes him a superior human being in the current GOP, and as long as he keeps showing up at those prayer breakfasts with his cronies, he'll have the veneer to display to the world as a pious and charitable businessman.
 
2011-06-06 07:16:34 AM  

Huggermugger: I have worked my ass off since 1976. I have worked at least 50 hours a week since then. I scrimped and saved, and then lost over $100,000 and a house in a divorce (I'm female, by the way). Now I live in a studio apartment, and am terrified about my future. My 401(k) is so volatile that I trust it as much as I expect Anna Nicole Smith to rise from the grave and dance the Charleston at IHOP.

My brother married into money, got a cushy job as a hedge fund manager, and is now worth eight figures. Last time I saw him he spent the entire time whining about Obama, and sneering at me for my poverty. Yes, he's a Teabagger, but he also sneers at the vast majority of 'baggers as mindless drones who toe the party line, and he admits that they're being manipulated.

I worked just as hard as he did. True, he did "make the choice" to choose his mate primarily for the fact that he could use her financially (he cheats on her regularly). I chose my mate primarily for the fact that I loved him; he cheated on me regularly. So, yes, I made a worse choice in my life, but I don't think it's because I'm stupid, it's just that I wasn't as mercenary and amoral and relentlessly greedy as my brother is; he truly is a sociopath, since he lacks empathy for others. But, that makes him a superior human being in the current GOP, and as long as he keeps showing up at those prayer breakfasts with his cronies, he'll have the veneer to display to the world as a pious and charitable businessman.


And getting a few hundred people who have been though what you have been through in a room is how revolutions start.

Try and remember, if nothing else, that sometimes being a better human being means being a worse off human being.

I don't like it either.

*hug*
 
2011-06-06 07:16:43 AM  

Aschlafly: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/6267755/69587298#c69587298" target="_blank">bunner</a>:</b> <i>Theory Of Null: It's only going to get worse.

always does.</i>

Uh, yeah, because I'm way worse off with my cheap clothes and my shiatty car and my internet connection than I would've been as a farking serf.


It's like the industrial revolution all over again! He has cheap clothes and internet. Everything in my home is made in the USA! And you wonder why I don't have a TV! Because we don't make TV's! What are you doing to help make things better? Spending boat loads of money on cheap foreign brands of clothing because they make you look cool when you go out clubbing? Driving a cheaply made foreign made car because you thought tokyo drift was bad ass?
I care more than you do! I have stickers on my American made bumper to prove it!

Am I trolling you back right?

Listen nobody is saying things are worse than 400 years ago. Even back then things were better than living in the dark ages on a technological scale.

Every time and place has it's own history, Look at how farked up North Korea is or how farked up Nazi Germany was just 70 years ago.

Things don't always get better with time. Sometimes they get worse and history proves it,
 
2011-06-06 07:20:05 AM  
Speaking of minimum wage, Florida just raised theirs. By 6 cents an hour.

/what was even the farking point?
//just so Voldemort can say he "raised" the minimum wage?
 
2011-06-06 07:21:58 AM  

Theory Of Null: Aschlafly: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/6267755/69587298#c69587298" target="_blank">bunner</a>:</b> <i>Theory Of Null: It's only going to get worse.

always does.</i>

Uh, yeah, because I'm way worse off with my cheap clothes and my shiatty car and my internet connection than I would've been as a farking serf.

It's like the industrial revolution all over again! He has cheap clothes and internet. Everything in my home is made in the USA! And you wonder why I don't have a TV! Because we don't make TV's! What are you doing to help make things better? Spending boat loads of money on cheap foreign brands of clothing because they make you look cool when you go out clubbing? Driving a cheaply made foreign made car because you thought tokyo drift was bad ass?
I care more than you do! I have stickers on my American made bumper to prove it!

Am I trolling you back right?

Listen nobody is saying things are worse than 400 years ago. Even back then things were better than living in the dark ages on a technological scale.

Every time and place has it's own history, Look at how farked up North Korea is or how farked up Nazi Germany was just 70 years ago.

Things don't always get better with time. Sometimes they get worse and history proves it,


It's the ruthless capitalists time to shine right now. In my opinion, humanity will look back on the conservative capitalist the same way we currently look back on southern segregationists. With derision for their beliefs and disgust for the people who held them.

/Not really all that helpful in the here and now though
 
2011-06-06 07:26:40 AM  
They're been TRYING to rerun the industrial revolution with technology because only very large things are worth people with very large amounts of money putting that money into it so they can get even larger amounts of money back. That, and greedy, hubris riddled dickheads who have never done a days work in their lives tend to have little by way of imagination. Look at Donald Trump

Robber barons are how America rolls, folks.

People sh*tting in high cotton and people eating day old bread at the circus. Period.

The only problem is, you can't make stuff like that here and make a profit so they whored it out to China. The other problem is data isn't a viable product, just the sh*t we use to move it around, hack it, defend it and manipulate it is. America 2.0 isn't opening locally, folks. It's a foreign language production. And you can't even get pay per view. Now open up some Fritos, turn on Real Housewives of Pig Snatch NJ and think about covering the note, next month and stop griping about your own demise. We gave you shiny things to play with! What more do you want?
 
2011-06-06 07:31:44 AM  

brainiac-dumdum: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS as if anyone was ever meant to.

Your FAIL is strong, libtards...

A woman working two jobs should be able to feed her family and afford new shoes.


She could actually, you know, Marry a man.
 
2011-06-06 07:47:49 AM  

rubi_con_man: She could actually, you know, Marry a man.


"But that's oppressive and gender enslavement brought about by the singularities inherent in the patriarchal socipolitical old boy network of the domineering...

um... wait.. back in a minute..."

www.x-entertainment.com

*glug**glug**glug* *glug. "anyway, as I was SAYING!

/Suckers. They got a flavor for every flag they sold you. Ask around.
 
2011-06-06 07:51:32 AM  
Huggermugger:

I'd marry you, but your family sounds nuts.
 
2011-06-06 07:56:54 AM  
vudukungfu

Video, A for V, post or all of the above?
 
2011-06-06 07:57:36 AM  

Britney Spear's Speculum: But on a serious note,

"Sometimes I get off work and think, 'Man, I'm going to need a new pair of shoes,' " the 23-year-old said.

You can't have children at 19 (or even 18?) and expect to get by in today's society. Sure, teen pregnancy worked for 100s of years and even up until the 80's..possibly the 90's (as my half-sister will attest). But now? No. Forget it. I'm 27 and I can't afford a kid mentally and financially. Granted I'm in medical school (and I won't have kids, ever). People have bred themselves retarded and it won't stop. It's hard to have sympathy.



But birth control, sex ed and abortion are WRONG!
 
2011-06-06 07:59:19 AM  

relcec: WhyteRaven74: relcec: how many people do you know that have busted there asses their entire lives that are still actually poor that aren't borderline retarded, chemical dependent, or have had some shiat luck along the way that would have probably put anyone down?

I've met quite a few people like that. As for those afflicted by some bad luck, there's next to think offered to right things to get them past whatever bad luck has thrown their way.

you personally know people that from a young age worked their asses off in school, and at every job they ever had. that have never had chemical dependency issues, never had bad luck, and are not stupid (or have a learning disability), yet still are actually POOR. you know people that fulfill all these requirements and make 15k a year r less and are not just going through a rough patch maybe? they are destitute and have always been this way?


You cannot possibly be this obtuse. I know people like this too. That's what EVERONE'S been telling you. Notwithstanding your conservative talking points, success often has little to do with effort, and frequently has everything to do with luck.
 
2011-06-06 08:00:58 AM  

bunner:
Video, A for V, post or all of the above?


Usually, people ask me WTF I'm talking about.
HUR?
 
2011-06-06 08:03:24 AM  

Huggermugger: waaaaaaah


Were able to get in some pretty sweet travel, though.
 
2011-06-06 08:04:03 AM  

vudukungfu: bunner:
Video, A for V, post or all of the above?

Usually, people ask me WTF I'm talking about.
HUR?


Your website has a reel. It looks like commercial work. So, I was wondering if you're a production house, audio for video, jingles, post production...

Admittedly, I'm assuming that's actually your site and not just a random link.

Hur dur.
 
2011-06-06 08:07:04 AM  

mrichmond3737: WhyteRaven74 Nickel and Dimed by any chance?


That sounds about right.


To counterbalance that book, you should also read "Scratch Beginnings" by Adam Shepard.

A lot of the problems with living on minimum wage are due to wanting things you can't afford, and spending your money on stuff that isn't necessary. For example, poor people are more likely to smoke. If you smoke a pack a day, in NY you are spending a minimum of $7.98 a pack. That's $239.40 a month. What if you like to have a couple beers after work? At $1 a day for pisswater, that's another $30, so you're up around $270 in expenses before you even buy food, pay the rent, or pay the utilities.

For comparison, if you make minimum wage in NYS you are making $7.25 an hour. That's $1,232.50 a month before takes. Figure that taxes take 15% off the top, and you are left with $1,048. If you are buying beer and cigarettes, you're spending almost 26% of your take home pay on things you don't need to live.

It's a simple calculation to make. Anyone who has taken grade school math could do it. How many of them do it, though?

As a foster parent, I've dealt with a *LOT* of single mothers, etc. scraping by on minimum wage jobs (if they are working at all). I don't know how many times I dropped a foster kid off for a parental visit and seen a crappy apartment with dirty dishes in the sink, clothes on the floor, but a new flatscreen TV, an Xbox360 or Wii, and cable or a dish. Or I go to a run down trailer with a bunch of crap in the yard and a lawn consisting of weeds so high that there are probably Japanese soldiers hiding out in it that don't know the war is over, but a shiny new pick'em'up truck in the ruts that pass for a driveway. How much of their precious resources go to those things while the kids are eating potato chips and Kraft macaroni and cheese made with water instead of milk and butter for dinner?

Not to mention when I see them buying $20 or more of lottery tickets a week.

Some people have crappy luck, but you can overcome bad luck if you put the effort into it. I've seen it happen. For the majority of the people in the lower economic classes, though, being poor is "the norm". Their parents were poor. Their peers are poor. To them, that's just life. It's easy to blame outside forces, but if you are motivated enough there isn't really anything that can hold you back.

I'm a perfect example of this: I'm pretty sure I could make a lot more money than I am making now. But I'm in the same socioeconomic class as my parents, and it's my comfort zone. If I were more ambitious, I know I could make more money.
My brother-in-law is like that, and he's done quite well for himself, but I just don't have it in me, and I suspect that neither do most people. So, the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.
 
2011-06-06 08:07:11 AM  

jrw8778: You cannot possibly be this obtuse. I know people like this too. That's what EVERONE'S been telling you. Notwithstanding your conservative talking points, success often has little to do with effort, and frequently has everything to do with luck.


I know absolutely no one like this. Not that I don't know a good many people, either. People who stay at the minimum wage level for 20 years have something wrong with them. Period.

Yes, I've worked minimum wage jobs. Several of them, in fact. It didn't take me too long to realize that they sucked balls. I worked my way through college, got a good job and kept working to get better jobs. It's not that difficult.

But, if after 20 years one is still working a minimum wage job they're retarded, chemically-dependent, or have some other mental issues.
 
2011-06-06 08:07:43 AM  

bunner:
Hur dur.


I'm just and actor and copywriter.
It's my pal's site.
I'm in the video for Magic Hat Beer.
I'm in a few others, too.
 
2011-06-06 08:08:39 AM  
Ah.

Thanks.
 
2011-06-06 08:13:44 AM  

WhyteRaven74: mrichmond3737: I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe.

Nickel and Dimed by any chance?


Yep.

I also read Scratch Beginnings which is intended to be a bit of a rebuttal to Nickle and Dimed. All it actually does is reinforce the argument, but I suppose it depends on how you look at it. :)
 
2011-06-06 08:16:18 AM  

dittybopper: I've dealt with a *LOT* of single mothers, etc. scraping by on minimum wage jobs (if they are working at all). I don't know how many times I dropped a foster kid off for a parental visit and seen a crappy apartment with dirty dishes in the sink, clothes on the floor, but a new flatscreen TV, an Xbox360 or Wii, and cable or a dish


As someone who used to work and still volunteers on occasion at an afterschool program that has mostly poor children I can tell you, you may not know this, but even poor children have grandparents and as granparents do, they buy their grandkids stuff. But it's probably easier just to assume every xbox was bought with foodstamps.
 
2011-06-06 08:17:55 AM  

Aidan: I also read Scratch Beginnings which is intended to be a bit of a rebuttal to Nickle and Dimed. All it actually does is reinforce the argument, but I suppose it depends on how you look at it. :)


I'm not sure how reading a book where a person managed to drastically improve their circumstances helps to support the position that it's damned near impossible to live/get ahead on minimum wage. I'd like to hear your view of this (no snark, genuinely interested).
 
2011-06-06 08:20:29 AM  

Headso: As someone who used to work and still volunteers on occasion at an afterschool program that has mostly poor children I can tell you, you may not know this, but even poor children have grandparents and as granparents do, they buy their grandkids stuff. But it's probably easier just to assume every xbox was bought with foodstamps.


They also all buy them pick-up trucks? Cigarettes? Lottery tickets?
 
2011-06-06 08:21:18 AM  
I come from down in the valley where mister when you're young
They bring you up to do like your daddy done

Poor man wanna be rich
Rich man wanna be king
The king ain't satisfied till he runs everything
I'm gonna go out tonight
I'm gonna find out what I got

For a lot of people, those simple couplets touch upon their circumstances far more than some harrumphing politician or some bureaucratic functionary with a stack of paperwork that points to places they have been told they're not welcome.

Until we stop thinking that the point of life is to win some sort of disposable income dick waving contest, we have failed our species, our nation and ourselves.
 
2011-06-06 08:22:55 AM  

zzrhardy: You don't feed the poor with welfare because they are hungry, you do it so they don't kill your wife and family.


When I was a junior in high school way back in the 80's taking US History, the teacher, who was somewhat conservative, made a statement that I never forgot:

Social programs are an insurance policy against revolution.

I don't like the idea of rewarding lazy people, but I understand.
 
2011-06-06 08:23:45 AM  

bunner: Wal Mart. Offering you 1970's prices so you can survive on our 1970's wages.®

"Hey, I got an idea.. let's find out what people are buying, make knockoffs of it in China for pennies on the dollar and flood the market, here with a bunch of big box stores. We buy in Yuan, we get paid in Dollars. I mean, who the f*ck needs the FOREX?"

"You think people will put up with that?"

"Sure, just sell them cheap, sh*tty food, too."


Yeah hows that Most favored nation trade agreement working out for ya ?
Clinton wasn't it? Isn't that who china bought an election for?

NAFTA also, great plan there good thing every one is sticking to the agreements on that one or we would be screwed ... oh wait they aren't are they. Have the Repubs to thank for that one i think. Bush specifically.
 
2011-06-06 08:25:24 AM  

ronaprhys: People who stay at the minimum wage level for 20 years have something wrong with them.


They might not be the bright enough and ambitious enough and have enough self control to parlay 7 bucks an hour to more wealth. That does not mean there is something wrong with them nor does it mean they are a not valuable member of society. Low wage workers do all the tasks that allow higher wage workers to concentrate on their tasks.
 
2011-06-06 08:26:45 AM  
"We have a special relationship with America. That means we share intelligence. Which is bad, because we end up with a deficit." - Marcus Brigstocke
 
2011-06-06 08:27:41 AM  

ronaprhys: Headso: As someone who used to work and still volunteers on occasion at an afterschool program that has mostly poor children I can tell you, you may not know this, but even poor children have grandparents and as granparents do, they buy their grandkids stuff. But it's probably easier just to assume every xbox was bought with foodstamps.

They also all buy them pick-up trucks? Cigarettes? Lottery tickets?


yes, every poor person has a pick up truck and smokes and buys lotto tickets too, you might as well believe that also along with the xbox thing.
 
2011-06-06 08:29:29 AM  

Headso: They might not be the bright enough and ambitious enough and have enough self control to parlay 7 bucks an hour to more wealth. That does not mean there is something wrong with them nor does it mean they are a not valuable member of society. Low wage workers do all the tasks that allow higher wage workers to concentrate on their tasks.


Did I ever say they weren't valuable members of society? If so, quote that. If not, quit putting words into my mouth.

I will, however, clarify one point. I'm referring to someone earning minimum wage and complaining about it. If they're happy with doing just that, there might not be something wrong with them. However, if one is still at minimum wage after 20 years, complaining about the man keeping them down, and so forth - there's something wrong with them. It could be decision-making skills, bad past, something mental, chemical-dependence, who knows - but something definitely exists.
 
2011-06-06 08:29:35 AM  

ronaprhys: Aidan: I also read Scratch Beginnings which is intended to be a bit of a rebuttal to Nickle and Dimed. All it actually does is reinforce the argument, but I suppose it depends on how you look at it. :)

I'm not sure how reading a book where a person managed to drastically improve their circumstances helps to support the position that it's damned near impossible to live/get ahead on minimum wage. I'd like to hear your view of this (no snark, genuinely interested).


Certainly! Glad you asked. :)

First of all, I quite liked the book. Don't get me wrong. Here's what *I* took away from it.

YES, you can improve your lot in life!
IF... You are willing to give up a few things. 1. You MUST be in a city area. City transportation >> car. That is a huge chunk of money. 2. You MUST drop to BELOW what you can afford to maintain. He went to a shelter, he did not attempt to even try living on his "own" at first. This was a VERY smart move on his part. Even with sharing an appt, the other author (Barbara Ehrenreich) simply was living way above her means.

1+2 = 3. Accept lack of personal security. This is less of an issue for a man, especially a young man. Women tend to value security much higher and that results in higher living expenses. I'm not saying one was safer than the other. I won't make that judgment. I will say there's a perception there. There's also health considerations. She was far more concerned about the effects on her long-term health. She was also about 3 times his age. Again, this can be due to age and/or gender perceptions of the values of certain things. I'm not judging that either, just pointing it out.

4. You will be doing hard labor. Hard, physical labor. This is obviously easier for a guy. Both what he did (moving company was one of his better jobs, IIRC?) and what she did (the maid service comes to mind) were physically demanding in one way or another. There's a danger of injury in either one that'll fark up your chances. Again, depending on gender, age, health history, and just plain luck, this is either not important to a person, or VERY important. I will not wuss out and claim he was lucky. He was a smart young man and probably was pretty careful with his body.

5. The most important one that made me close the book and laugh came in the epilogue when his mother got sick and he got a shiatty job at the airport moving carts. What that said to me is thus:

Caveat: YES, you can improve your lot in life! IF nothing else is more important!

Basically he ended up where Barbara was (although with a FAR better base because of his earlier unaffected choices!). Not because of choices HE made, but because something important - family - LIMITED the choices he COULD make.

So... There ya go. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to hop up on my soapbox on that one. No one else except my husband has read either book so I can't hold forth much on my opinions. :P
 
2011-06-06 08:41:07 AM  

Headso: ronaprhys: Headso: As someone who used to work and still volunteers on occasion at an afterschool program that has mostly poor children I can tell you, you may not know this, but even poor children have grandparents and as granparents do, they buy their grandkids stuff. But it's probably easier just to assume every xbox was bought with foodstamps.

They also all buy them pick-up trucks? Cigarettes? Lottery tickets?

yes, every poor person has a pick up truck and smokes and buys lotto tickets too, you might as well believe that also along with the xbox thing.


i think youre kind of missing the point and being sorta straw man-y with your ciriticism of dittyboppers post, which was good. Attack the specific examples all you want, but there is some truth to the point made:

alot of poor folks (and this was echoed by other posts as well) dont seem to know any different, expect any diffeernt, or really know how to grow wealth. They eke out a living, and then if they suffer a windfall in the form of an inheritance or whatever it pays off the new car or pays down the cc which then gets charged back up... being poor, indeed like being rich, or id argue, even being happy, is a habit. and habits are hard to break.

with the amount of barriers we are putting in front of poor people its no wonder so many of them stay that way. education and health care are getting more and more out of reach, fewer jobs with benefits, etc etc.. its easier to stay in the zone youre used to, even if its sucky.

my mom certainly falls into this category. she's had a job at a lower middle class range her whole career and has always used her credit cards to supplement her income, meaning shes always drowning in cc debt. a few times she got a chunk of money from a dead relative and she just pays down the principle...and carrys on living how she did before. Does she invest that money into something, grow the money, put it somewhere where it will grow? no she doesnt know how to do that at all. and i bet millions of the working poor and lower middle classes are exactly the same damn way.
 
2011-06-06 08:41:52 AM  

ronaprhys: Did I ever say they weren't valuable members of society? If so, quote that. If not, quit putting words into my mouth.


Me making an assertion is not putting words in your mouth, stop being a whiny victim, it's the worst of the "conservative" traits.

ronaprhys: f one is still at minimum wage after 20 years, complaining about the man keeping them down, and so forth - there's something wrong with them.


People often complain about their predicaments and blame others for their situation, that is not a symptom of being poor.
 
2011-06-06 08:43:37 AM  

Ender's: Meh. At least the guy trying to scrape by isn't a loser like the dude on unemployment is.


Just FYI, unemployment can only be obtained if a person has had a job for a specific length of time. You can't just walk down to the unemployment office if you've been a slacker for years and tell them to give you unemployment. You must have been productive for a length of time to get it in the first place and it is intended to only be a bridge to assist you between jobs. That's why they call it unemployment insurance.

Unemployment ≠ welfare
 
2011-06-06 08:43:43 AM  

bunner: Poor man wanna be rich
Rich man wanna be king
The king ain't satisfied till he runs everything
I'm gonna go out tonight
I'm gonna find out what I got


Oh yeah, well:

Tiger got to hunt,
bird got to fly;
Man got to sit and wonder 'why, why, why?'
Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
Man got to tell himself he understand.
 
2011-06-06 08:44:21 AM  

Headso: yes, every poor person has a pick up truck and smokes and buys lotto tickets too, you might as well believe that also along with the xbox thing.


As someone who grew up poor (parents in minimum- wage jobs etc.) and even today knows a few poor people, I can tell you that the Xbox/smoking thing is generally accurate. "Poor" in Western terms is relative, and it does not equate to "no money". Anyway, working- class people like to enjoy themselves just as anybody else does. We didn't always have enough food growing up, but the goddamn cable bill was always paid on time.
 
2011-06-06 08:46:55 AM  

Aidan:

Certainly! Glad you asked. :)

First of all, I quite liked the book. Don't get me wrong. Here's what *I* took away from it.

YES, you can improve your lot in life!
IF... You are willing to give up a few things. 1. You MUST be in a city area. City transportation >> car. That is a huge chunk of money. 2. You MUST drop to BELOW what you can afford to maintain. He went to a shelter, he did not attempt to even try living on his "own" at first. This was a VERY smart move on his part. Even with sharing an appt, the other author (Barbara Ehrenreich) simply was living way above her means.

1+2 = 3. Accept lack of personal security. This is less of an issue for a man, especially a young man. Women tend to value security much higher and that results in higher living expenses. I'm not saying one was safer than the other. I won't make that judgment. I will say there's a perception there. There's also health considerations. She was far more concerned about the effects on her long-term health. She was also about 3 times his age. Again, this can be due to age and/or gender perceptions of the values of certain things. I'm not judging that either, just pointing it out.

4. You will be doing hard labor. Hard, physical labor. This is obviously easier for a guy. Both what he did (moving company was one of his better jobs, IIRC?) and what she did (the maid service comes to mind) were physically demanding in one way or another. There's a danger of injury in either one that'll fark up your chances. Again, depending on gender, age, health history, and just plain luck, this is either not important to a person, or VERY important. I will not wuss out and claim he was lucky. He was a smart young man and probably was pretty careful with his body.

5. The most important one that made me close the book and laugh came in the epilogue when his mother got sick and he got a shiatty job at the airport moving carts. What that said to me is thus:

Caveat: YES, you can improve your lot in life! IF nothing else is more important!

Basically he ended up where Barbara was (although with a FAR better base because of his earlier unaffected choices!). Not because of choices HE made, but because something important - family - LIMITED the choices he COULD make.

So... There ya go. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to hop up on my soapbox on that one. No one else except my husband has read either book so I can't hold forth much on my opinions. :P


That'd be my actual opinion, too. While I didn't live in a shelter, right out of HS I was kicked out/left the house (mutual). I got an apartment with a buddy of mine (bad area of town), delivered newspapers 6 days a week and worked as a delivery guy/errand boy for a church. After that I moved up to $4.50/hour working in a plastics factory (3rd shift). Thought I was in the money, then. It was during that when I realized that working hourly jobs like this was a long path to nowhere so I made the choices (and subsequent sacrifices) to get out of that grind. I'm in a different grind now (corporate drone), but I've got an office and a nice salary.
 
2011-06-06 08:47:02 AM  

Headso: dittybopper: I've dealt with a *LOT* of single mothers, etc. scraping by on minimum wage jobs (if they are working at all). I don't know how many times I dropped a foster kid off for a parental visit and seen a crappy apartment with dirty dishes in the sink, clothes on the floor, but a new flatscreen TV, an Xbox360 or Wii, and cable or a dish

As someone who used to work and still volunteers on occasion at an afterschool program that has mostly poor children I can tell you, you may not know this, but even poor children have grandparents and as granparents do, they buy their grandkids stuff. But it's probably easier just to assume every xbox was bought with foodstamps.


Most of the time, the poverty runs through the family. Parents are poor, grandparents are poor, etc.

Also, that still doesn't explain the cigarettes and beer, or the lottery tickets. Also, a dish network subscription, or cable, is an ongoing expense, not a single purchase.
 
2011-06-06 08:48:01 AM  

dittybopper: I'm pretty sure I could make a lot more money than I am making now. But I'm in the same socioeconomic class as my parents, and it's my comfort zone. If I were more ambitious, I know I could make more money.
My brother-in-law is like that, and he's done quite well for himself, but I just don't have it in me, and I suspect that neither do most people. So, the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.


No reason you couldn't make that extra money, continue to live like you do now, and invest the surplus. You might be able to retire young enough to enjoy that nest egg, rather than having to spend it on medical care.
 
2011-06-06 08:50:21 AM  

ronaprhys: That'd be my actual opinion, too. While I didn't live in a shelter, right out of HS I was kicked out/left the house (mutual). I got an apartment with a buddy of mine (bad area of town), delivered newspapers 6 days a week and worked as a delivery guy/errand boy for a church.


so you worked as a male prostitute?

/i keeeeed
//cool story bro, nice to hear you made it through.
 
2011-06-06 08:50:24 AM  

Father_Jack: with the amount of barriers we are putting in front of poor people its no wonder so many of them stay that way. education and health care are getting more and more out of reach, fewer jobs with benefits, etc etc.. its easier to stay in the zone youre used to, even if its sucky.


I don't see anything wrong with the poor that are not super motivated and intelligent and lucky "staying in their zone". As a nation we need those types of laborers. I see a problem with advocating for cuts in programs or changes in economic policy that takes money out of their hands. Especially when the motivator is spite based on anecdotes.
 
2011-06-06 08:52:12 AM  

Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?


The same freaken way I did. YOu drag your tired arse to school at night after work, paid for with loans, and get a meaningful education that gives you a better chance at better employment...instead of going home and drinking your night away.

Worked in an unairconditioned warehouse in Louisiana, drug my sweaty arse to school every night, went home wiped out to my pregnant wife in our one bedroom apartment. Repeat for several years. Bachelors of Science in CIS earned. Earn slightly more money, rent small house...saved and bought a small house....went back to school at night for my MBA ...again just for the chance to do better. Earned MBA from top 50 school in New Orleans, at night, ....and one of my clients ends up hiring me to run there whole business at 6 figures. What am I doing with this money? paying down bills and student loans...no new cars, no new house....maybe someday but not now.

FARK YOU if you think I should just turn over my families new check considering how hard I worked to get here. Unless you carried a gun in defense of this country (military) or you have a permanent disability, FARK OFF.
 
2011-06-06 08:52:13 AM  
'Are there no prisons?...
And the Union workhouses. Are they still in operation?'
I was afraid that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,
I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned-they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there.'

'Many can't go there; and many would rather die.'

'If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
 
2011-06-06 08:52:40 AM  

FabulousFreep: bunner: Wal Mart. Offering you 1970's prices so you can survive on our 1970's wages.®

"Hey, I got an idea.. let's find out what people are buying, make knockoffs of it in China for pennies on the dollar and flood the market, here with a bunch of big box stores. We buy in Yuan, we get paid in Dollars. I mean, who the f*ck needs the FOREX?"

"You think people will put up with that?"

"Sure, just sell them cheap, sh*tty food, too."

Yeah hows that Most favored nation trade agreement working out for ya ?
Clinton wasn't it? Isn't that who china bought an election for?

NAFTA also, great plan there good thing every one is sticking to the agreements on that one or we would be screwed ... oh wait they aren't are they. Have the Repubs to thank for that one i think. Bush specifically.


Actually, Clinton did NAFTA also. 1994

The problem with NAFTA isn't free trade. The problem is that Mexico has no controls on how products are manufactured. Meanwhile, the U.S. has volumes of regulations on every industry, every product, every employee/employer relationship. They all cost money.

I've worked with companies making the decision to keep a manufacturing job here or move it to Mexico, China, India, even Australia on one case. The logistical costs skyrocket. At-risk inventory costs skyrocket. Quality costs skyrocket while quality usually plummets. But companies have to look at the total cost of production. They don't care what they pay an employee, they have to worry about what it costs to employ them.

When, as in one example, it's going to cost several hundred thousand dollars to upgrade a piece of equipment in a foundry to satisfy the EPA while the equipment in Mexico is subject to no such costs, the job is going to Mexico. In spite of the fact that the equipment is operating here, close to a residential neighborhood, there are no noxious emissions, no particulate matter covering nearby cars and homes, and not a single complaint. There were a lot of complaints when those 20 jobs were no longer available. But when we sat down with community leaders and explained the dollars and cents. they understood. Those were jobs that paid around $20/hour. Fringe benefits plus government regs drove the cost of employment to around $50/hour. Comparatively, we could afford to pay that even though labor cost in Mexico was less than $20/day. All the other logistical costs that were added when the job moved ate up the difference. The tipping point was amount of money it would cost to upgrade equipment that didn't need upgrading other than an EPA mandate.

Companies will pay what they need to pay in order to get the work done. When there are a dozen illegal immigrants willing to work for less than minimum wage, that's what employers will pay. Until there are no more illegal immigrants available or until the cost of employing them exceeds any benefit. If a company knew that all of its assets would be seized and sold at absolute auction with the proceeds going first to creditors and then directly to the government for hiring illegals, we wouldn't have a problem. Likewise, if illegals knew that there were absolutely no jobs available to them and no benefits available to them, we wouldn't have a problem.

Minimum wage is only paid when there is a surplus of labor. Illegal immigrants create a surplus of labor.

Excessive regulation increases the cost of production; high cost of production moves jobs overseas, jobs overseas mean surplus labor here, means lower wages here.
 
2011-06-06 08:56:12 AM  

Headso: ronaprhys: People who stay at the minimum wage level for 20 years have something wrong with them.

They might not be the bright enough and ambitious enough and have enough self control to parlay 7 bucks an hour to more wealth. That does not mean there is something wrong with them nor does it mean they are a not valuable member of society. Low wage workers do all the tasks that allow higher wage workers to concentrate on their tasks.


Well said. I didn't mean to imply that people who are stuck in minimum wage jobs necessarily have something *WRONG* with them, just that if they want something more they can have it, they just have to be willing to work for it.
 
2011-06-06 08:56:24 AM  
In grand stereotypes...

People who have jobs should vote Democrat, in their own interests.

People who make jobs should vote Republican, in their own defense.
 
2011-06-06 08:56:33 AM  

dittybopper: Headso: dittybopper: I've dealt with a *LOT* of single mothers, etc. scraping by on minimum wage jobs (if they are working at all). I don't know how many times I dropped a foster kid off for a parental visit and seen a crappy apartment with dirty dishes in the sink, clothes on the floor, but a new flatscreen TV, an Xbox360 or Wii, and cable or a dish

As someone who used to work and still volunteers on occasion at an afterschool program that has mostly poor children I can tell you, you may not know this, but even poor children have grandparents and as granparents do, they buy their grandkids stuff. But it's probably easier just to assume every xbox was bought with foodstamps.

Most of the time, the poverty runs through the family. Parents are poor, grandparents are poor, etc.

Also, that still doesn't explain the cigarettes and beer, or the lottery tickets. Also, a dish network subscription, or cable, is an ongoing expense, not a single purchase.


point being, every time you see some perceived luxury in the time you are dropping a kid off you are blaming the single mother for bad choices.
 
2011-06-06 08:59:49 AM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.



Maybe its that whole "Punnishing success" thing the Dems spout. Jealousy is most unbecoming.
 
2011-06-06 09:00:29 AM  

madcat2c: Weaver95: slayer199: Learn a skill, get an education, and stop relying on minimum wage to be a living wage.

And just how are you supposed to 'get an education' when you've got no money, no college fund and no options?

The same freaken way I did. YOu drag your tired arse to school at night after work, paid for with loans, and get a meaningful education that gives you a better chance at better employment...instead of going home and drinking your night away.


Or you could do what I did: Sign up and serve Uncle Sam for a few years, and get the college benefits. That way you can save up for the education *AND* drink the night away, so long as you were bright-eyed and bushy-tailed for formation at 0700.
 
2011-06-06 09:00:49 AM  

Fail in Human Form:

It's the ruthless capitalists time to shine right now. In my opinion, humanity will look back on the conservative capitalist the same way we currently look back on southern segregationists. With derision for their beliefs and disgust for the people who held them.

/Not really all that helpful in the here and now though


Yeah, i think that will be one variable in what caused economic collapse.

I was reading an article that was discussing how the US could compete with China in manufacturing. The numbers just don't add up. The Chinese standard of living and cost of labor would have to rise dramatically to even come close. We still manufacture more high tech stuff but it's only a matter of time before they become the next Japan and start producing cars, planes and other high value items for pennies on the dollar.


We would have to build high tech factories that depend on robotics instead of humans to just to compete with them. And that still means less jobs. Sooner or later high tech robotics will replace humans in pretty much every field imaginable anyway. What will we do when most of our population becomes unemployable?

So I think we need a new system, a new way at looking at our consumer based society before everything turns to shiat.
 
2011-06-06 09:01:08 AM  
Weaver95 2011-06-05 06:37:29 PM

what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


Because there are people in the world who still believe you should have to work for what you get.

I worked many years for Pizza Hut, first as a line cook, then phones and finally shift management. Then the extra money I had from my $8.55/hr job I put towards community college classes. When my grades were high enough, I got excepted into George Mason University. I took out student loans and worked 2-3 jobs a semester. With the great decision of getting a BA in Sociology my job perspectives were dim. So I got out with a job making $14 an hour with no benefits and decided to go back to school, working and schooling for two years until I was accepted into a MA program in Economics. After three years of working and schooling for 60 hours a week, I finally got a break to work for an Economic research team in DC, for about $43,000 a year. Seeing that the programmers were making way more than I was, I did another 2-3 years of database administration and programming courses. And now ten years later, living in the expensive Fairfax County Virginia making $53,000 a year, I own (paying off) my condo and am almost done paying off student loans. I did all this as a high school drop out with 2 felonies from my banging days. So yes, some of us that dont make $250,000 a year still think that people should have to earn their own way through life and let the government stay out of our lives. Also, dont have kids if you can't afford them.
 
2011-06-06 09:01:17 AM  
It's not the useful sort of regulation, though, is it?

I'm all for keeping America clean and unpolluted for the precious babies and chilllldrreeeennnnns.. but we're not. We're primping the joint for a fire sale.

"Buy American property! Lush acreage! Fresh air! Clean food supplies!" Why do you think that bankers are turning every fu*king piece of land they can get their hands on and the houses on it into something they can fit into their pockets. It's about the only think they ARE playing long ball on, but you ain't invited to the game. Get ready for America, the Resort Area, V.1.1 Beta

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson
 
2011-06-06 09:01:29 AM  

Headso: Me making an assertion is not putting words in your mouth, stop being a whiny victim, it's the worst of the "conservative" traits.


You stated it as something I said, which I clearly didn't. You did so to set up my position as something easier to defeat. Stop straw-manning, it's the worst of the liberal traits.

There - now we've both traded tit for tat. Can we actually move on and discuss this like adults or are you going to persist with nonsense?

People often complain about their predicaments and blame others for their situation, that is not a symptom of being poor.

No on argues this. However, that does nothing to disprove my point. Do you have anything actual to back up the point that it's anything other than personal failings keeping those that are unhappy with their lives at minimum wage?
 
2011-06-06 09:05:29 AM  

madcat2c: .went back to school at night for my MBA .


I am always curious when I read these "I did it" screeds if the people writing them have such low self esteem that they believe their accomplishments could also be made by the semi-retarded guy who sweeps the factory floor or are they so narcissistic they just can't see life from another's perspective?
 
2011-06-06 09:09:45 AM  

Joe Blowme: Maybe its it's that whole "Punnishing Punishing success" thing the Dems spout. Jealousy is most unbecoming.


A third grade reading level is most unbecoming.
 
2011-06-06 09:13:32 AM  

Headso: dittybopper: Headso: dittybopper: I've dealt with a *LOT* of single mothers, etc. scraping by on minimum wage jobs (if they are working at all). I don't know how many times I dropped a foster kid off for a parental visit and seen a crappy apartment with dirty dishes in the sink, clothes on the floor, but a new flatscreen TV, an Xbox360 or Wii, and cable or a dish

As someone who used to work and still volunteers on occasion at an afterschool program that has mostly poor children I can tell you, you may not know this, but even poor children have grandparents and as granparents do, they buy their grandkids stuff. But it's probably easier just to assume every xbox was bought with foodstamps.

Most of the time, the poverty runs through the family. Parents are poor, grandparents are poor, etc.

Also, that still doesn't explain the cigarettes and beer, or the lottery tickets. Also, a dish network subscription, or cable, is an ongoing expense, not a single purchase.

point being, every time you see some perceived luxury in the time you are dropping a kid off you are blaming the single mother for bad choices.


To a large degree, yes. Think about it: If they didn't make poor life choices to begin with, it's unlikely that their children would be in foster care. Middle and upper income people generally don't get their children taken away by Child Protective Services.
 
2011-06-06 09:14:03 AM  
derpdeederp:


No one in the world ever gets what they want and that is beautiful.
Everybody dies frustrated and sad and that is beautiful.
 
2011-06-06 09:14:51 AM  

ronaprhys: Do you have anything actual to back up the point that it's anything other than personal failings keeping those that are unhappy with their lives at minimum wage?


No, of course everyone who is poor never had some bad luck in life or health problems that restrict their ability to earn money, of course it's silly to believe that anyone who is poor more than a few years is at fault for their situation and has no right to complain.
 
2011-06-06 09:16:47 AM  

Headso: madcat2c: .went back to school at night for my MBA .

I am always curious when I read these "I did it" screeds if the people writing them have such low self esteem that they believe their accomplishments could also be made by the semi-retarded guy who sweeps the factory floor or are they so narcissistic they just can't see life from another's perspective?


Lesson #1: Everyone perceives others in relation to themselves. Short version: Everyone thinks everyone else is just like them.

I'm not being insulting, btw. I'm still trying to internalize this lesson, myself. :)

Lesson #1 in practice: Whatever person X is accusing YOU of is what THEY would do in your circumstances.
 
2011-06-06 09:17:50 AM  

dittybopper: Middle and upper income people generally don't get their children taken away by Child Protective Services.


And, of course, they live in nice houses with thick walls that are detached from other homes so when they get sh*tfaced and break stuff and beat their kids in ager, nobody can hear.

Circumstance is a b*tch.

Ask any poor person.

/how, not where you live is what gives you quality of life.
 
2011-06-06 09:19:02 AM  

Ablejack: No one in the world ever gets what they want and that is beautiful.
Everybody dies frustrated and sad and that is beautiful.


Saying Deputy Dawg dog a ding dang depadepa Deputy Dawg dog a ding dang depadepa
 
2011-06-06 09:19:13 AM  

Headso:
I am always curious when I read these "I did it" screeds if the people writing them have such low self esteem that they believe their accomplishments could also be made by the semi-retarded guy who sweeps the factory floor or are they so narcissistic they just can't see life from another's perspective?


It's not even a matter of intelligence, really. My father was a ridiculously intelligent man, especially considering he grew up in a Dickensian Glasgow slum (whole family in one room, one toilet for six families etc.). But he died still doing the same kind of ill-paid kitchen work that he hated, even though he had been a trained chef in the old country. He simply lacked ambition, discipline, and optimism, because these aren't virtues that are easy to acquire when you're raised in poverty.
 
2011-06-06 09:22:14 AM  

dittybopper: Think about it: If they didn't make poor life choices to begin with, it's unlikely that their children would be in foster care.


which means they couldn't have a relative that gives their kid something nice, or something.

dittybopper: Middle and upper income people generally don't get their children taken away by Child Protective Services.


We have a safety net of family with the means to pick up slack for the bad choices of our close family.
 
2011-06-06 09:22:40 AM  

Aidan: Lesson #1: Everyone perceives others in relation to themselves. Short version: Everyone thinks everyone else is just like them.

I'm not being insulting, btw. I'm still trying to internalize this lesson, myself. :)

Lesson #1 in practice: Whatever person X is accusing YOU of is what THEY would do in your circumstances.


you see this alot.

"Anyone who has more than me is a greedy bastard who got lucky or married into it or somehow screwed other people over. anyone who has less than me is a lazy good for nothing, i got mine, he can get his too."


not entirely untrue, mind you, but it sure makes for a lot of angry white peopel who dont understand the challenges or class race or disparate incomes of ones parents.
 
2011-06-06 09:24:40 AM  

alltandubh: Headso:
I am always curious when I read these "I did it" screeds if the people writing them have such low self esteem that they believe their accomplishments could also be made by the semi-retarded guy who sweeps the factory floor or are they so narcissistic they just can't see life from another's perspective?

It's not even a matter of intelligence, really. My father was a ridiculously intelligent man, especially considering he grew up in a Dickensian Glasgow slum (whole family in one room, one toilet for six families etc.). But he died still doing the same kind of ill-paid kitchen work that he hated, even though he had been a trained chef in the old country. He simply lacked ambition, discipline, and optimism, because these aren't virtues that are easy to acquire when you're raised in poverty.


isnt dickensonian glasgow slum sort of redundant?
 
2011-06-06 09:27:21 AM  
ITT: Whining.
 
2011-06-06 09:27:27 AM  
The problem is the economy is a big pyramid, and there is NO WAY for everyone at the bottom, regardless of their abilities, skills, education or ambition, to "move up."

This is where the whole "bootstrap" thing fails. Everyone who successfully uses their bootstraps eliminates the ability of a half dozen others (at the minimum) to use their own bootstraps successfully.

Those of you who have jobs, go to your boss and ask him or her what you can do to get their position.

Then come back next week to this thread and report whether you were laughed at, reprimanded, fired or actually given reasonable advice on career advancement.

Some bosses will actually be helpful, but the corporate world is a zero-sum game, and in fact a subzero-sum game, since eliminating existing positions is a goal of many corporations. People are expenses and liabilities on the company ledger. You always have the "golden child" of the office, the superstar, who is often kept around to give everyone else hope, but in my experience usually that person is being given a LOT of "extra help" behind the scenes to force that person into superstar status. It's not always the case. But I've also seen a lot of them self-destruct quickly once on their own because they bought into their own hype.

Personally, I don't think that the problems in the US are fixable. I see no possible solution that would not create an all-out civil war if put into action, and not because of the old "haves vs have nots." It would be the "have nots vs the have nots" because of the stupid, blind ideology that is clung to by people desperate to justify their poverty. For example, when people living on $20K a year blast a teacher making $40K a year with a master's degree for "making too much." Seriously? Stop being satisfied with $20K a year. Stop meekly accepting the crumbs that are given by institutional shareholders-- because they are really the ones controlling things. The same pension funds etc that the middle class relies on are the same funds ruining their prospects of stability. But unless we are willing to change the laws severely restricting shareholder rights and executive compensation, the system won't change. And out of sheer stupidity, the underclasses will fight to the death to protect the system that screws them.
 
2011-06-06 09:29:39 AM  

dittybopper: Middle and upper income people generally don't get their children taken away by Child Protective Services.


Social workers are generally drawn from the middle class, so there can be an element of class bias in their assessment of children's living situations. A couple of years ago I was speaking to an acquaintance of mine who was a social worker on the verge of retirement; her opinion was that the new generation of workers were more dogmatic and narrow- minded, and that they had a tendency to mistake the ordinary messiness of poverty for actual neglect or abuse. In the vast majority of situations children are better off with their parents, even when they are poor.
 
2011-06-06 09:33:59 AM  

BolloxReader: The problem is the economy is a big pyramid


Is it?
 
2011-06-06 09:35:17 AM  

BolloxReader: This is where the whole "bootstrap" thing fails. Everyone who successfully uses their bootstraps eliminates the ability of a half dozen others (at the minimum) to use their own bootstraps successfully.


i disagree with this.

why is getting an education taking from 6 other people?

BolloxReader: And out of sheer stupidity, the underclasses will fight to the death to protect the system that screws them.


this however is totally true.

the republican hijacking of significant chunks of the electorate to vote against their own self interests based on the fear of the gay married suicide bomber is really their best play in ages.

wisconsin was a great example. the WI electorate votes in a republican gov because theyre impatient with the fact that obama's administration cant undo 8 years of mismanagement in 2, and then the republican guy does exactly what republicans do: goes after the unions, slashes programs etc, and everyone protests. WTF.
 
2011-06-06 09:36:02 AM  

Father_Jack:
isnt dickensonian glasgow slum sort of redundant?


Hmm, point taken. But the really Dickensian ones were the old Victorian tenements they ended up destroying in the 1960s, when they shuffled all the proles over to tower blocks and "modern" estates like Drumchapel.
 
2011-06-06 09:37:07 AM  

BolloxReader: It would be the "have nots vs the have nots"


you mean, like now?

because of the stupid, blind ideology propaganda that is clung to foisted off on people desperate to justify their poverty.

Somehow this makes mo' sense.
 
2011-06-06 09:40:39 AM  
Are there no work farms?
 
2011-06-06 09:41:16 AM  

bunner: dittybopper: Middle and upper income people generally don't get their children taken away by Child Protective Services.

And, of course, they live in nice houses with thick walls that are detached from other homes so when they get sh*tfaced and break stuff and beat their kids in ager, nobody can hear.


Teachers and other mandatory reporters can still see the bruises.

Circumstance is a b*tch.

Ask any poor person.

/how, not where you live is what gives you quality of life.


Think about this: Successful people rarely remain that way with significant personality defects that lead them to abuse or neglect their children. Things like drug abuse and alcoholism tend to hold you back from achieving.

I've been poor and unemployed. Lived in a crappy $300/month apartment in a shiat town. Usually late on the rent. I mostly worked minimum wage jobs when I could get work. Drove crap $500 cars that I would buy and run until they needed a significant repair. But I also got an education while I was doing that, and I worked at making a better future for myself. I was in my early to mid 20's.

I had neighbors in their 50's in my same circumstances. Both alcoholics, he was in and out of jail, mostly for petty crap like stealing beer and cigarettes, and I believe the wife once got fired from her minimum wage job at a convenience store because she was caught taking beer and cigarettes. They pissed their money away, while my (then) girlfriend and I saved and worked when we could, and went to school. Now in our 40's, we are doing much better then our neighbors did back then, simply because we made better life choices.
 
2011-06-06 09:44:02 AM  

vudukungfu: Are there no work farms?


they're getting pirvatized so that corporations can get in on the incarceration industry, too. We still pay them 40k per prisoner to keep them in concrete toilets and feed them peanut butter, but whatever foreced labor they do is now billed to the state, too and they keep that. Find a vein that hasn't been tapped and stick a needle in it. It's the American way. Or at least it seems to be, lately. Whoever the f*ck though that installing 19th c. England here, with a dash of Soviet Russia, was a good idea should be shot, though.
 
2011-06-06 09:44:06 AM  

FredaDeStilleto: So, what happens is the burden of providing for the working poor is shifted from the employer to the state. What's wrong with this picture?


PRIVATIZE WELFARE NOW!
 
2011-06-06 09:45:27 AM  

derpdeederp: Seeing that the programmers were making way more than I was, I did another 2-3 years of database administration and programming courses. And now ten years later, living in the expensive Fairfax County Virginia making $53,000 a year, .


You're a DBA with two degrees and ten years experience, working in Fairfax for $53,000/year? What's wrong with you?
 
2011-06-06 09:46:04 AM  
"Social programs are an insurance policy against revolution."

No they aren't, they are a vote-buying tactic by a certain political party. Always were.
 
2011-06-06 09:50:20 AM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


If you are young and republican you have no heart. If you are old and democrat you have no brain.
 
2011-06-06 09:51:10 AM  

Ludendorff's Ghost: "Social programs are an insurance policy against revolution."

No they aren't, they are a vote-buying tactic by a certain political party. Always were.


Yup s'em dang libatards and kneegrahs and muzlims and communiss and and.. terrists and libtards given all the money away!

Dude?

I hate to break it to you but that whole dog and pony show and the people who can't wait to pick up their custom tailored flag and yell the loudest is the crux of the problem.

Honest.
 
2011-06-06 09:52:22 AM  
My plan was to start having kids right away and let the job/income thing work itself out later.
 
2011-06-06 09:52:38 AM  

Headso: No, of course everyone who is poor never had some bad luck in life or health problems that restrict their ability to earn money, of course it's silly to believe that anyone who is poor more than a few years is at fault for their situation and has no right to complain.


So, nothing. But, again, you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say anything about poor. I said something about minimum wage. If you do the Venn, you'll see that they're aren't 1:1.

BolloxReader: The problem is the economy is a big pyramid, and there is NO WAY for everyone at the bottom, regardless of their abilities, skills, education or ambition, to "move up."


There absolutely is a way for everyone to move up, just not for everyone to be at the top.

This is where the whole "bootstrap" thing fails. Everyone who successfully uses their bootstraps eliminates the ability of a half dozen others (at the minimum) to use their own bootstraps successfully.

Those of you who have jobs, go to your boss and ask him or her what you can do to get their position.

Then come back next week to this thread and report whether you were laughed at, reprimanded, fired or actually given reasonable advice on career advancement.


No, this isn't. Again, the point isn't to get to the top - it's to get to a point where one is living what they consider to be a comfortable life where they can provide for children (if they elect to have them), weather financial storms, etc. With planning, hard work, and scrimping it's not that difficult to get there.

As for the challenge, yeah - I got good advice from my last boss. In fact, I'm now in a lateral position to him. If the current boss isn't willing to give good advice, keep working hard and start looking elsewhere.

Some bosses will actually be helpful, but the corporate world is a zero-sum game, and in fact a subzero-sum game, since eliminating existing positions is a goal of many corporations. People are expenses and liabilities on the company ledger. You always have the "golden child" of the office, the superstar, who is often kept around to give everyone else hope, but in my experience usually that person is being given a LOT of "extra help" behind the scenes to force that person into superstar status. It's not always the case. But I've also seen a lot of them self-destruct quickly once on their own because they bought into their own hype.

Not necessarily. Creating more business means more profit, which in turn leads to new jobs. It's not zero sum unless the business is making less profit.

Personally, I don't think that the problems in the US are fixable. I see no possible solution that would not create an all-out civil war if put into action, and not because of the old "haves vs have nots." It would be the "have nots vs the have nots" because of the stupid, blind ideology that is clung to by people desperate to justify their poverty. For example, when people living on $20K a year blast a teacher making $40K a year with a master's degree for "making too much." Seriously? Stop being satisfied with $20K a year. Stop meekly accepting the crumbs that are given by institutional shareholders-- because they are really the ones controlling things. The same pension funds etc that the middle class relies on are the same funds ruining their prospects of stability. But unless we are willing to change the laws severely restricting shareholder rights and executive compensation, the system won't change. And out of sheer stupidity, the underclasses will fight to the death to protect the system that screws them.

This situation has existed, to one extent or another, for quite some time. Remember the 70s?
 
2011-06-06 09:52:41 AM  

Linoleum_Blownapart: derpdeederp: Seeing that the programmers were making way more than I was, I did another 2-3 years of database administration and programming courses. And now ten years later, living in the expensive Fairfax County Virginia making $53,000 a year, .

You're a DBA with two degrees and ten years experience, working in Fairfax for $53,000/year? What's wrong with you?


not sure. but whatever it is, its no small thing.

those guys got 120k in Los Angeles.
 
2011-06-06 09:53:04 AM  
Well, to be fair, the people selling flags and giving welfare to the filthy rich are part of the problem, too but don't worry. That trickles down!

www.x-entertainment.com
 
2011-06-06 09:53:15 AM  

RandomAxe: Remember Joe the Plumber? A living archetype of Fooling Yourself right-wingers. Joe would have paid higher taxes under McCain, but he planned to vote for McCain because he planned to be a millionaire. He had no actual plan or means to become a millionaire. He just figured if he hung around the club long enough and sucked up hard enough, surely they'd give him an honorary membership.


Do you really think you are authorized to speak on Joe's behalf? I don't. You are making shiat up to fit your preexisting views.
 
2011-06-06 09:54:07 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Joe Blowme: Maybe its it's that whole "Punnishing Punishing success" thing the Dems spout. Jealousy is most unbecoming.

A third grade reading level is most unbecoming.


And yet i have a much better job than you, a spelling nazi on the intarwebs. Maybe that is why you fail, more worried about my lack of spellchecker instead of the point which keeps you in your moms basement.

/i was told there would be no test
 
2011-06-06 09:56:03 AM  

alltandubh: dittybopper: Middle and upper income people generally don't get their children taken away by Child Protective Services.

Social workers are generally drawn from the middle class, so there can be an element of class bias in their assessment of children's living situations. A couple of years ago I was speaking to an acquaintance of mine who was a social worker on the verge of retirement; her opinion was that the new generation of workers were more dogmatic and narrow- minded, and that they had a tendency to mistake the ordinary messiness of poverty for actual neglect or abuse. In the vast majority of situations children are better off with their parents, even when they are poor.


In those circumstances, and it does on occasion happen, generally get their children back fairly quickly.

For instance, we got a child placed into our car on suspicion of abuse. A relative had reported the mother going out to a party, and seeing the toddler with bruises. CPS visited based upon the allegation, noted the bruises, and yanked the kid out of the home and placed him with us.

After the first hour or so, we knew why he had the bruises: The kid was a natural daredevil. He liked to climb up on furniture and jump off, that sort of thing, and he had two speeds: Stop, and full speed ahead. The kind of kid who is going to grow up to be a natural athlete.

It turns out that the relative had an ax to grind with the mother, and had reported things that were truthful in such a way she could get the mother in trouble but not get in trouble herself. She told the truth, but not the whole truth, which she did indeed know. The mother in this case did everything the court asked of her, the main conditions being getting a permanent apartment and attending child care classes, and did them so well that the judge gave her the child back within a month.

I'd also point out that there is a difference between being just messy, and being dirty. If you walk into a house and it smells of dirty laundry, garbage, and cat urine, it's not just messy.
 
2011-06-06 09:56:36 AM  
Notabunny :
Occam's Chainsaw: CayceP: hey're going to be office monkeys for about $17/hr. Right now they're being paid $10/hr and treated like shiat. Management was all "OMG Y R U leaving??" today.

And that's the disconnect. Employers value their labor at X, because they have no reason to value them more.

2 weeks ago, my employer sent out a mass email saying that they are likely to significantly reduce salaries, benefits and retirement July 1. Last week, the 68 most senior employees, including managerial staff, submitted their retirement forms, and a large number of those unable to retire began submitting resumes and applications elsewhere. All of the clerical staff in one department have already accepted other jobs. The wizards on the top floor and utterly baffled and more than a little pissed at the prospect of reduced productivity effecting next quarter's bonuses.


Notabunny, hope you keep (better still, find a better) job, but I love stories like this. Employer making $$$, thinks 'Hey, good time for salary reductions/benefit reductions' and key people start quitting. I'm hoping you find a better job and the employer goes out of business, with LOTS of debt.
 
2011-06-06 09:56:41 AM  
I

Headso: madcat2c: .went back to school at night for my MBA .

I am always curious when I read these "I did it" screeds if the people writing them have such low self esteem that they believe their accomplishments could also be made by the semi-retarded guy who sweeps the factory floor or are they so narcissistic they just can't see life from another's perspective?


I have the opposite of the "I did it" attitude:

I grew up middle class, went to state university on an academic scholarship and, like many college freshmen, had no idea what the fark I wanted to do with my life. Eventually graduated, with honors (not super-duper-honors, but not lol-barely-made-it, either) and took a lowlowlow paying job with a social services agency. For the next two years, I looked for something in my field and, eventually, by nothing more than dumb luck, found my dream job--I was told it was a single line in a resume, a throw away line I had literally just added for that application, that got me my interview.

I haven't "made it", but I'm on my way; and I'm very, very conscious that even though some of it has to do with my own intelligence and hard work, a great degree of it is dumb luck. For that reason, fark me if I ever look down on someone less fortunate than I am, because, in a lot of cases, the only thing separating me from the guy making minimum wage is chance.
 
2011-06-06 09:56:48 AM  

madcat2c: FARK YOU if you think I should just turn over my families new check considering how hard I worked to get here. Unless you carried a gun in defense of this country (military) or you have a permanent disability, FARK OFF.


Ahh yes, because accepting a job from the military is the most honorable, decent thing anyone can do, regardless of whether you served the country well or beat some Iraqi chick because she wouldn't put out, you deserve the utmost respect. And obviously, the military isn't ever just a career choice, anyone who serves does it out of (misguided) love for their country!

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you already turn over a bunch of that check? Y'know, to pay for the military and police you so love, as well as the social workers, welfare, and roads that you absolutely despise?
 
2011-06-06 10:00:22 AM  

Ludendorff's Ghost: "Social programs are an insurance policy against revolution."

No they aren't, they are a vote-buying tactic by a certain political party. Always were.


so when otto von bismarck (along w Alfred Krupp) instituted the first ones of their kind in the 1870s in Imperial Germany in the steel industry, he wasnt actually doing it to maintain worker peace and indeed restrict the rights of workers to unionize in exchange for job security, disability insurance and penions, he was actually just a bribin' lib dem bent on votes that they didnt have because they werent democratic?

i thought it was about maintaining order in an age of strikes and revolutions that organically grew slowly into universal welfare programs which then fluorished after ww2 across western europe and the US and were only recently systematically taken down in the US by the heavily ideologicially driven Right.

thanks for clearing that up.
 
2011-06-06 10:00:42 AM  

ronaprhys: I didn't say anything about poor.


you don't think someone would construe your post here:

ronaprhys: their lives at minimum wage


as a synonym for poor? ok I get it you are trolling... have fun with that.
 
2011-06-06 10:01:08 AM  

Aidan: Headso: madcat2c: .went back to school at night for my MBA .

I am always curious when I read these "I did it" screeds if the people writing them have such low self esteem that they believe their accomplishments could also be made by the semi-retarded guy who sweeps the factory floor or are they so narcissistic they just can't see life from another's perspective?

Lesson #1: Everyone perceives others in relation to themselves. Short version: Everyone thinks everyone else is just like them.

I'm not being insulting, btw. I'm still trying to internalize this lesson, myself. :)

Lesson #1 in practice: Whatever person X is accusing YOU of is what THEY would do in your circumstances.


Intelligence allows many of us to learn and understand, if only partly, things we haven't experienced.

I don't have to be below the poverty line to put myself in their shoes.

Though I have met a handful of folks without this ability. I've seen them say things like everyone is turned on by the opposite sex and gays choose to be different because they hate God. I've seen them say they don't understand what depression is, and say people should just be happy. They also tend towards having poor logic and reasoning skills.
 
2011-06-06 10:05:55 AM  

CalvinMorallis: I haven't "made it", but I'm on my way; and I'm very, very conscious that even though some of it has to do with my own intelligence and hard work, a great degree of it is dumb luck. For that reason, fark me if I ever look down on someone less fortunate than I am, because, in a lot of cases, the only thing separating me from the guy making minimum wage is chance.


youre selling yourself short.

you got in by chance, sure. everyone gets that shot.

if you keep it for 2 years, you earned your place at the table, and its not chance anymore that keeps you at that table, that enables you to ascend. and that son aint chance, that means youre good at what you do.

sure there are alot of people who got lucky, but people dont stay lucky for very long,
 
2011-06-06 10:07:25 AM  

dittybopper: For instance, we got a child placed into our car on suspicion of abuse.


Is that like a reverse car jacking?
 
2011-06-06 10:11:40 AM  

Father_Jack: CalvinMorallis: I haven't "made it", but I'm on my way; and I'm very, very conscious that even though some of it has to do with my own intelligence and hard work, a great degree of it is dumb luck. For that reason, fark me if I ever look down on someone less fortunate than I am, because, in a lot of cases, the only thing separating me from the guy making minimum wage is chance.

everyone gets that shot.


Not always true.

if you keep it for 2 years, you earned your place at the table, and its not chance anymore that keeps you at that table, that enables you to ascend. and that son aint chance, that means youre good at what you do.

Quite true.

He has a point.

Flex your muscles a little. See what you can lift. Bet it pays more than what you're getting now.
 
2011-06-06 10:12:10 AM  
"Herman Proby, who counsels low-income families at the Baldwin Center in Pontiac, spent a recent afternoon with a single mother of three who makes $7.54 an hour as a telemarketer.

"That's $880 a month," Proby said. "How do you live on that?"


Assuming an 8-hour workday, $880 a month at $7.54 an hour means you're only working 14.5 days. Perhaps that's part of the problem right there?

I understand that a single mom with 3 kids has little time to pursue any further education for career advancement, but it's not like you don't have any control over whether or not you have those kids in the first place.

I'm not suggesting that poor people shouldn't be allowed to have kids. We all have the right make decisions that affect our finances, but we also need to be prepared to deal with the subsequent financial position that those decisions put us into.
 
2011-06-06 10:12:32 AM  

Arthur Jumbles: "Work smarter, not harder".


My dad always told me this. Fortunately, I listened.

*Paraphrasing from an e-mail he sent me recently* He grew up working as a deckhand, carpenter, then shipyard worker, then eventually getting into an apprenticeship as a boilermaker, which led to him becoming a shipfitter/layout journeyman. Then ***luckily*** (as RandomAxe mentions) he was chosen to be trained to lead a project which would modernize ship design and construction, which included frames and other structures for drilling ships and oil rigs for 13 years. He was laid off (making $11.50/hr) in 1983, three weeks before I was born. His knowledge with the emerging computer systems allowed him to get back on at one of the chemical plants down here (SE Texas) and has been there ever since, working as an IT Service Delivery Consultant.

/you've been favorited
//already checked to make sure you weren't my dad
 
2011-06-06 10:17:07 AM  

Smackledorfer: Though I have met a handful of folks without this ability. I've seen them say things like everyone is turned on by the opposite sex and gays choose to be different because they hate God. I've seen them say they don't understand what depression is, and say people should just be happy. They also tend towards having poor logic and reasoning skills.


I think that it's something more central than that. Judging by the speech of 'those people', they seem to have very limited language processing abilities. Having graded a number of papers, I've seen some of the saddest excuses for 'thought' ever put on paper. The least creative thinkers tend to repeat buzz-phrases in varying orders, in a way that almost resembles those dummy placeholder sites that just have a giant block of crazy text.

It could just be general stupidity, too.
 
2011-06-06 10:17:14 AM  

Father_Jack:
sure there are alot of people who got lucky, but people dont stay lucky for very long,


Lucky Ducky!
 
2011-06-06 10:19:35 AM  

trappedspirit: dittybopper: For instance, we got a child placed into our car on suspicion of abuse.

Is that like a reverse car jacking?


sed 's/car/care'
 
2011-06-06 10:22:07 AM  

Tsubodai: but it's not like you don't have any control over whether or not you have those kids in the first place.


That's really all you people have, in your arsenal of logical arguments. That, and "flat-screen TV". Really pathetic.
 
2011-06-06 10:22:26 AM  
Not everyone can be smart. I would suggest that we find a way to single out those with lower intelligence and punish them, you know just for fun, but the system already handles that quite nicely. Of course there are exceptions to the rule. And for some people all they focus on are the exceptions and don't see the beautiful things going on all the time. But they usually have to be at the gym in 26 minutes, to start washing the towels.
 
2011-06-06 10:22:57 AM  

Tsubodai: I'm not suggesting that poor people shouldn't be allowed to have kids. We all have the right make decisions that affect our finances, but we also need to be prepared to deal with the subsequent financial position that those decisions put us into.


yep.

my younger sister is a perfect example of this.

in her late-mid 20s (ie, should know better...) living with loser BF who cant keep a job. She makes the money as a contract graphic designer, not much, but got a steady income in the high 30s which i suppose in seattle if you share the rent is enough to get by on. she has this dog.

she then gets pregnant. decides to keep it. because its the US and a contract job, no benes, no PTO, the company is under no obligation to keep her on after the kids born. loser BF gets cold feet and bails. she keeps working till the birth, and now despite having siblings all over her city to help her she opting to move back to the buttfark midwest where theres no work and no future to live with her horrible mother because she refuses to get rid of the dog.

so she's going to be a student loan straddled single mom living with her own mom thousands of miles from any sort of economically vibrant place to build a career because of stupid choices. the dumbest of which i think is the keeping the dog thing.

if it was "lose the dog or move in with mom", wouldnt that be a pretty clear choice? sheesh.
 
2011-06-06 10:23:42 AM  

Tsubodai: "Herman Proby, who counsels low-income families at the Baldwin Center in Pontiac, spent a recent afternoon with a single mother of three who makes $7.54 an hour as a telemarketer.

"That's $880 a month," Proby said. "How do you live on that?"

Assuming an 8-hour workday, $880 a month at $7.54 an hour means you're only working 14.5 days. Perhaps that's part of the problem right there?

I understand that a single mom with 3 kids has little time to pursue any further education for career advancement, but it's not like you don't have any control over whether or not you have those kids in the first place.

I'm not suggesting that poor people shouldn't be allowed to have kids. We all have the right make decisions that affect our finances, but we also need to be prepared to deal with the subsequent financial position that those decisions put us into.


Probably because the call center she works for are a bunch of bastages and only offer part-time positions to get around the lawful benefit requirements of full time employment. I worked for a year at a position in tech support where we were only allowed to work 37 hours a week and were written up if we clocked more than that. Employers dodging benefit requirements by having employees work just under full time and get by with paying part-time are the worst kind of evil.
 
2011-06-06 10:23:49 AM  

Tsubodai:
"That's $880 a month," Proby said. "How do you live on that?"

Assuming an 8-hour workday, $880 a month at $7.54 an hour means you're only working 14.5 days. Perhaps that's part of the problem right there?


Or maybe you're also paying taxes on your wages, like a sucker.
 
2011-06-06 10:30:03 AM  

Father_Jack: CalvinMorallis: I haven't "made it", but I'm on my way; and I'm very, very conscious that even though some of it has to do with my own intelligence and hard work, a great degree of it is dumb luck. For that reason, fark me if I ever look down on someone less fortunate than I am, because, in a lot of cases, the only thing separating me from the guy making minimum wage is chance.

youre selling yourself short.

you got in by chance, sure. everyone gets that shot.

if you keep it for 2 years, you earned your place at the table, and its not chance anymore that keeps you at that table, that enables you to ascend. and that son aint chance, that means youre good at what you do.

sure there are alot of people who got lucky, but people dont stay lucky for very long,


I don't think everyone "gets that shot" though.

Without going into too much detail about what I do, it's a position with the state legislature. For that one application, I added a line to my resume, under "extracurricular activities" or whatever, that I written the campaign literature for a friend's failed House of Delegates campaign. It was, literally, a single line, and one I hadn't used in any application before. When I got the interview and, ultimately, the job, I assumed it was my degree, or my work experience...but my supervisor said that they had decided to interview half a dozen people, and my resume got picked because they saw I had "campaign experience" and they thought I might enjoy the work.

I wrote exactly two campaign mailers, and one stump speech, for a guy that ended up winning less than 10 percent of the vote. I probably logged a total of 6 hours of real work to that campaign. And it was my, "Hey, why not add this in to the resume" decision that got me the job that's going to support me and family for the next 25 years and into retirement.

I did well in school; I have an inherent aptitude for the kind of work I do; and yes, it does take a level of personal commitment to apply, apply, apply for that Great Career; but all of that would have been for naught if not for that split second resume decision.

My point, I guess, is hard work carries you pretty damn far; but hard work without luck can be the difference between financial security and happiness, and 38hrs a week doing filing.
 
2011-06-06 10:34:35 AM  

trappedspirit: If you are young and republican you have no heart. If you are old and democrat you have no brain.


That old saying might have had some merit when Republicans were about anything other than the complete destruction of the nation out of pure spite. I think it's now "If you are young and republican you have no brain. If you are old and republican you have no brain".

They are intentionally trying to tank the economy and drag us back into recession. It's economic terrorism. There's no justification for supporting them except for the sociopathic self-interest of the corporate elite.
 
2011-06-06 10:34:40 AM  

trappedspirit: dittybopper: For instance, we got a child placed into our car on suspicion of abuse.

Is that like a reverse car jacking?


Jesus... I don't EVER want to be good enough to deserve that! Avoid! Avoid!

dittybopper: sed 's/car/care'


Oh, well fine then.
 
2011-06-06 10:40:25 AM  

Aidan: ronaprhys: Aidan: I also read Scratch Beginnings which is intended to be a bit of a rebuttal to Nickle and Dimed. All it actually does is reinforce the argument, but I suppose it depends on how you look at it. :)


So, basically if you're a male who is willing to be homeless in a major city and are healthy & strong enough to work like a slave then you could work minimum wage and get ahead if you're lucky enough to not get hurt or have any other misfortune befall you. A woman who tries that will get assaulted/raped, without a doubt. Anybody who has any physical/medical issues which preclude hard labor is right out. Anybody who doesn't live in a big city is right out.

If sharing a cheap apartment in a small town with a roommate is "living above your means" at minimum wage, there is something fundamentally wrong with the whole farking system.

The whole idea behind "minimum wage" is the idea that having a job means you'll have enough money to live at least a rudimentary standard of living. Homeless shelters are below that. Trying to suggest them as a viable way of life at the minimum wage level is blatantly insulting.

I'd take his book as more of an indictment of the system than anything else.
 
2011-06-06 10:42:52 AM  

Silverstaff: I'd take his book as more of an indictment of the system than anything else.


I don't think we're necessarily disagreeing. However he does present his book as a "I can do it, so can you!" thing. I call it success porn. :)
 
2011-06-06 10:46:52 AM  
Once you realize that minimum wage is a polite term for "slave pay, " it's not that surprising.
 
2011-06-06 10:53:07 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: They are intentionally trying to tank the economy and drag us back into recession. It's economic terrorism.


Oh my, you actually believe that, don't you?
 
2011-06-06 10:54:33 AM  

Dictatorial_Flair: Once you realize that minimum wage is a polite term for "slave pay, " it's not that surprising.


And how interesting it is that we all want bartenders to bring us drinks we don't know how to make, fry guys to cook us hamburgers we're too lazy to grill, and poop scoopers to clean up grimy stuff in our public restrooms...but we absolutely bristle at the idea of paying these people a living wage for doing so.
 
2011-06-06 10:59:01 AM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: multiple working roommates splitting rent and bills.

And when this luxury is unavailable and you must solo it? Your solution is to starve?

serial_crusher: enough to feed yourself and basic health maintenance.

Does this include health care? What measure of sustenance? Is borderline starvation enough, or can you afford meat? And if you get proper nutrition and health care, how would forgoing this not pay for the additional half-dependent discussed above?

serial_crusher: Not necessarily anything by way of saving money for college, etc.

Zero ability to save money. So every unscheduled expenditure would lead to insolvency? That's the scenario I describe above, where you do just fine at or near minimum wage, until the unexpected cuts your throat. Congratulations, you want the status quo. And it's working just fine, ain't it?


I'm in that boat. I make slightly above minimum wage with no cable (only Netflix) and my utilities are included with rent. My diet consists of ramen and canned veggies and every once in a while I can afford a fruit. I am a full time student with a full time job and in a typical month after paying expenses with no surprises I end up with about $12 to save and use as entertainment. When I end up with an unexpected bill I'm farked
 
2011-06-06 11:05:33 AM  
derpdeederp: Seeing that the programmers were making way more than I was, I did another 2-3 years of database administration and programming courses. And now ten years later, living in the expensive Fairfax County Virginia making $53,000 a year, .

You're a DBA with two degrees and ten years experience, working in Fairfax for $53,000/year? What's wrong with you?


No, Im a social scientist who can interact with programming and databases languages. Also the two felonies dont help with the pay check.
 
2011-06-06 11:06:11 AM  

CalvinMorallis: Dictatorial_Flair: Once you realize that minimum wage is a polite term for "slave pay, " it's not that surprising.

And how interesting it is that we all want bartenders to bring us drinks we don't know how to make, fry guys to cook us hamburgers we're too lazy to grill, and poop scoopers to clean up grimy stuff in our public restrooms...but we absolutely bristle at the idea of paying these people a living wage for doing so.


Relevant:
http://www.angryflower.com/atlass.gif
 
2011-06-06 11:12:42 AM  

mrichmond3737: This isn't exactly a new study. This is more of a reevaluation of an older study from the nineties. I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe. She tried for three months to live on exactly what her coworkers made and found, quite overwhelmingly, that she was barely making ends meet, let alone the single moms out there. And that's if you're lucky enough to be employed.

/Still believes in "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em."


Minimum wage was never designd to raise a family on.
 
2011-06-06 11:16:25 AM  

CalvinMorallis: I wrote exactly two campaign mailers, and one stump speech, for a guy that ended up winning less than 10 percent of the vote. I probably logged a total of 6 hours of real work to that campaign. And it was my, "Hey, why not add this in to the resume" decision that got me the job that's going to support me and family for the next 25 years and into retirement.


my equivalent story: i did a phone interview with a woman for an entry level HTML position in the bay area in 1999. during the interview i for whatever reason said "blessed be!" that i had seen advertised somewhere. turned out this woman was a wiccan and this is their "amen" equivalent, and so i got to interview and got the gig.

now, 2011, i manage multimillion dollar software development projects for a swiss bank and have worked for many of the big .coms.

i guess *my* point is, how far ive come isnt due solely to the fact that i read a billboard with a wiccan slogan on it.
 
2011-06-06 11:17:23 AM  

Huggermugger: Tsubodai: but it's not like you don't have any control over whether or not you have those kids in the first place.

That's really all you people have, in your arsenal of logical arguments. That, and "flat-screen TV". Really pathetic.


Yeah, personal responsibility's a biatch isn't it?
 
2011-06-06 11:19:50 AM  

Father_Jack: i guess *my* point is, how far ive come isnt due solely to the fact that i read a billboard with a wiccan slogan on it.


And THAT... is the problem. The meritocracy is a lie. You're obviously good at what you do, but.. nowha'amsayin'?
 
2011-06-06 11:21:39 AM  

Arthur Jumbles: Pay attention in high school, don't gangbang and keep your legs closed. Fill out the FAFSA in January and use your Pell grant and free state aid to go to your local community college. Get a work-study job and work like a dog during summer to avoid taking out loans. Then transfer to a four year school or earn an associate degree in a field were you can immediately start earning a paycheck.


This is good advice, but it fails to acknowledge the basic math of the jobs available.

A certain (large) percentage of the jobs are shiatty. A certain (smaller) percentage of the jobs are OK. Smaller still segments of the jobs are good and great.

Yes, people should try to get into the better jobs. But, someone is still going to pick lettuce and work at Walmart and change Grandma's bedpan. The only question is just how shiatty do we make life for the people that work these jobs.

Again, it is a mathematical certainty that SOMEONE will work those jobs.
 
2011-06-06 11:21:59 AM  

CalvinMorallis: Dictatorial_Flair: Once you realize that minimum wage is a polite term for "slave pay, " it's not that surprising.

And how interesting it is that we all want bartenders to bring us drinks we don't know how to make, fry guys to cook us hamburgers we're too lazy to grill, and poop scoopers to clean up grimy stuff in our public restrooms...but we absolutely bristle at the idea of paying these people a living wage for doing so.


Even I, bleeding-heart that I am, do this. It's really hard to stop oneself, even if you realize it. I keep telling myself that I can simply choose not to have that service or product, but I have NO right to biatch about the price if I want something done RIGHT and VERY little right to biatch about the quality if I want it done CHEAP.
 
2011-06-06 11:23:39 AM  

Father_Jack: CalvinMorallis: I wrote exactly two campaign mailers, and one stump speech, for a guy that ended up winning less than 10 percent of the vote. I probably logged a total of 6 hours of real work to that campaign. And it was my, "Hey, why not add this in to the resume" decision that got me the job that's going to support me and family for the next 25 years and into retirement.

my equivalent story: i did a phone interview with a woman for an entry level HTML position in the bay area in 1999. during the interview i for whatever reason said "blessed be!" that i had seen advertised somewhere. turned out this woman was a wiccan and this is their "amen" equivalent, and so i got to interview and got the gig.

now, 2011, i manage multimillion dollar software development projects for a swiss bank and have worked for many of the big .coms.

i guess *my* point is, how far ive come isnt due solely to the fact that i read a billboard with a wiccan slogan on it.


I don't discount the value of hard work; and I also don't believe that if not for my own chance decision I'd be cleaning gutters. My Weeners was geared toward arguing the idea that "Well, if I did it all on my own, you can, too!" That's buillshiat. No matter how hard you work, no matter how bootstrappy you may be, everyone is helped out, every now and then, by a little luck. And I think it's terribly arrogant, meanspirited and wrong headed to look down on people who simply haven't gotten the same stroke of good luck as you may have.
 
2011-06-06 11:25:16 AM  

Aidan: CalvinMorallis: Dictatorial_Flair: Once you realize that minimum wage is a polite term for "slave pay, " it's not that surprising.

And how interesting it is that we all want bartenders to bring us drinks we don't know how to make, fry guys to cook us hamburgers we're too lazy to grill, and poop scoopers to clean up grimy stuff in our public restrooms...but we absolutely bristle at the idea of paying these people a living wage for doing so.

Even I, bleeding-heart that I am, do this. It's really hard to stop oneself, even if you realize it. I keep telling myself that I can simply choose not to have that service or product, but I have NO right to biatch about the price if I want something done RIGHT and VERY little right to biatch about the quality if I want it done CHEAP.


Oh, I have to stop myself from doing the same thing. It's why I'm a proponent of "fair living wage" legislation--tying state minimum wages to the average cost of rented housing, state-to-state.
 
2011-06-06 11:25:18 AM  

Aidan: CalvinMorallis: Dictatorial_Flair: Once you realize that minimum wage is a polite term for "slave pay, " it's not that surprising.

And how interesting it is that we all want bartenders to bring us drinks we don't know how to make, fry guys to cook us hamburgers we're too lazy to grill, and poop scoopers to clean up grimy stuff in our public restrooms...but we absolutely bristle at the idea of paying these people a living wage for doing so.

Even I, bleeding-heart that I am, do this. It's really hard to stop oneself, even if you realize it. I keep telling myself that I can simply choose not to have that service or product, but I have NO right to biatch about the price if I want something done RIGHT and VERY little right to biatch about the quality if I want it done CHEAP.


And of course, there's the obvious fact that if you need to piss from a great height upon those who serve a purpose and do it well, regardless of it's implied social status, you're probably the very textbook definition of "insecure jerk".
 
2011-06-06 11:26:22 AM  

Headso: ronaprhys: I didn't say anything about poor.

you don't think someone would construe your post here:

ronaprhys: their lives at minimum wage

as a synonym for poor? ok I get it you are trolling... have fun with that.


Hint: Words have meaning. If I say "minimum wage", I actually mean earning minimum wage. People can be poor and earn more than minimum wage. Technically, they could also be earning minimum wage and rich (though this group is likely small enough to be statistically insignificant). You're reading into this with your bias and trying to expand what I said to support the argument you want to make. You can do that, but I get to call you on it. Go back, read my statement, and make your argument based on what I actually typed - not what you think. If you need to ask clarifying questions, feel free to do so. If not, you're just failing.
 
2011-06-06 11:26:25 AM  
That was the colloquial "you", btw.
 
2011-06-06 11:26:44 AM  

bunner: Father_Jack: i guess *my* point is, how far ive come isnt due solely to the fact that i read a billboard with a wiccan slogan on it.

And THAT... is the problem. The meritocracy is a lie. You're obviously good at what you do, but.. nowha'amsayin'?


actually, sorry, no, i dont follow. :) is my sarcasm meter broken?
 
2011-06-06 11:28:02 AM  

Tsubodai: I'm not suggesting that poor people shouldn't be allowed to have kids.


Would be incredibly silly to say that. Who'd flip burgers at McDonald's for us?
 
2011-06-06 11:29:33 AM  

bunner: That was the colloquial "you", btw.


I figured. I'm only 5'7 after all. :)
 
2011-06-06 11:29:45 AM  

CalvinMorallis: I don't discount the value of hard work; and I also don't believe that if not for my own chance decision I'd be cleaning gutters. My Weeners was geared toward arguing the idea that "Well, if I did it all on my own, you can, too!" That's buillshiat. No matter how hard you work, no matter how bootstrappy you may be, everyone is helped out, every now and then, by a little luck. And I think it's terribly arrogant, meanspirited and wrong headed to look down on people who simply haven't gotten the same stroke of good luck as you may have.


yeah thats a fair statement i agree with. my OP to you was more towards telling you i didnt thinky ou were giving yourself enough credit is all. :)
 
2011-06-06 11:30:27 AM  

Father_Jack: bunner: Father_Jack: i guess *my* point is, how far ive come isnt due solely to the fact that i read a billboard with a wiccan slogan on it.

And THAT... is the problem. The meritocracy is a lie. You're obviously good at what you do, but.. nowha'amsayin'?

actually, sorry, no, i dont follow. :) is my sarcasm meter broken?


No.

What I'm saying is you got a great gig and excelled with your skills.

And that's great.

And you got your foot in the door, as we all must at some point, by unwittingly appealing to some squinty cow's sense of self importance.

And that's atrocious. And not your fault. It does, however, need to stop or the meritocracy is a lie. Because you can't get a chance to prove your merits from the bench and if the only way off of the bench is to blow the coach, then the coach needs replaced.
 
2011-06-06 11:32:11 AM  

bikerific: This is good advice, but it fails to acknowledge the basic math of the jobs available.

A certain (large) percentage of the jobs are shiatty. A certain (smaller) percentage of the jobs are OK. Smaller still segments of the jobs are good and great.

Yes, people should try to get into the better jobs. But, someone is still going to pick lettuce and work at Walmart and change Grandma's bedpan. The only question is just how shiatty do we make life for the people that work these jobs.

Again, it is a mathematical certainty that SOMEONE will work those jobs.



No - it doesn't fail. It takes that into account. Those jobs should be used as starter jobs or as jobs for those not capable (or not desiring) to do more. The general education given on this subject shouldn't be that one deserves a better job or better things. Not at all. It should be to save your money, don't spend it on useless crap (quality jeans that will last might cost $30, less if you catch them on sale. designer jeans have no real value over the quality ones - maybe even less as they might not hold up to use). That way your dollars go farther. Learn to repair things yourself so you save money there. Learn to do basic math so you can understand whether or not buying a condo/townhome/house is a better deal for your specific situation than renting. Same with buying a vehicle.

As one progresses in life, they should be able to move up. Lots of skills are transferable from different industries. Start as a lettuce picker/bedpan changer. Figure out what it takes to be in charge of those doing some sort of repetitive manual labor. Get those jobs. Then move up from there.
 
2011-06-06 11:32:48 AM  
I've been paid minimum wage since I began college ten years ago. I'm ready for a real paycheck now please. Pretty please.
 
2011-06-06 11:33:58 AM  

TheRedMonkey: mrichmond3737: This isn't exactly a new study. This is more of a reevaluation of an older study from the nineties. I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe. She tried for three months to live on exactly what her coworkers made and found, quite overwhelmingly, that she was barely making ends meet, let alone the single moms out there. And that's if you're lucky enough to be employed.

/Still believes in "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em."

Minimum wage was never designd to raise a family on.


THIS, it was originally designed to fight sweat shops and targeted women and children
 
2011-06-06 11:34:06 AM  
I'm saying only hiring people who know the secret handshake or whose daddy knows a guy who knows a guy has, so far, gotten us 14 trillion in debt, G.W. Bush and that fat prick in the server room who couldn't reboot an iPod.
 
2011-06-06 11:38:06 AM  

Joe Blowme: TheRedMonkey: mrichmond3737: This isn't exactly a new study. This is more of a reevaluation of an older study from the nineties. I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe. She tried for three months to live on exactly what her coworkers made and found, quite overwhelmingly, that she was barely making ends meet, let alone the single moms out there. And that's if you're lucky enough to be employed.

/Still believes in "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em."

Minimum wage was never designd to raise a family on.

THIS, it was originally designed to fight sweat shops and targeted women and children


Nickle and Dimed is an AWESOME book and I highly recommend it.
 
2011-06-06 11:38:49 AM  

Father_Jack: CalvinMorallis: I don't discount the value of hard work; and I also don't believe that if not for my own chance decision I'd be cleaning gutters. My Weeners was geared toward arguing the idea that "Well, if I did it all on my own, you can, too!" That's buillshiat. No matter how hard you work, no matter how bootstrappy you may be, everyone is helped out, every now and then, by a little luck. And I think it's terribly arrogant, meanspirited and wrong headed to look down on people who simply haven't gotten the same stroke of good luck as you may have.

yeah thats a fair statement i agree with. my OP to you was more towards telling you i didnt thinky ou were giving yourself enough credit is all. :)


Ah, okay. Thank you, then!
 
2011-06-06 11:43:30 AM  

bunner: And you got your foot in the door, as we all must at some point, by unwittingly appealing to some squinty cow's sense of self importance.

And that's atrocious. And not your fault. It does, however, need to stop or the meritocracy is a lie. Because you can't get a chance to prove your merits from the bench and if the only way off of the bench is to blow the coach, then the coach needs replaced.


there are many things which influence luck in a hiring decision. Having one thing among many go your favor and help you get lucky is not the same thing as quid pro quo sexual harassment, nor is it in my eyes evidence of a systemic lack of meritocratic institutions.

while i hear the argument that the US is not as meritocratic as it once was, and personally do think that the US is nowhere NEAR as meritocratic as its cultural myths tell us Americans it is (ie, by pointing to those who have succeeded despite the odds as testament to the viability of the model), i hardly think this is a suitable example.

There are many things which contribute to a hire, and the part i cited was part of why i got the interview, along with others, but i passed the interview and got the job because of my mad html skillz (notepad, yo), not because of preferencial treatment by a squinty eyed cow.
 
2011-06-06 11:44:50 AM  

raerae1980: I've been paid minimum wage since I began college ten years ago. I'm ready for a real paycheck now please. Pretty please.


Well, at least you have tasty snackies and snaz-o decor.

Good luck, kiddo.

*hug*

/nice lamp
 
2011-06-06 11:47:13 AM  

Father_Jack: the part i cited was part of why i got the interview


yeah... your foot in the door.

Father_Jack: passed the interview and got the job because of my mad html skillz


And that's dandy.
 
2011-06-06 11:51:07 AM  
If people have so little ambition they choose to work for minimum wage they have no right to complain.

Waiting tables is an unskilled job open to everyone and pays significantly more. I found a random grocery clerking job that paid 8.5 an hour starting back when the minimum was ~5, it took me all of a 5 minute drive around town looking for help wanted signs. UPS starts at 9 or 10 an hour.
 
2011-06-06 11:52:59 AM  

bunner: Father_Jack: the part i cited was part of why i got the interview

yeah... your foot in the door.

Father_Jack: passed the interview and got the job because of my mad html skillz

And that's dandy.


U mad?
 
2011-06-06 11:54:58 AM  

TheRedMonkey: Minimum wage was never designd to raise a family on.


i141.photobucket.com
 
2011-06-06 11:56:00 AM  

bunner: raerae1980: I've been paid minimum wage since I began college ten years ago. I'm ready for a real paycheck now please. Pretty please.

Well, at least you have tasty snackies and snaz-o decor.

Good luck, kiddo.

*hug*

/nice lamp


Thanks...LOL. I don't live in that apartment anymore...I'm in a much nicer and safer one now. And no roaches!!!

/that apartment sucked ass, seriously.

sorry for threadjack
 
2011-06-06 12:01:53 PM  

raerae1980: Joe Blowme: TheRedMonkey: mrichmond3737: This isn't exactly a new study. This is more of a reevaluation of an older study from the nineties. I recall reading a very sad book written by a journalist/author who went undercover and worked minimum wage jobs at Walmart, a maid service, and a cafe. She tried for three months to live on exactly what her coworkers made and found, quite overwhelmingly, that she was barely making ends meet, let alone the single moms out there. And that's if you're lucky enough to be employed.

/Still believes in "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em."

Minimum wage was never designd to raise a family on.

THIS, it was originally designed to fight sweat shops and targeted women and children

Nickle and Dimed is an AWESOME book and I highly recommend it.


Ill read that and you read this... Scratch Beginnings: Me, $25, and the Search for the American Dream.
 
2011-06-06 12:05:02 PM  

Aidan: Even I, bleeding-heart that I am, do this. It's really hard to stop oneself, even if you realize it. I keep telling myself that I can simply choose not to have that service or product, but I have NO right to biatch about the price if I want something done RIGHT and VERY little right to biatch about the quality if I want it done CHEAP.


Since I'm a Master Auto Mechanic I'm getting a REALLY big kick out of this.
 
2011-06-06 12:05:03 PM  

ginandbacon: In most of the civilized world, parents and children have free health care, free nursery schools and preschools, and parents have paid maternity/paternity leave for 1 year. College tuition is also free and in some countries (Germany), students receive a stipend.

But yeah, go USA.


Inigo_Montoya.jpg
 
2011-06-06 12:08:18 PM  

Babwa Wawa: WhyteRaven74: Fizpez: That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????

I think the number is a general figure, and could vary place to place depending on various costs and how available stuff is.

Day care's a biatch. Child care for kids costs more than state university in almost every state. But you don't have 529s to pay for those five-six years..

If this chick had pre-K offered, it would be a very different story. All the folks who want more "murrican kids" would be well served to advocate funding of child care.


You don't need 529s for daycare. It is tax deductible.
 
2011-06-06 12:12:13 PM  

theknuckler_33: Babwa Wawa: WhyteRaven74: Fizpez: That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????

I think the number is a general figure, and could vary place to place depending on various costs and how available stuff is.

Day care's a biatch. Child care for kids costs more than state university in almost every state. But you don't have 529s to pay for those five-six years..

If this chick had pre-K offered, it would be a very different story. All the folks who want more "murrican kids" would be well served to advocate funding of child care.

You don't need 529s for daycare. It is tax deductible.


Not all of it....not even close. IIRC the credit maxes out at $3,000.
 
2011-06-06 12:19:35 PM  

reklamfox: I make slightly above minimum wage with no cable (only Netflix)


I know $8/month isn't usually considered "luxurious", but... why not got to your public library and find a good book to read?
 
2011-06-06 12:21:34 PM  

scanman61: theknuckler_33: Babwa Wawa: WhyteRaven74: Fizpez: That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????

I think the number is a general figure, and could vary place to place depending on various costs and how available stuff is.

Day care's a biatch. Child care for kids costs more than state university in almost every state. But you don't have 529s to pay for those five-six years..

If this chick had pre-K offered, it would be a very different story. All the folks who want more "murrican kids" would be well served to advocate funding of child care.

You don't need 529s for daycare. It is tax deductible.

Not all of it....not even close. IIRC the credit maxes out at $3,000.


I never actually deducted it on my taxes, but I used the flex-spending plan at my work and I was able to set aside $5,000 pre-tax annually. But yea, it doesn't cover it all. However, I think the deductible amount is related to the percentage of the expense of your income, so a lower income person might be able to deduct more... but don't quote me on that, it's been a few years since I've read up on that.
 
2011-06-06 12:25:39 PM  

serial_crusher: reklamfox: I make slightly above minimum wage with no cable (only Netflix)

I know $8/month isn't usually considered "luxurious", but... why not got to your public library and find a good book to read?


Aren't public libraries evil? I know that the 'baggers are whining about how they should be defunded because they're full of baby rapers accessing kiddie pron, and they loan out uncensored books to toddlers.

Just tell people to go outside and lick the sidewalk for entertainment.
 
2011-06-06 12:28:26 PM  
The way to make it is to get a degree in English Theatre Philosophy at a private university. Never live with your parents or friends. Spend 30 grand on a wedding and have some kids. Get a brand new house and spend another 30 grand on a new SUV. Don't worry, god will provide. When you lose your job, go to grad school and get divorced. Make sure to spend plenty of money on lawyers. Through it all, remember its not your fault, you did not have a choice because you're an [ethnicity] [gender], and as soon as you step out of line society will surely rape and abandon you.
 
2011-06-06 12:30:32 PM  

Dion Fortune: The way to make it is to get a degree in English Theatre Philosophy at a private university. Never live with your parents or friends. Spend 30 grand on a wedding and have some kids. Get a brand new house and spend another 30 grand on a new SUV. Don't worry, god will provide. When you lose your job, go to grad school and get divorced. Make sure to spend plenty of money on lawyers. Through it all, remember its not your fault, you did not have a choice because you're an [ethnicity] [gender], and as soon as you step out of line society will surely rape and abandon you.


Yeah. Way to thread shiat at the tail end of what has actually been a fairly thoughtful and engaging discussion by aduits.
 
2011-06-06 12:35:09 PM  

Monophtalmos: It's called personal responsibility, but many people prefer to place the burden of raising children on society as a whole


You 'baggers do not have a monopoly on personal responsibility, regardless of how much you pound your chests and declare yourselves the sole possessors of character and morals. You also do not have sole ownership of patriotic qualities, nor are you the only ones who believe in and practice "family values", and your children are not the only ones that behave in school. You do not exclusively practice good habits of nutrition and budgeting and personal hygiene. You are not the only safe drivers on the road. You are not the only people who give to charity (actually, you hardly ever do that), nor are you the only ones who follow the laws of this country and your municipalities (in fact, you are more likely to violate them, and then claim some sort of vague exceptionalism as a rationale).

In fact, most of the ones I've known have been whiny, hypocritical, slothful, amoral, and constantly blame everyone else (blacks, illegal aliens, non-Christians, furriners) for all of their misfortunes.

/keep farking that chicken, Bubba
 
2011-06-06 12:44:25 PM  
As a young mom working two jobs, in school full time and only provider for a family of three, I get a kick out of these responses.

I have a hard time reading shiat like this, the only option you have in a situation that sucks is not stopping to realize how bad it is.

/I hustle, I make it work.
 
2011-06-06 12:50:19 PM  
This article is the usual piece of crap. It's about a single mom with two kids, which means she obviously has a car and some sort of housing. Of COURSE you can't support that on minimum wage. Minimum wage was never intended to support a family - it's what people with no education and/or job skills get paid. Essentially, high school students. And what happens when you start feeling all "compassionate" and raise the minimum wage? All the borderline workers who are no longer worth the new minimum wage get fired. Then they're on welfare and roaming the streets being criminals. Meanwhile, illegals, who are willing to do the same job for $3 per hour (but don't pay taxes, send most of the money back home, and leech off public services...), get hired to fill in.

On a personal note, I taught myself how to do web design and programming, and easily make $30-$40 per hour minimum as a consultant. I was doing this before I had a college degree.Why? Because I have two married parents who stressed education and taught me to read at age 4. They didn't run out on each other, and they didn't just dump me into some crappy school and ignore me. Broken families are unsuccessful families, and not getting educated (even if it's vocational rather than academic) leads to failure.

My college degree also cost about $20K overall, since it included a lot of testing and portfolio review.
 
2011-06-06 12:55:16 PM  

Father_Jack: U mad?


Yes, that must be it. Sure. Send me something to sign and you can show it your friends. *sigh*
 
2011-06-06 12:56:32 PM  

phedus: As a young mom working two jobs, in school full time and only provider for a family of three, I get a kick out of these responses.

I have a hard time reading shiat like this, the only option you have in a situation that sucks is not stopping to realize how bad it is.

/I hustle, I make it work.


You go, girl!!!
 
2011-06-06 12:56:48 PM  

j0ndas: This article is the usual piece of crap. It's about a single mom with two kids, which means she obviously has a car and some sort of housing. Of COURSE you can't support that on minimum wage. Minimum wage was never intended to support a family - it's what people with no education and/or job skills get paid. Essentially, high school students. And what happens when you start feeling all "compassionate" and raise the minimum wage? All the borderline workers who are no longer worth the new minimum wage get fired. Then they're on welfare and roaming the streets being criminals. Meanwhile, illegals, who are willing to do the same job for $3 per hour (but don't pay taxes, send most of the money back home, and leech off public services...), get hired to fill in.

On a personal note, I taught myself how to do web design and programming, and easily make $30-$40 per hour minimum as a consultant. I was doing this before I had a college degree.Why? Because I have two married parents who stressed education and taught me to read at age 4. They didn't run out on each other, and they didn't just dump me into some crappy school and ignore me. Broken families are unsuccessful families, and not getting educated (even if it's vocational rather than academic) leads to failure.

My college degree also cost about $20K overall, since it included a lot of testing and portfolio review.


So, basically, you made it on your own hard work, but it all started because of the luck of the draw. Yeah, you came from a good family. Good for you. And fark anyone who didn't have the same at-the-start advantages you did, right?

My parents are married. I grew up firmly middle class. My dad has his Master's and my Mom's a teacher, so education was important in my household, too. But I don't feel like I did anything to deserve such a childhood. And people who do--those who shiat on the poor, the single parent families, and the day laborers--are, truly, some of our nation's most despicable citizens.
 
2011-06-06 12:58:25 PM  

theknuckler_33: scanman61: theknuckler_33: Babwa Wawa: WhyteRaven74: Fizpez: That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????

I think the number is a general figure, and could vary place to place depending on various costs and how available stuff is.

Day care's a biatch. Child care for kids costs more than state university in almost every state. But you don't have 529s to pay for those five-six years..

If this chick had pre-K offered, it would be a very different story. All the folks who want more "murrican kids" would be well served to advocate funding of child care.

You don't need 529s for daycare. It is tax deductible.

Not all of it....not even close. IIRC the credit maxes out at $3,000.

I never actually deducted it on my taxes, but I used the flex-spending plan at my work and I was able to set aside $5,000 pre-tax annually. But yea, it doesn't cover it all. However, I think the deductible amount is related to the percentage of the expense of your income, so a lower income person might be able to deduct more... but don't quote me on that, it's been a few years since I've read up on that.


Nope...IRS Form 2441

You can't claim more than $3K per kid in day care, and I think we spent right around $6K for the year.
 
2011-06-06 01:05:12 PM  

j0ndas: This article is the usual piece of crap. It's about a single mom with two kids, which means she obviously has a car and some sort of housing. Of COURSE you can't support that on minimum wage. Minimum wage was never intended to support a family - it's what people with no education and/or job skills get paid. Essentially, high school students. And what happens when you start feeling all "compassionate" and raise the minimum wage? All the borderline workers who are no longer worth the new minimum wage get fired. Then they're on welfare and roaming the streets being criminals. Meanwhile, illegals, who are willing to do the same job for $3 per hour (but don't pay taxes, send most of the money back home, and leech off public services...), get hired to fill in.

On a personal note, I taught myself how to do web design and programming, and easily make $30-$40 per hour minimum as a consultant. I was doing this before I had a college degree.Why? Because I have two married parents who stressed education and taught me to read at age 4. They didn't run out on each other, and they didn't just dump me into some crappy school and ignore me. Broken families are unsuccessful families, and not getting educated (even if it's vocational rather than academic) leads to failure.

My college degree also cost about $20K overall, since it included a lot of testing and portfolio review.


And there you have it, folks. Everybody should be just like him and the rest is a piece of piss.
 
2011-06-06 01:09:30 PM  

scanman61: theknuckler_33: scanman61: theknuckler_33: Babwa Wawa: WhyteRaven74: Fizpez: That's almost $50k/year - I realize working with younger than school age kids pretty much means day care but $50k/year is now the threshold for "barely making it"????

I think the number is a general figure, and could vary place to place depending on various costs and how available stuff is.

Day care's a biatch. Child care for kids costs more than state university in almost every state. But you don't have 529s to pay for those five-six years..

If this chick had pre-K offered, it would be a very different story. All the folks who want more "murrican kids" would be well served to advocate funding of child care.

You don't need 529s for daycare. It is tax deductible.

Not all of it....not even close. IIRC the credit maxes out at $3,000.

I never actually deducted it on my taxes, but I used the flex-spending plan at my work and I was able to set aside $5,000 pre-tax annually. But yea, it doesn't cover it all. However, I think the deductible amount is related to the percentage of the expense of your income, so a lower income person might be able to deduct more... but don't quote me on that, it's been a few years since I've read up on that.

Nope...IRS Form 2441

You can't claim more than $3K per kid in day care, and I think we spent right around $6K for the year.


Well, I'm not sure what loophole exployer offered FSAs take advantage of, but if your employer offers it, you can contribute $5000 for child care expenses. That is pre-tax money so is the same as a $5000 tax deduction on your return. If you don't have an FSA and can only deduct $3000 on your tax return, that doesn't seem fair. But $5000 is the limit for using pre-tax income to pay for child care expenses when using a FSA.
 
2011-06-06 01:20:09 PM  

bunner: I'm saying only hiring people who know the secret handshake or whose daddy knows a guy who knows a guy has, so far, gotten us 14 trillion in debt, G.W. Bush and that fat prick in the server room who couldn't reboot an iPod.


The worst thing about that prick is he's too busy watching family guy on his workstation to google how to do so if he needs to.

/hate that guy
 
2011-06-06 01:22:37 PM  

Weaver95: Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit...


The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me.
(http://bible.cc/matthew/26-11.htm)
 
2011-06-06 01:25:53 PM  
Prov. 19:17

James 1:27

Prov. 21:13
 
2011-06-06 01:26:03 PM  

bunner: Father_Jack: U mad?

Yes, that must be it. Sure. Send me something to sign and you can show it your friends. *sigh*


ok maybe that was a stretch, but comon you do live in cincinnati
 
2011-06-06 01:27:03 PM  
A mother with two young children -- like Thomas -- needs $24.49 an hour to house, clothe and feed her children. That's three times the minimum wage.

I call BS...if you can;t survive on $25/hr even with 2 kids you're either a retard or has some expensive habits!

I know a LOT of people making less than that with same amount of kids and they're OK. Not rich BUT definitely not as poor as desperate as TFA makes it out to be!!!
 
2011-06-06 01:27:16 PM  

Father_Jack: bunner: Father_Jack: U mad?

Yes, that must be it. Sure. Send me something to sign and you can show it your friends. *sigh*

ok maybe that was a stretch, but comon you do live in cincinnati


You're not very good at this, are you? : )
 
2011-06-06 01:44:05 PM  

Huggermugger: serial_crusher: reklamfox: I make slightly above minimum wage with no cable (only Netflix)

I know $8/month isn't usually considered "luxurious", but... why not got to your public library and find a good book to read?

Aren't public libraries evil? I know that the 'baggers are whining about how they should be defunded because they're full of baby rapers accessing kiddie pron, and they loan out uncensored books to toddlers.

Just tell people to go outside and lick the sidewalk for entertainment.


True, but he also said he was a full time student. School library is only evil if it's a state university. Really you should be going to Liberty University though, where the library if filled with a million copies of the only Book that matters.
Or, just go pretend you're interested in joining a religious club and eat all their pizza, then pretend you're interested in joining a frat and drink all their beer? I did that a couple of times. Worked out ok.
 
2011-06-06 01:45:32 PM  

CalvinMorallis: So, basically, you made it on your own hard work, but it all started because of the luck of the draw. Yeah, you came from a good family. Good for you. And fark anyone who didn't have the same at-the-start advantages you did, right?

My parents are married. I grew up firmly middle class. My dad has his Master's and my Mom's a teacher, so education was important in my household, too. But I don't feel like I did anything to deserve such a childhood. And people who do--those who shiat on the poor, the single parent families, and the day laborers--are, truly, some of our nation's most despicable citizens.


Obviously, I had advantages. Not because my parents were particularly rich, but because they were well-educated and cared. Do I intrinsically deserve these advantages? No. Do many other Americans have a much harder time of it? Heck yes. However, I should also note that I have severe scoliosis and don't have nearly the lung capacity or general physical ability of most people. I think that offsets my advantages a bit. And even for someone overall worse off than myself, that doesn't negate the fact that it's his responsibility to get an education and work hard, not society's responsibility to give it all to him on a silver platter. Minimum wage is more than enough to survive on if you don't have a car or house payments or children, and nobody who works hard to get ahead should be making minimum wage. Minimum wage is for the bottom scrapings of the barrel, you can easily make several times that as a house cleaner, janitor, trash collector, etc. You can make far more than minimum wage just mowing lawns and cleaning gutters. The key is being self-motivated rather than just trying for the best job you can get with no qualifications and no job skills. The job market sucks, especially in poor areas, so you should be looking for work you can do on your own.
 
2011-06-06 01:46:30 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: A mother with two young children -- like Thomas -- needs $24.49 an hour to house, clothe and feed her children. That's three times the minimum wage.

I call BS...if you can;t survive on $25/hr even with 2 kids you're either a retard or has some expensive habits!


Keep them reading comprehension skills up.
 
2011-06-06 01:48:08 PM  

bunner: Father_Jack: bunner: Father_Jack: U mad?

Yes, that must be it. Sure. Send me something to sign and you can show it your friends. *sigh*

ok maybe that was a stretch, but comon you do live in cincinnati

You're not very good at this, are you? : )


well, maybe not, but still. :)

such a wonderful city fallen to such disrepair, how smart could you people be?

here's me in cinci dowtown:

"hey this is nice...wow...great city hall...lets go into this german district...wow neat houses, looks like a brick sf... neat...neat... wow there are a lot of nasty people here...but look, its so close to downtown, how bad could it be- ok nevermind roll up the windows we are getting OUT OF HERE jesus did you see that guy he was barfing and walking at the same time and i swear that guy had an ak47..."
 
2011-06-06 01:51:19 PM  

Father_Jack: "hey this is nice...wow...great city hall...lets go into this german district...wow neat houses, looks like a brick sf... neat...neat... wow there are a lot of nasty people here...but look, its so close to downtown, how bad could it be- ok nevermind roll up the windows we are getting OUT OF HERE jesus did you see that guy he was barfing and walking at the same time and i swear that guy had an ak47..."


I couldn't tell you.

I've been there twice for all of about an hour.

I repeat...

You're not very good at this. : )
 
2011-06-06 01:52:57 PM  
By the way, I think you're talking about cowtown.. again, I couldn't tell you. I dated a chick there, for a bit and she graduated cop school and is in some little burg in OH, now.
 
2011-06-06 01:53:25 PM  
How about NOT HAVING FARKING CHILDREN UNTIL YOU MAKE MORE THAN MINIMUM WAGE?

/makes minimum wage
/childless, because I'm a responsible farking adult
 
2011-06-06 01:56:04 PM  

j0ndas:

On a personal note, I taught myself how to do web design and programming, and easily make $30-$40 per hour minimum as a consultant. I was doing this before I had a college degree.Why? Because I have two married parents who stressed education and taught me to read at age 4. They didn't run out on each other, and they didn't just dump me into some crappy school and ignore me. Broken families are unsuccessful families, and not getting educated (even if it's vocational rather than academic) leads to failure.

My college degree also cost about $20K overall, since it included a lot of testing and portfolio review.


So what did you do to deserve that fortunate childhood? Sounds like you got far by living off of your parents achievements and got a leg up in the game of working life. You must be proud.
 
2011-06-06 01:56:30 PM  

Weaver95: what I don't get is how someone making less than $250,000 a year can vote Republican. Even the Jesus option doesn't explain it - Jesus was pretty clear on the whole 'help the poor' bit, which our corporate overlords don't do.


For exactly the same reason they wear Micheal Jordan shoes.
 
2011-06-06 01:59:08 PM  

Occam's Chainsaw: serial_crusher: No, I draw the line at 1 person.

At what standard of living?


Fark all this noise.

Serial:
Do you believe there should be a Federal Minimum Wage (alternative being no MW or a State Controlled MW)?

If you believe there should be any MW at all (something you have agreed to upthread), what do you believe that minimum should be TODAY?

What do you believe it should be based on?

My answers:
Yes Unless*. Because I'm getting more than a little uncomfortable with all these Governors who seem to fancy themselves kings. When acknowledging that the CoL varies pretty wildly all across the country, it's also worth noting that CoL varies wildly from county to county within those states as well.

I believe that today, a reasonable MW would be somewhere shy of 15 bucks/hr... if it's a national one.

*Unless what? Unless there are federal guidelines tying minimum wage to CoL at the state or municipal level and granting either the state or municipality control over the details.

A great many jobs in this country pay minimum wage. What this says to me is that there are a great many employers who prefer to pay people not what they are worth, but only what they are required to pay. Loosen those requirements and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect those same employers continuing to pay the bare minimum. Which is why we absolutely NEED to maintain that minimum at a sustainable level. The LEVEL is what needs to be debated. Not some wishy-washy horseshiat about bootstraps.

Bring stronger sauce to the table cause your shiat is pretty weak.
 
2011-06-06 02:02:03 PM  

Flat_Panda: So what did you do to deserve that fortunate childhood? Sounds like you got far by living off of your parents achievements and got a leg up in the game of working life. You must be proud.


Trolling? No kids? YOU decide. [vote now] : )
 
2011-06-06 02:10:34 PM  

BeesNuts: Serial:
Do you believe there should be a Federal Minimum Wage (alternative being no MW or a State Controlled MW)?

If you believe there should be any MW at all (something you have agreed to upthread), what do you believe that minimum should be TODAY?

What do you believe it should be based on?


I agree with what you said about how it varies from location to location. I guess the best approach would be for the feds to define what things you actually need (how much food can you eat, how big does your apartment have to be, how far should you be expected to commute, etc) that could determine a specific number at the state or county level. Probably state since a lot of times people live in one county and work in another etc. Then localities can choose to pile more on top as they see fit. As for how much it should be, From TFA: Single Michigan residents without children must earn $12.24 an hour to support themselves.

I'd call that a good place to start for Michigan, but remember I voiced some concerns about unrealistic standards of living, so I'd like to know more about the process that generated that figure.
I'm not an economist so I don't have an exact number.
 
2011-06-06 02:18:12 PM  

trappedspirit: LouDobbsAwaaaay: They are intentionally trying to tank the economy and drag us back into recession. It's economic terrorism.

Oh my, you actually believe that, don't you?


Oh my, you actually continue to carry water for a bunch of domestic terrorists who call themselves a political party, don't you?
 
2011-06-06 02:35:38 PM  

doglover: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS

How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.


BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.
 
2011-06-06 02:37:14 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: doglover: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS

How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.

BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.


Again. Iron-clad proof that if you, with your individual, unique circumstances, can do it, then surely anyone, regardless of their circumstances, can do it, too.
 
2011-06-06 02:45:29 PM  

CalvinMorallis: chiefsfaninkc: doglover: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS

How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.

BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.

Again. Iron-clad proof that if you, with your individual, unique circumstances, can do it, then surely anyone, regardless of their circumstances, can do it, too.


Why yes, yes they can. I worked in Restaurants until I was 25 years old and still never worked for minimum wage. If you are over the age of 17 and you work for minimum wage you are a slacker. I also worked part time at Walmart a couple of years ago cause I wanted to pay some stuff off (the10% discount was nice) and working in the Garden Center i started @ 8.50 an hour which is well below my non-union regular pay but hey it was easy, took zero skills and required no thinking.
 
2011-06-06 02:45:44 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.


And the socioeconomic topology certainly hasn't changed since 1980.

You can park your high horse over there with the others.

Sorry.

The hitching rail is a bit crowded.
 
2011-06-06 02:50:08 PM  
Human quality of life should NEVER get in the way of the success of corporations.
 
2011-06-06 02:51:27 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: CalvinMorallis: chiefsfaninkc: doglover: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS

How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.

BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.

Again. Iron-clad proof that if you, with your individual, unique circumstances, can do it, then surely anyone, regardless of their circumstances, can do it, too.

Why yes, yes they can. I worked in Restaurants until I was 25 years old and still never worked for minimum wage. If you are over the age of 17 and you work for minimum wage you are a slacker. I also worked part time at Walmart a couple of years ago cause I wanted to pay some stuff off (the10% discount was nice) and working in the Garden Center i started @ 8.50 an hour which is well below my non-union regular pay but hey it was easy, took zero skills and required no thinking.


You're a slacker. Or a felon. Or you suffer from a mental defect that your parents didn't have the proper health insurance to treat at a young enough age. Or you grew up in a family where you were lucky if you were allowed to do your schoolwork--let alone get any encouragement or help with it. Or you live in an area where the economy is so bad, those minimum wage employers are the only ones hiring.

Ah, what am I thinking? You're right. Your individual, unique to you and you alone, circumstances prove that only losers take minimum wage jobs.
 
2011-06-06 02:52:33 PM  

The First Four Black Sabbath Albums: Human quality of life should NEVER get in the way of the success of corporations.


now you're talkin' like a REEEEAL 'MERICAN.
 
2011-06-06 02:53:23 PM  

In Allah We Trust: ginandbacon: In most of the civilized world, parents and children have free health care, free nursery schools and preschools, and parents have paid maternity/paternity leave for 1 year. College tuition is also free and in some countries (Germany), students receive a stipend.

But yeah, go USA.

Sounds like soshalizm.


Well some Americans are starting to figure out that Socialism is not the great terror that the Facists in charge here want you to think it is.
 
2011-06-06 02:53:50 PM  

bunner: Father_Jack: "hey this is nice...wow...great city hall...lets go into this german district...wow neat houses, looks like a brick sf... neat...neat... wow there are a lot of nasty people here...but look, its so close to downtown, how bad could it be- ok nevermind roll up the windows we are getting OUT OF HERE jesus did you see that guy he was barfing and walking at the same time and i swear that guy had an ak47..."

I couldn't tell you.

I've been there twice for all of about an hour.

I repeat...

You're not very good at this. : )


really? you live in cincinnati and have never been downtown? how does that work? mom takes you to school and soccer practice then its home to fark or what. :)
 
2011-06-06 02:57:56 PM  

Huggermugger:
You 'baggers do not have a monopoly on personal responsibility, regardless of how much you pound your chests and declare yourselves the sole possessors of character and morals. You also do not have sole ownership of patriotic qualities, nor are you the only ones who believe in and practice "family values", and your children are not the only ones that behave in school. You do not exclusively practice good habits of nutrition and budgeting and personal hygiene. You are not the only safe drivers on the road. You are not the only people who give to charity (actually, you hardly ever do that), nor are you the only ones who follow the laws of this country and your municipalities (in fact, you are more likely to violate them, and then claim some sort of vague exceptionalism as a rationale).

In fact, most of the ones I've known have been whiny, hypocritical, slothful, amoral, and constantly blame everyone else (blacks, illegal aliens, non-Christians, furriners) for all of their misfortunes.

/keep farking that chicken, Bubba


Please activate your braincell before jumping to conclusions. I am not even American, so don't try to categorize me according to an American political movement. Neither am I Christian or Patriotic. But you seem to be a fine specimen of a well-meaning, yet utterly clueless 'tard. I wouldn't even say "lib"tard as I don't think you are intellectually able to take a political stance beyond reproducing stereotypes.
 
2011-06-06 03:02:25 PM  
BeesNuts

I believe that today, a reasonable MW would be somewhere shy of 15 bucks/hr... if it's a national one.


Holy Carp, what would it cost to get a Big Mac? That would cause some serious price and wage inflation.

/yes, I know I said Carp, not sure if they have word filters.
 
2011-06-06 03:07:40 PM  

derpdeederp: BeesNuts

I believe that today, a reasonable MW would be somewhere shy of 15 bucks/hr... if it's a national one.

Holy Carp, what would it cost to get a Big Mac? That would cause some serious price and wage inflation.

/yes, I know I said Carp, not sure if they have word filters.


What's a big mac cost now? Like 2, 2.50? Probably a whopping 2.53. A bank breaker, indeed.
 
2011-06-06 03:09:35 PM  

bunner: chiefsfaninkc: BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.

And the socioeconomic topology certainly hasn't changed since 1980.

You can park your high horse over there with the others.

Sorry.

The hitching rail is a bit crowded.


Lots of whiners in this thread.

CalvinMorallis: chiefsfaninkc: CalvinMorallis: chiefsfaninkc: doglover: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS

How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.

BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.

Again. Iron-clad proof that if you, with your individual, unique circumstances, can do it, then surely anyone, regardless of their circumstances, can do it, too.

Why yes, yes they can. I worked in Restaurants until I was 25 years old and still never worked for minimum wage. If you are over the age of 17 and you work for minimum wage you are a slacker. I also worked part time at Walmart a couple of years ago cause I wanted to pay some stuff off (the10% discount was nice) and working in the Garden Center i started @ 8.50 an hour which is well below my non-union regular pay but hey it was easy, took zero skills and required no thinking.

You're a slacker. Or a felon. Or you suffer from a mental defect that your parents didn't have the proper health insurance to treat at a young enough age. Or you grew up in a family where you were lucky if you were allowed to do your schoolwork--let alone get any encouragement or help with it. Or you live in an area where the economy is so bad, those minimum wage employers are the only ones hiring.

Ah, what am I thinking? You're right. Your individual, unique to you and you alone, circumstances prove that only losers take minimum wage jobs.


Yeap living with a single gay mother when I was in highschool in the 80's was a real treat and gave me all kinds of socioeconomic benefits.
 
2011-06-06 03:10:04 PM  

ginandbacon: In most of the civilized world, parents and children have free health care, free nursery schools and preschools, and parents have paid maternity/paternity leave for 1 year. College tuition is also free and in some countries (Germany), students receive a stipend.

But yeah, go USA.


Sure, but good luck trying to become a trillionaire in those countries.
 
2011-06-06 03:11:32 PM  

serial_crusher: I agree with what you said about how it varies from location to location. I guess the best approach would be for the feds to define what things you actually need (how much food can you eat, how big does your apartment have to be, how far should you be expected to commute, etc) that could determine a specific number at the state or county level. Probably state since a lot of times people live in one county and work in another etc. Then localities can choose to pile more on top as they see fit. As for how much it should be, From TFA: Single Michigan residents without children must earn $12.24 an hour to support themselves.


So, let's imagine two 20 year olds working at McDonalds, one of them a single college kid and the other a HS dropout with 4 dependents.

Are you saying that the dropout with the crotchfruit is going to be making significantly more than the single kid because of his superior lifestyle choices?

You may want to think your cunning plan through.
 
2011-06-06 03:14:26 PM  
2 weeks ago, my employer sent out a mass email saying that they are likely to significantly reduce salaries, benefits and retirement July 1. Last week, the 68 most senior employees, including managerial staff, submitted their retirement forms, and a large number of those unable to retire began submitting resumes and applications elsewhere. All of the clerical staff in one department have already accepted other jobs. The wizards on the top floor and utterly baffled and more than a little pissed at the prospect of reduced productivity effecting next quarter's bonuses.
 
2011-06-06 03:18:29 PM  
CalvinMorallis 2011-06-06 03:07:40 PM

derpdeederp: BeesNuts

I believe that today, a reasonable MW would be somewhere shy of 15 bucks/hr... if it's a national one.

Holy Carp, what would it cost to get a Big Mac? That would cause some serious price and wage inflation.

/yes, I know I said Carp, not sure if they have word filters.

What's a big mac cost now? Like 2, 2.50? Probably a whopping 2.53. A bank breaker, indeed.


Hmm, I would think significantly more than $.03. You would have to inflate all wages in the production stream. Lettuce pickers, cattle handlers, truckers, etc. Raising minimum wage would also raise all workers wages, it does not magically increase the quantity of goods in an economy and said goods would still be distributed to the higher buyer in a capitalistic system.

If I was making $15/hr (about twice the minimum wage) and the MW was raised to $15/hr, I would demand a higher wage, or move to a company that paid more.
 
2011-06-06 03:20:03 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: Yeap living with a single gay mother when I was in highschool in the 80's was a real treat and gave me all kinds of socioeconomic benefits.


Not what I said at all. You are using your own personal, unique-to-you circumstances and your own personal success, and saying that that proves that anyone else in the country, regardless of their personal circumstances, is just as capable as attaining the same level of success.

Going by your own logic--the single case of your success-against-the-odds--wouldn't a single, solitary case of one middle class white kid, growing up in a household with two married, Christian parents who value education, not making it prove, just as conclusively, that growing up privileged hurts one's chances of future success?
 
2011-06-06 03:25:01 PM  

Maus III: 2 weeks ago, my employer sent out a mass email saying that they are likely to significantly reduce salaries, benefits and retirement July 1. Last week, the 68 most senior employees, including managerial staff, submitted their retirement forms, and a large number of those unable to retire began submitting resumes and applications elsewhere. All of the clerical staff in one department have already accepted other jobs. The wizards on the top floor and utterly baffled and more than a little pissed at the prospect of reduced productivity effecting next quarter's bonuses.


i love it when people repost things they posted earlier.
 
2011-06-06 03:26:35 PM  

derpdeederp: CalvinMorallis 2011-06-06 03:07:40 PM

derpdeederp: BeesNuts

I believe that today, a reasonable MW would be somewhere shy of 15 bucks/hr... if it's a national one.

Holy Carp, what would it cost to get a Big Mac? That would cause some serious price and wage inflation.

/yes, I know I said Carp, not sure if they have word filters.

What's a big mac cost now? Like 2, 2.50? Probably a whopping 2.53. A bank breaker, indeed.

Hmm, I would think significantly more than $.03. You would have to inflate all wages in the production stream. Lettuce pickers, cattle handlers, truckers, etc. Raising minimum wage would also raise all workers wages, it does not magically increase the quantity of goods in an economy and said goods would still be distributed to the higher buyer in a capitalistic system.

If I was making $15/hr (about twice the minimum wage) and the MW was raised to $15/hr, I would demand a higher wage, or move to a company that paid more.


Well, granted, that's just a number I pulled out of my ass, but my point was that employee wages :: product cost isn't even close to a 1-1 ratio. Sure, prices would go up, a bit, but not even close to a rate equal to that of the wage increase.

Different company, I know, but consider this study: What happens if Wal-Mart paid entry-level workers $12 an hour? (new window) Even if the largest percentage of the cost increase goes on to shoppers, the average consumer would spend less than 50 cents more per trip.

Truth of the matter is that the lie that increasing minimum wage would increase good costs to prohibitive rates is a boogeyman scare tactic, purposely pushed by corporate lobbyists, and has no foundation in fact.
 
2011-06-06 03:27:01 PM  

Father_Jack: Maus III: 2 weeks ago, my employer sent out a mass email saying that they are likely to significantly reduce salaries, benefits and retirement July 1. Last week, the 68 most senior employees, including managerial staff, submitted their retirement forms, and a large number of those unable to retire began submitting resumes and applications elsewhere. All of the clerical staff in one department have already accepted other jobs. The wizards on the top floor and utterly baffled and more than a little pissed at the prospect of reduced productivity effecting next quarter's bonuses.

i love it when people repost things they posted earlier.


Fark you, sir. (Or ma'am).
 
2011-06-06 03:28:22 PM  

Maus III: Father_Jack: Maus III: 2 weeks ago, my employer sent out a mass email saying that they are likely to significantly reduce salaries, benefits and retirement July 1. Last week, the 68 most senior employees, including managerial staff, submitted their retirement forms, and a large number of those unable to retire began submitting resumes and applications elsewhere. All of the clerical staff in one department have already accepted other jobs. The wizards on the top floor and utterly baffled and more than a little pissed at the prospect of reduced productivity effecting next quarter's bonuses.

i love it when people repost things they posted earlier.

Fark you, sir. (Or ma'am).


you're saying fark you to me when you're the one being a spammin' little monkey?
 
2011-06-06 03:29:28 PM  

Monophtalmos: Huggermugger:
You 'baggers do not have a monopoly on personal responsibility, regardless of how much you pound your chests and declare yourselves the sole possessors of character and morals. You also do not have sole ownership of patriotic qualities, nor are you the only ones who believe in and practice "family values", and your children are not the only ones that behave in school. You do not exclusively practice good habits of nutrition and budgeting and personal hygiene. You are not the only safe drivers on the road. You are not the only people who give to charity (actually, you hardly ever do that), nor are you the only ones who follow the laws of this country and your municipalities (in fact, you are more likely to violate them, and then claim some sort of vague exceptionalism as a rationale).

In fact, most of the ones I've known have been whiny, hypocritical, slothful, amoral, and constantly blame everyone else (blacks, illegal aliens, non-Christians, furriners) for all of their misfortunes.

/keep farking that chicken, Bubba

Please activate your braincell before jumping to conclusions. I am not even American, so don't try to categorize me according to an American political movement. Neither am I Christian or Patriotic. But you seem to be a fine specimen of a well-meaning, yet utterly clueless 'tard. I wouldn't even say "lib"tard as I don't think you are intellectually able to take a political stance beyond reproducing stereotypes.


Try not digging all of your teabagge rhetoric nuggets out of your anus, and then perhaps no one will assume that you're an Amurrican moron.

/you're still a moron
 
2011-06-06 03:38:31 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: CalvinMorallis: chiefsfaninkc: doglover: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS

How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.

BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.

Again. Iron-clad proof that if you, with your individual, unique circumstances, can do it, then surely anyone, regardless of their circumstances, can do it, too.

Why yes, yes they can. I worked in Restaurants until I was 25 years old and still never worked for minimum wage. If you are over the age of 17 and you work for minimum wage you are a slacker. I also worked part time at Walmart a couple of years ago cause I wanted to pay some stuff off (the10% discount was nice) and working in the Garden Center i started @ 8.50 an hour which is well below my non-union regular pay but hey it was easy, took zero skills and required no thinking.


Give up, they are too busy wallering in self pity to better themselves. They see everything as "luck" with no free will involved, self-fulfilling prophecy of defeat is all they have. So sad.
 
2011-06-06 03:44:39 PM  

Joe Blowme: chiefsfaninkc: CalvinMorallis: chiefsfaninkc: doglover: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS

How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.

BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.

Again. Iron-clad proof that if you, with your individual, unique circumstances, can do it, then surely anyone, regardless of their circumstances, can do it, too.

Why yes, yes they can. I worked in Restaurants until I was 25 years old and still never worked for minimum wage. If you are over the age of 17 and you work for minimum wage you are a slacker. I also worked part time at Walmart a couple of years ago cause I wanted to pay some stuff off (the10% discount was nice) and working in the Garden Center i started @ 8.50 an hour which is well below my non-union regular pay but hey it was easy, took zero skills and required no thinking.

Give up, they are too busy wallering in self pity to better themselves. They see everything as "luck" with no free will involved, self-fulfilling prophecy of defeat is all they have. So sad.


Check the thread, smart guy. I'm the one who had all the built-in advantages in the world and eventually landed my dream job, but still has the humility and, let's face it, intelligence, to recognize that success in life 50% effort, and 50% having the good fortune to happen to have your leg extended when someone cracks the door open. I don't call that self-pity. I call that self-awareness
 
2011-06-06 03:52:24 PM  
Is it even mathematically possible for everyone to work themselves up to a "good" job?

If everyone woke up one day with the ability to go to school and overcome all their obstacles and quality for a high paying job, what would happen?
 
2011-06-06 03:53:34 PM  

scanman61: serial_crusher: I agree with what you said about how it varies from location to location. I guess the best approach would be for the feds to define what things you actually need (how much food can you eat, how big does your apartment have to be, how far should you be expected to commute, etc) that could determine a specific number at the state or county level. Probably state since a lot of times people live in one county and work in another etc. Then localities can choose to pile more on top as they see fit. As for how much it should be, From TFA: Single Michigan residents without children must earn $12.24 an hour to support themselves.


So, let's imagine two 20 year olds working at McDonalds, one of them a single college kid and the other a HS dropout with 4 dependents.

Are you saying that the dropout with the crotchfruit is going to be making significantly more than the single kid because of his superior lifestyle choices?

You may want to think your cunning plan through.


huh? No, I'm saying they should both be making the same amount. The college kid would be the one making "more", to the extent that he has fewer expenses.

I guess my examples like "how much can you eat" etc were a little ambiguous. I wasn't saying that they should pay each person according to their consumption. I was saying they should pick a baseline of things a single person needs, then make that the minimum wage.

Let's say 2000 calories of food a day, 450 square feet of living space, 5 mile commute to work, etc... Figure out how much all of those cost in the state/county/city in question, assume a 40 hour work week, and set that as the minimum wage.

College guy is fine on that (assuming he gets a good job after graduation to pay for all those student loans), but dropout guy and his kids are going to starve to death without some charity. That's not his employer's problem though.
 
2011-06-06 03:59:30 PM  

CalvinMorallis: Joe Blowme: chiefsfaninkc: CalvinMorallis: chiefsfaninkc: doglover: LordZorch: Amazing that people are still trying to float the "live on minimum wage" BS

How the hell are supposed to find a better job or get more education when you can't even pay your rent and buy food working six days hard labor a week.

Yes, you're not supposed to live on minimum wage. Reality check is that sometimes YOU MUST.

BS I have been working since I was in High School over 25 years ago and I have had exactly one minimum wage job and that was as a dishwasher when I was 14.

Again. Iron-clad proof that if you, with your individual, unique circumstances, can do it, then surely anyone, regardless of their circumstances, can do it, too.

Why yes, yes they can. I worked in Restaurants until I was 25 years old and still never worked for minimum wage. If you are over the age of 17 and you work for minimum wage you are a slacker. I also worked part time at Walmart a couple of years ago cause I wanted to pay some stuff off (the10% discount was nice) and working in the Garden Center i started @ 8.50 an hour which is well below my non-union regular pay but hey it was easy, took zero skills and required no thinking.

Give up, they are too busy wallering in self pity to better themselves. They see everything as "luck" with no free will involved, self-fulfilling prophecy of defeat is all they have. So sad.

Check the thread, smart guy. I'm the one who had all the built-in advantages in the world and eventually landed my dream job, but still has the humility and, let's face it, intelligence, to recognize that success in life 50% effort, and 50% having the good fortune to happen to have your leg extended when someone cracks the door open. I don't call that self-pity. I call that self-awareness


Sad really, in your world all poor people would be doomed to repeat the cycle in which they were born with only a 50% chance to do better. I happen to believe that you can do anything and overcome any obstacle if you put enough effort into it, who knew all this time all i had to do was flip a coin to see if something was worth trying. I can see the alure of your view though, with it everything is only half your fault and half fate. Makes for a wonderful excuse for failure.
 
2011-06-06 04:04:47 PM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: trappedspirit: LouDobbsAwaaaay: They are intentionally trying to tank the economy and drag us back into recession. It's economic terrorism.

Oh my, you actually believe that, don't you?

Oh my, you actually continue to carry water for a bunch of domestic terrorists who call themselves a political party, don't you?


*BLANK STARE*
 
2011-06-06 04:10:34 PM  

Father_Jack: you live in cincinnati


No.
 
2011-06-06 04:14:14 PM  

chiefsfaninkc: Lots of whiners in this thread


Not as many as there are braying, junior league Horatio Algers.
 
2011-06-06 04:14:53 PM  
Check the thread, smart guy. I'm the one who had all the built-in advantages in the world and eventually landed my dream job, but still has the humility....

Did you seriously just brag about how humble you are?
 
2011-06-06 04:18:37 PM