Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!

[carpedm9587]

I think I agree with OBP here...

And I'll respond as I did to him. It seems rather foolish to continue to do things that are frustrating. Go talk with someone else. I promise I won't mind. Now - setting the sidetrack into ad homs aside, let's look at the argument.

Where there is a gut of employees out there desperate for work, you have people sitting at home jobless, making NOTHING. Which is considerably less than minimum wage. I think I would rather have the CHOICE to work for less than minimum wage than make nothing at all.

Assuming you meant "glut" - there is no argument here. Minimum wage is better than nothing.

But again, there is a point for everyone where working for so little is not worth the effort. And companies will not be able to compete because they can't get workers. The solution is not forcing higher wages. It is helping people get training so they can get better jobs. So they don't HAVE to take a job picking cabbages. More skill means more choice.

You paint a false dichotomy. Yes - training is a necessary component. So too is ensuring that anyone who works is paid a living wage for their labor. When you add that there is a requirement in most support systems for the person to show they are working or attempting to get work in order to secure support, you have a lot of people working full time and STILL having to depend on government support to feed, house, and clothe their families. A minimum - living wage - reduces the need for government support.

America is not the country of economic justice. It is the land of opportunity. And when you get training you have more opportunity. Nobody owes you a living carp. As you tell your kids, life isn't fair. It is up to you to make the best of your life. If someone wants to sit on their butts all day and not go to school or get any training then they will end up working at the bottom of the pile for whatever wages they can get, or just live off of welfare or end up homeless. It is up to them. Rich people don't own poor people anything. They pay their employees what the employees agree to work for. That is only fair. The employees always have the choice to not take the job. And the more skills they have the more opportunity they have.

Here we delve back into the inverse of the "land of opportunity" argument, which has repeatedly been shown to be false. Because this is a land of opportunity, it does not follow that anyone who is not "making it" is lazy and sitting on their butts. Yes - there are such people and we need better mechanisms to weed them out of the system and let them deal with the consequences of their choices. These are not the people I am talking about. I am talking about the people trapped in the cycle of poverty for any number of reasons.

And rich people DO owe poor people something if they made their riches on the backs of the poor. I would argue that a man walking away with $22.8M in one year when the line-level employees often have to get two jobs or go on financial support is "making their money on the backs of others." It is theft of labor - and it is perfectly just to right that theft by either forcing a minimum wage, or taxing the rich at a higher level and using the funds to provide support for the poor. You are not stealing if you take back what was stolen and give it to those from whom it was stolen.

[Sparko]

And I'll respond as I did to him. It seems rather foolish to continue to do things that are frustrating. Go talk with someone else. I promise I won't mind. Now - setting the sidetrack into ad homs aside, let's look at the argument.



Assuming you meant "glut" - there is no argument here. Minimum wage is better than nothing.



You paint a false dichotomy. Yes - training is a necessary component. So too is ensuring that anyone who works is paid a living wage for their labor. When you add that there is a requirement in most support systems for the person to show they are working or attempting to get work in order to secure support, you have a lot of people working full time and STILL having to depend on government support to feed, house, and clothe their families. A minimum - living wage - reduces the need for government support.



Here we delve back into the inverse of the "land of opportunity" argument, which has repeatedly been shown to be false. Because this is a land of opportunity, it does not follow that anyone who is not "making it" is lazy and sitting on their butts. Yes - there are such people and we need better mechanisms to weed them out of the system and let them deal with the consequences of their choices. These are not the people I am talking about. I am talking about the people trapped in the cycle of poverty for any number of reasons.

And rich people DO owe poor people something if they made their riches on the backs of the poor. I would argue that a man walking away with $22.8M in one year when the line-level employees often have to get two jobs or go on financial support is "making their money on the backs of others." It is theft of labor - and it is perfectly just to right that theft by either forcing a minimum wage, or taxing the rich at a higher level and using the funds to provide support for the poor. You are not stealing if you take back what was stolen and give it to those from whom it was stolen.

It is not theft of labor. He offered them a job for a specific amount of pay. They accepted of their own free will. The purpose of a company is to make profit. The profit is used to pay the owners, the employees, make capital investments, etc. Making a profit is in everyone's best interest. It is not evil. You try to make a profit in your company don't you?

In America, we are free to take jobs elsewhere. Or to start our own company, or be a freelancer. Heck with a car you can be your own boss driving for Lyft or Uber or Amazon now. There is no reason to work at a crappy job. Nobody is holding them hostage. You don't like how walmart is treating you? Go somewhere else. Drive for Uber. Sell on Ebay. Sell hotdogs on the street. There are MILLIONS of things a person can do to make money besides working for minimum wage at a sweatshop.

Why do you think all those illegal aliens want to come here? We ARE the land of opportunity.

Your whole Debbie Downer attitude with regards to business and wages gets really old. And you are a business owner.

[carpedm9587]

It is not theft of labor. He offered them a job for a specific amount of pay. They accepted of their own free will. The purpose of a company is to make profit. The profit is used to pay the owners, the employees, make capital investments, etc. Making a profit is in everyone's best interest. It is not evil. You try to make a profit in your company don't you?

Tell the father of a family that cannot find work that they are "taking a minimum wage job of their own free will." Often people are in a position of choosing from what is available. The cycle of poverty is exactly that - a hard to break cycle that gets harder the longer you are in it. The data is fairly clear. The average stint at a poverty level in the U.S. is 2.8 years. The longer one is in poverty, the lower the chance that they will escape the cycle. By the time someone has been in poverty 7 or more years, they have an 83% chance (or more) of staying in poverty.

In America, we are free to take jobs elsewhere. Or to start our own company, or be a freelancer.

So if someone lacks the skills to get anything more than an entry-level position, what makes you think they have the wherewithal to start a company? Or a skill/product they can sell? Some do - many don't.

Heck with a car you can be your own boss driving for Lyft or Uber or Amazon now.

The key part of this sentence is "with a car." And Uber/Lyft drivers may do well in New York City or other major Metro areas, but they aren't going to do so in the average small town.

There is no reason to work at a crappy job. Nobody is holding them hostage. You don't like how walmart is treating you? Go somewhere else. Drive for Uber. Sell on Ebay. Sell hotdogs on the street. There are MILLIONS of things a person can do to make money besides working for minimum wage at a sweatshop.

Your lack of knowledge about poverty in the U.S. is amazing. And I am not sure if your broad-sweeping view that anyone who is trapped in poverty is simply lazy and or shiftless is more offensive or more simply naive.

Why do you think all those illegal aliens want to come here? We ARE the land of opportunity.

There is no question that the lowest opportunity here is better than the opportunities in many other countries. And, in general, this is a country of greater security - at least for most people. That is why they come. That does not mean we do not have our own poor. Poverty is not measured in raw dollars - it is measured in the relationship between earning and cost of living.

Your whole Debbie Downer attitude with regards to business and wages gets really old. And you are a business owner.

Yes - I am - and my business exists to create a profit to support my family. I created my business specifically because I felt I was one of those that other people were making their money on my back - and I set out to change that. But I did so with the benefit of a master's degree and 20 years of industry experience. I managed that master's degree because I grew up in a home with two parents, food shelter and clothing, and enough parental supervision to make sure I did my school work and learned basic skills of life.

Today we have countless families with one or two parents, with two or three jobs. They are barely putting food on the table and a roof over the head, and to do that they work countless hours for pittance wages and no benefits. One medical problem and they are sunk. We have people in jail who are there without benefit of trial because they can't post bail. They might be there for unpaid parking tickets because they can't afford to park their cars. They might be there for speeding because they were late for work and afraid to lose their jobs.

Your callous disregard for those who are less fortunate with regards to wages and status of life gets really old - and somewhat sad. And you are a Christian.

[Sparko]

Tell the father of a family that cannot find work that they are "taking a minimum wage job of their own free will." Often people are in a position of choosing from what is available. The cycle of poverty is exactly that - a hard to break cycle that gets harder the longer you are in it. The data is fairly clear. The average stint at a poverty level in the U.S. is 2.8 years. The longer one is in poverty, the lower the chance that they will escape the cycle. By the time someone has been in poverty 7 or more years, they have an 83% chance (or more) of staying in poverty.

Again, if someone has no training or skill, they will need to take what they can get. That is not the fault of the employer, that is the fault of the employee. The employer owes nobody a living. He has a company, and needs people to do work. He offers pay that will be a compromise on getting the best workers while still keeping his costs to a minimum to make his product affordable and profitable. Nobody is forced to take the jobs. And if nobody takes them, the employer will need to raise the wages. But if a father of three can't find a job other than a minimum wage job, then he is the only one at fault for not having the skills needed to get a better job.

So if someone lacks the skills to get anything more than an entry-level position, what makes you think they have the wherewithal to start a company? Or a skill/product they can sell? Some do - many don't.

Well if they don't then they are out of luck. Still not the employers fault. Life isn't fair. But it doesn't take any skill to drive an Uber or sell stuff on Ebay. Or start a cleaning service, or lawn care service.

The key part of this sentence is "with a car." And Uber/Lyft drivers may do well in New York City or other major Metro areas, but they aren't going to do so in the average small town.

How would you know? And that was just an example. There is Task Rabbit and other such services. There are lots of opportunity for someone who actually WANTS to work.

Your lack of knowledge about poverty in the U.S. is amazing. And I am not sure if your broad-sweeping view that anyone who is trapped in poverty is simply lazy and or shiftless is more offensive or more simply naive.

No yours is. I grew up poor. My dad grew up the son of a preacher with 12 kids. He joined the Army because the only other job was the coal mines. He was a sergeant. We never had any money. I grew up in a trailer. My dad turned into an alcoholic. I paid my own way through trade school and then college and worked my way into a nice job now. My first home was a HUD house, a 1 bedroom shack I had to renovate myself. So I know poverty.

Yes - I am - and my business exists to create a profit to support my family. I created my business specifically because I felt I was one of those that other people were making their money on my back - and I set out to change that. But I did so with the benefit of a master's degree and 20 years of industry experience. I managed that master's degree because I grew up in a home with two parents, food shelter and clothing, and enough parental supervision to make sure I did my school work and learned basic skills of life.

Sounds like YOU are the one who has the lack of knowledge about poverty.

Your callous disregard for those who are less fortunate with regards to wages and status of life gets really old - and somewhat sad. And you are a Christian.

I was one of them. I know the difference between someone who is willing to work their way out of a hole and someone who expects others to just take care of them so they can sit in their trailer and watch the soaps and smoke pot all day. I have no problem with disabled getting help, but if you can work you have no excuse. Life isn't fair. It's up to each of us to scrabble our way out of the hole and make a decent living for ourselves and our family. The rich owe us nothing. All we need is a level playing ground, and I believe America offers that.

[One Bad Pig]

Based on your posts, OBP, I am dubious about the emphasized claim.

There is nothing in my posts which suggests anything of the sort. I am sorry that you are apparently unable to take my personal experiences at face value.

Then I suggest engaging with someone else.

Doing that.

[carpedm9587]

There is nothing in my posts which suggests anything of the sort.

Huh? Anything of what sort?

I am sorry that you are apparently unable to take my personal experiences at face value.

Personal experiences are exactly that: personal experiences. They are not a substitute for broader data. Too many people base their beliefs of their own personal experiences and never look further to see the broader picture. So the man who walks away from a plane crash unscathed when everyone else is dead screams, "miracle!" But if you look across the entire breadth of plane crashes, the probability that someone will walk away unscathed is significant. The probability that a given person will win the lottery is minuscule - but the probability that someone will win the lottery is fairly high - high enough that it will eventually happen.

Personal experience informs us - but it can also distort our perceptions.

Doing that.

Been interesting talking with you. It would have been better if we could have stayed focused on the subject.

[carpedm9587]

Again, if someone has no training or skill, they will need to take what they can get. That is not the fault of the employer, that is the fault of the employee. The employer owes nobody a living. He has a company, and needs people to do work. He offers pay that will be a compromise on getting the best workers while still keeping his costs to a minimum to make his product affordable and profitable. Nobody is forced to take the jobs. And if nobody takes them, the employer will need to raise the wages. But if a father of three can't find a job other than a minimum wage job, then he is the only one at fault for not having the skills needed to get a better job.

Well if they don't then they are out of luck. Still not the employers fault. Life isn't fair. But it doesn't take any skill to drive an Uber or sell stuff on Ebay. Or start a cleaning service, or lawn care service.

How would you know? And that was just an example. There is Task Rabbit and other such services. There are lots of opportunity for someone who actually WANTS to work.

No yours is. I grew up poor. My dad grew up the son of a preacher with 12 kids. He joined the Army because the only other job was the coal mines. He was a sergeant. We never had any money. I grew up in a trailer. My dad turned into an alcoholic. I paid my own way through trade school and then college and worked my way into a nice job now. My first home was a HUD house, a 1 bedroom shack I had to renovate myself. So I know poverty.

Sounds like YOU are the one who has the lack of knowledge about poverty.

I was one of them. I know the difference between someone who is willing to work their way out of a hole and someone who expects others to just take care of them so they can sit in their trailer and watch the soaps and smoke pot all day. I have no problem with disabled getting help, but if you can work you have no excuse. Life isn't fair. It's up to each of us to scrabble our way out of the hole and make a decent living for ourselves and our family. The rich owe us nothing. All we need is a level playing ground, and I believe America offers that.

I've read through your responses, and further back and forth seems clearly pointless. You are locked, apparently, into a view that your experience is the experience of everyone else - and blind to the true cycle of systemic poverty. In my experience, someone with your views never changes them, and is impervious to data or reason. So I'll leave you to it. Last word to you.

[seer]

They are not a substitute for broader data.

Here is some broader data from the liberal Brookings Institute:

Policy aimed at promoting economic opportunity for poor children must be framed within three stark realities. First, many poor children come from families that do not give them the kind of support that middle-class children get from their families. Second, as a result, these children enter kindergarten far behind their more advantaged peers and, on average, never catch up and even fall further behind. Third, in addition to the education deficit, poor children are more likely to make bad decisions that lead them to drop out of school, become teen parents, join gangs and break the law.

In addition to the thousands of local and national programs that aim to help young people avoid these life-altering problems, we should figure out more ways to convince young people that their decisions will greatly influence whether they avoid poverty and enter the middle class. Let politicians, schoolteachers and administrators, community leaders, ministers and parents drill into children the message that in a free society, they enter adulthood with three major responsibilities: at least finish high school, get a full-time job and wait until age 21 to get married and have children.

Our research shows that of American adults who followed these three simple rules, only about 2 percent are in poverty and nearly 75 percent have joined the middle class (defined as earning around $55,000 or more per year). There are surely influences other than these principles at play, but following them guides a young adult away from poverty and toward the middle class.

https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/t...-middle-class/

https://www.brookings.edu/research/w...y-and-welfare/

[Sparko]

I've read through your responses, and further back and forth seems clearly pointless. You are locked, apparently, into a view that your experience is the experience of everyone else - and blind to the true cycle of systemic poverty. In my experience, someone with your views never changes them, and is impervious to data or reason. So I'll leave you to it. Last word to you.

YOU were the one who questioned my "knowledge of poverty." I would say that having lived in it, my experience shows that I have a good deal of knowledge of it and how to get out of it. Where on the other hand you apparently had a sliver spoon shoved up your rear and everything handed to you on a silver platter and only know about poverty by reading statistics.

[One Bad Pig]

Been interesting talking with you. It would have been better if we could have stayed focused on the subject.

Perhaps if you could have avoided accusing me of specious charges like seeing what I want to see.... I no longer expect anything better of you.

[Sparko]

Here is some broader data from the liberal Brookings Institute:

Policy aimed at promoting economic opportunity for poor children must be framed within three stark realities. First, many poor children come from families that do not give them the kind of support that middle-class children get from their families. Second, as a result, these children enter kindergarten far behind their more advantaged peers and, on average, never catch up and even fall further behind. Third, in addition to the education deficit, poor children are more likely to make bad decisions that lead them to drop out of school, become teen parents, join gangs and break the law.

In addition to the thousands of local and national programs that aim to help young people avoid these life-altering problems, we should figure out more ways to convince young people that their decisions will greatly influence whether they avoid poverty and enter the middle class. Let politicians, schoolteachers and administrators, community leaders, ministers and parents drill into children the message that in a free society, they enter adulthood with three major responsibilities: at least finish high school, get a full-time job and wait until age 21 to get married and have children.

Our research shows that of American adults who followed these three simple rules, only about 2 percent are in poverty and nearly 75 percent have joined the middle class (defined as earning around $55,000 or more per year). There are surely influences other than these principles at play, but following them guides a young adult away from poverty and toward the middle class.

https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/t...-middle-class/

https://www.brookings.edu/research/w...y-and-welfare/

Yep. Education is the key. And basic education is free and trade school is still pretty cheap. Even community colleges are not that expensive. There are grants and scholarships you can apply for. I paid for all of my education myself, starting with a job working at KFC.

I wouldn't be opposed to a good plan to help pay for college for anyone who wants to go, as long as it was for a practical degree that could be turned into a job. But I fear such a plan would just be throwing money away as greedy colleges take the cash and just train our kids to be activists with no employable skills.

[carpedm9587]

Here is some broader data from the liberal Brookings Institute:

So you post an article about effect without cause. Ask "why do families of poor children not give them the support middle class families do? In many cases (certainly not all - but many), they are forced to work multiple jobs just to make ends meet - and do so without things like medical benefits because low-wage jobs are regularly scheduled below 40 hours and considered part-time. And the local/national programs have been widely gutted. Today, less than 30% of the money earmarked for welfare is actually used for cash assistance. Why? Take a read. Indeed, the way assistance is now structured, people are literally penalized for getting work, but also penalized if they do not look for and secure work. It becomes an endless cycle.

Building principles into children is hard work. It requires time and energy. Many of the families I work with are struggling just to keep their heads above water. The groups I work with are quick to spot the person who is just out to "game the system" and they are quickly disconnected. But they are the minority, at least in this area. And we often cannot meet all of the need for those truly struggling to escape poverty, because we lack the resources.

In the face of that, dismissive attitudes like Sparko's are, frankly, offensive. They represent a broad attitude within many people on the right that is the inverse of the American dream. If we are the land of opportunity, it follows that anyone not "making it" must be lazy and shiftless. Some are. The majority are not. The majority are truly struggling - and deserve our support and our encouragement - not our ridicule and dismissal.

Perhaps the Christians with those attitudes should do a little selective reading.

[carpedm9587]

Perhaps if you could have avoided accusing me of specious charges like seeing what I want to see.... I no longer expect anything better of you.

I'm sorry you're offended, OBP - but your posts reflect exactly that. You and Sparko seem to be making the same mistake: assuming that your personal experience must be how it is for everyone else. I know from my own experience that it is not. Indeed, I know that both type of people exist: those who need the help, and those who want to game the system and are lazy and shiftless. As best I can tell, the positions of the pair of you is that the former do not exist.

[carpedm9587]

This is a classic article about the cycle of poverty. I strongly recommend people take a moment and read it.

[seer]

So you post an article about effect without cause. Ask "why do families of poor children not give them the support middle class families do? In many cases (certainly not all - but many), they are forced to work multiple jobs just to make ends meet - and do so without things like medical benefits because low-wage jobs are regularly scheduled below 40 hours and considered part-time. And the local/national programs have been widely gutted. Today, less than 30% of the money earmarked for welfare is actually used for cash assistance. Why? Take a read. Indeed, the way assistance is now structured, people are literally penalized for getting work, but also penalized if they do not look for and secure work. It becomes an endless cycle.

Building principles into children is hard work. It requires time and energy. Many of the families I work with are struggling just to keep their heads above water. The groups I work with are quick to spot the person who is just out to "game the system" and they are quickly disconnected. But they are the minority, at least in this area. And we often cannot meet all of the need for those truly struggling to escape poverty, because we lack the resources.

In the face of that, dismissive attitudes like Sparko's are, frankly, offensive. They represent a broad attitude within many people on the right that is the inverse of the American dream. If we are the land of opportunity, it follows that anyone not "making it" must be lazy and shiftless. Some are. The majority are not. The majority are truly struggling - and deserve our support and our encouragement - not our ridicule and dismissal.

Perhaps the Christians with those attitudes should do a little selective reading.

Look at the three things, get a high school education, don't have children out of wedlock and get a full time job. If you do those three things, only 2% remain in poverty, 75% actually reach the middle class. Are you suggesting the poor are too stupid or immoral to follow these three simple steps? And BTW your Biblical references are not about forced charity instituted by the government. I have post more than once on this site what our Church does to help the poor, including feeding close to three hundred every month.