By living wage, I mean be able to own a home car etc. as long as they work full time.
This nation's economic portrait is a disaster-zone.
Americans Need A REAL Living Wage in all professions
By living wage, I mean be able to own a home car etc. as long as they work full time.
This nation's economic portrait is a disaster-zone.
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
Why do we need to work full time?Originally Posted by vesstheastralsilky
Sh*t needs to get done but a reduction to an average 32 would be dreamy if possible.
But the starting issue posted is a pressing one. More people could work in the professions they are most suited for if the living wage was implemented. I think the economic mess this country is in has much to do with exploitative type differences among everyone. Caregiving Fe types are constantly financially exploited, for example.
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
Because the ruling class sure as hell isn’t going to do that work, and it won’t do itself.
Besides, there is something very satisfying in watching other people work hard.
The fabric of American society was destroyed by the breakdown of the family due to excessive economic pressures after decades of legal and governmental economic mismanagement.
As it is, 1 in 3 American adults have incomes of under $10,000 a year. 1 in 3 struggle with much work just enough to get by. And 1 in 3 get $100,000 or more a year believing they deserve that privilege, having more than they know what to do with and rarely giving charity. As it is, 1 in 5 kids in the state of Michigan struggle with hunger. I never dreamed of living that statistical reality back when I did charity work in high school and most community service was mild or international then. Not to mention, I was told by a former design supervisor when I was at GM years ago that statistically the Detroit area contained the largest concentration of intelligence in the USA across all professions. Yet the state economic problems collectively persist. Simply being smart and or working hard cannot fix this crisis.
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
The problem is that action isn't being taken to account for how the increased productivity from things like automated work is only benefiting the owners of those companies, while at the same time many employees are losing market value. We need immediate and heavy-handed wealth distribution or the country is fucked.
Bullshit. I'm so glad my family broke up. You're right about the economics making life hard on people, but blood relatives aren't as important as you make them out to be. As long as you have relationships with people, if you want them, everything's good.
You're also right that being smart and working hard can't fix the USA. If the system is broken, most other things are screwed too.
That's wrong information.
According to the US Census Bureau, 22.77 percent earn less than 10,000 a year, not 1 in 3.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person..._United_States Scroll down to the part where it says, "income distribution" and look at the chart with percentages.
Anyways, if you are economically ignorant enough to think a "living wage" is going to fix the economy, vote Bernie, just don't complain employers find it easier to replace your kids' entry level job with AI and young people and low qualified workers find themselves cut off from the workforce.
Anyways, I'm not trying to be an asshole, but the point is that economics is not magic. Money doesn't grow on trees as the saying goes.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...d-for-decades/
I know it's tough for alot of people as their purchasing power adjusted for inflation hasn't really gone up (as said in the article above). One reason for this, the article says, is that employers have to pay more and more in health insurance. But the idea of raising minimum wage is not a solution because it won't make it easier for employers to pay employees, it will make it more expensive, which means small and medium sized businesses will have to fire alot of employees to keep their profits and even stay afloat. Which means there will be less jobs, for the young and low qualifed especially. It will also make it easier for big business to squeeze out competitors since they can hire and pay the difference but smaller businesses can't. I'm not against big business, but I am against de-incentivizing competition in the market. Furthermore, big business can hire an AI cheaper (over the long run) than a human employee to do the work, so I'm not even sure this will incentivize big businesses to hire you.
So I hear that it's tough (hell, I know it myself, we have similar factors in Western Europe) but that's not a reason to act like politicians can just work magic with the economy. Bernie's living wage will not give most Americans more purchasing power, especially not the ones who need it most.
Last edited by WVBRY; 11-25-2018 at 03:55 PM.
@Uncle Ave you don't come off as an asshole. I agree with you completely. I honestly find it absolutely ridiculous that people can sit in their air conditioned homes and type this kind of stuff on their Iphones. As much as flawed capitalism is, you can't deny that it's effective. The working population forms the backbone of this world. If you want to support them, as of now, the only solution is to buy more things. This creates more demand for goods, which in turn means more jobs and more money for the working class. Increasing wages means things are more expensive. It's simple logic.
Now, I'm not a supporter of laissez-faire capitalism, mind you. My views are more complex than "more consumerism!!" but this is an aspect of it.
@Pano Lou Thanks lol.
Wrt to what you're saying, I would say capitalism is not the same thing as consumerism. It's about accumulating resources (savings).
To illustrate this, let's imagine a man in a "state of nature" so to speak. He can only fish. So to stay alive he fishes three fish per day, to have three meals a day. But since he is smart, is willing to fish for nine fish per day, he has the time. Soon, he will have two days off to do other things - he builds a net - with which he can fish a hundred fish per day. Then he doesn't have to work for food, he can do other things, like start a net building business for the village he lives in - and everyone gains from this. And doing this, he is able to accumulate more and more resources than before and also makes everyone else better off.
Money is just a medium of exchange in a complex economy, and the point of capitalism is to accumulate capital, not to spend it all right away. If you spend it all right away, the economy never grows and noone gets richer.
Then the ESI fisher says “tsk, all your extra fish will go bad in the next day” and works tirelessly smoking all of LIE’s extra fish and dealing with the jealous people in the village he pisses off with his capitalism.
Wikipedia is not God. Other sources of data and statistics do exist and are not wrong by default.
22% would still be a travesty. Their data tends to be older too.
Here is where I got 1 in 3 from through the government-sponsored PBS source: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/a...e-the-numbers/ 1 in 3 is not an inaccurate statement when taking into account significant figures- a concept familiar to anyone who has had enough scientific study in physics or chemistry when applying mathematical data.
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
No, I was not making that point... I do think the two are linked though, as in, capitalism results in the growth of the economy, which in turn results in more buying power = more consumerism. I think you summed your point up pretty well.@Pano Lou Thanks lol.
Wrt to what you're saying, I would say capitalism is not the same thing as consumerism. It's about accumulating resources (savings).
To illustrate this, let's imagine a man in a "state of nature" so to speak. He can only fish. So to stay alive he fishes three fish per day, to have three meals a day. But since he is smart, is willing to fish for nine fish per day, he has the time. Soon, he will have two days off to do other things - he builds a net - with which he can fish a hundred fish per day. Then he doesn't have to work for food, he can do other things, like start a net building business for the village he lives in - and everyone gains from this. And doing this, he is able to accumulate more and more resources than before and also makes everyone else better off.
Money is just a medium of exchange in a complex economy, and the point of capitalism is to accumulate capital, not to spend it all right away. If you spend it all right away, the economy never grows and noone gets richer.
People often don't understand exactly how much effort is put into the basic things we take for granted. There's sweatshops in third world countries that make just about everything, often building materials, automobile parts are often imported, brand goods, precious jewels everything. If you sit down and think about it, you'll often realize how complex the "system" is. You can't just take one part of it, like workers in the US. It's never that simple. If the price of US goods increase, then it's not just Americans that would stop buying them. More jobs will be outsourced to Asia, the number of sweat shops that employ children will increase, more resources will be bought and sold in Asian countries. I mean, what makes more business sense? Paying an American 15 dollars/hour to harvest tea leaves, or paying some woman in India less than a dollar a day to do the same job? You should really be careful about what you wish for.
And where would the money to pay these workers more come from? From taxing them? Or do you propose that only the rich are taxed? It's easy to complain about things. Putting forward solutions that appeal to all people, not just your sentiments is more difficult.
Your making a lot of baseless assumptions here. You're assuming that the "fabric of American society" exists as a static entity that has somehow been destroyed. Even then, I fail to see the connection between it and the economic condition.The fabric of American society was destroyed by the breakdown of the family due to excessive economic pressures after decades of legal and governmental economic mismanagement.
What makes you think people are entitled to anything to begin with?By living wage, I mean be able to own a home car etc. as long as they work full time.
Also, quoting statistics is completely useless unless you can somehow make a point. You've just given numbers without explaining what metrics were used. You haven't explained how you interpret the data either. You do sound incredibly ignorant, especially for someone with such a high IQ.
You just had to throw in that little jab there, didnt you? I have a degree in engineering, I know how to interpret data. If you continue to offend me, I will PoLR hit you into oblivion. But I'm restraining myself, since you make yourself look bad without my help. Now can you please stop trolling? Or develop self awareness. Either will do.
She’s not directly talking to you or jabbing you at all. Bringing up how you have an engineering degree is pretty close to the behaviour of bragging about your IQ.
First of all, I am well aware that she's not jabbing me, she doesn't address me as all ever. But there's no need to talk to Uncle Ave like that. Why should I stand for it? She's implying that a person needs to have some kind of scientific study to be able to interpret statistics. Her overall tone is unbecoming. There's no need to talk to someone like that when they have been nothing but nice to her. Maybe it's because she's been the same way to me being rejected constantly despite my efforts to be friends with her, I just am losing tolerance for her condescending behavior.
As for my degree, what makes you think I'm bragging, lol? It's my response to what she said. A degree in STEM is noting to be proud of which is precisely my point. I had my IQ tested. I scored a whopping 105 points lol. I will never claim that I'm somehow accomplished because I went to some science school. But you're right, I should not sink to her level.
@Pano Lou Alright. There’s no point in me getting involved. All I can say is that I accept your self-typing of LSE, lol.
Um, that PBS article is about Russia.
The data I linked to is posted on Wikipedia but comes from the US Census Bureau. You are right that it is a little dated - 2016. But I doubt that that much has changed in the meantime. I mean, the 22 percent may have risen or fallen slightly - but it is not 1/3 either.
This is totally true. Everything we use in our day to day lives is so complex, from the batteries of computers to the screws that hold the hinges on a door, all of it is made somewhere in a sweatshop and at a cost that keeps our Western lifestyle cheap. I tried taking apart an old computer today - there are just so many parts and all of it is made somewhere and the production and distribution is so complex. It kinda reminds me of Milton Friedman's pencil analogy.
Exactly. People aeren't entitled to anything, they need to produce what they need it to survive and thrive. People who want a living wage so they can buy a car and house seem to me like they are just reciting an incantation in hopes money will fall from they sky. Not that there's anything wrong with wanting these things - nor doing what you can to get them without violating another person's freedom. But it is through our intelligence and hard work we obtain things in a complex economy, not by prayer, wish, magic, government edict, or whatever.
Astralsilky says that if you work hard and are smart this isn't enough to get ahead anymore. What could stop you though? Really, barring an unfortunate life event, only coercive force can stop people who are smart and work hard from succeeding. And that force comes from government regulation and control, not from the free market.
Really, I think the West and its economies are going through changes and will have to adjust. Some parts of the midwestern US have been hard hit by capital moving out of their part of the country into more productive areas like Silicon Valley and also into foreign countries where the same job American workers do can be done cheaper. And this is the fact that needs to be recognized. The West will just have to rely less on production and more on services, and with AI being the next big thing, there will be even more changes. I don't think AI will replace human workers, I do think the nature of the jobs will change though. So, many people will have to adjust. I don't the solution will come from the top down, planning of the economy only makes things worse and worse. We need more great minds to pioneer the industries of the future, and this will create more employment and more purchasing power. The most productive, innovative sectors of the economy are also the most unregulated (tech for example). The highly regulated ones like real estate and pharma tend to be the least innovative. The parts of the West that have been hit hard by outsourcing need innovative entrepreneurs in their area, not governement control over their economy.
Then stop putting yourselves in that position! You reap what you sow..
That isn't true by the way. I worked under an SEI freelance engineer a while ago and I have met ESEs who are cut throat professionals. I don't think they were exploited.
People definitely have a right to a decent life. We should be helping each other out on the basis of principle, as well.
It is true I've seen in numerous times and it makes me smack my head how you all can be so dumb.
Fuck the motherfucking ruling class.
Is there no minimum wage in the US?
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
There is but it's a joke.
Well I guess it'd make sense to have one (decent) to begin with. Some services cannot be outsourced and they'll benefit from that. Those that go out of business were likely at the limit already.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
In terms of real value, the one we have peaked in the 1960s. And that's if you use official inflation stats. Inflation is more doctored than it used to be, so the real situation is probably worse. I'm thinking about when they made substitution ok for calculating inflation. But there's other stuff too.
I'll take that as flippant sarcasm instead of simple insult, because it doesn't solve the collective's problems. The systems are broken.
~* astralsilky
Each essence is a separate glass,
Through which Sun of Being’s Light is passed,
Each tinted fragment sparkles with the Sun,
A thousand colors, but the Light is One.
Jami, 15th c. Persian Poet
Post types & fully individuated before 2012 ...
Well ime it's a mixed bag for FE types, just like it is for any other type. There are those that got the short end of the stick and others who are doing pretty, pretty well.
She said Fe caregiver types and its a pattern I cooberate with her.
Get Back to Work *puts feet up
The problem is that American society is based on corporatism that benefits the rich, but not the poor. Government gives bail outs and tax breaks to large corporations and minimal benefits to the poor so in other words socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor. They basically have it backwards so of course it ends in a growing gap between the rich and the poor. The U.S is not pure capitalist by any means as corporations are artificial legal manifestations of the government that disrupt the natural harmony of the free market.
The U.S. is a corporate oligarchy that exists to benefit the ruling class at the expense of the rest. While, pure capitalism and pure socialism seem like appealing ideas in theory, I think in practice they run into problems. I think a mixed market economy that is properly managed to benefit everyone and not the wealthiest is the best. I like the Northern European model the most, a good balance of socialism and capitalism working for benefiting the public first and foremost. Where the government redistributes wealth within a capitalist environment IMO.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
This is not unique to America. I would say most people have bad money habits and over reliance on debt, regardless of socioeconomic status. The difference is our threshold. People would rather blame society as a whole instead of owning up to their own shortcomings. You would need to either destroy inflation and the financial system with it or encourage people to make sensible financial decisions individually. Sometimes owning a house/car is not viable. I wish I had a better solution but that is the truth. I don't own a house and I probably won't for the foreseeable future due to the economic situation in my country, but I'm still saving/investing that money elsewhere in hopes that the situation changes.
I'm still well off and not in need of a personal residence, but it's a nice perk.
This basically. Forcing people to pay more than labor is worth is functionally indistinguishable from welfare, so why not just increase welfare?
Automation.
This is what it comes down to - I guess a "living wage" sounds less entitled than welfare.Besides, there is something very satisfying in watching other people work hard.
Really a better way to fix these problems would be to improve the job market by making education better (and free) and fighting the corruption and social/environmental decay that corporations perpetrate through lobbying, deceptive advertising, etc.
Education doesn't matter much. My siblings are struggling financially even though we had the same upbringing and opportunities. I honestly think a lot of people get caught up in the cycle of buying expensive things to keep up with the Joneses. One huge example of this is my brother borrowing around 130k to finance his wedding. Dude had just completed a few months at his new job. Followed by another loan a year later to buy a brand new Mercedes, which he was forced to sell at a loss later that year. He has two kids now, and he is well paid, but that didn't stop him from falling into debt and struggling with it to this day. His actual take home money is close to a quarter of his salary.
I've often lent him money when I was just a teller. He earned treble my salary at the time.
Sometimes the culture fails you and you have to be aware of that. Our culture is big on spending on stupid shit. Like weddings. Most people feel out of place if they don't conform and spend just as much. I'm not about to blow up my life savings on one night. That is pure lunacy. It's hard to find a partner that can understand and appreciate that. Being financially sensible is looked down upon. It's one of the reason why I'm only getting married now (I'm 30).
Predatory lending is another problem that can be addressed with regulation.
Though, of course individual responsibility is needed too.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote