Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
exactly what luxuries do you think burger flippers have? i love how easy it is to state something like this anectdotally, but do you actually have a real life example of someone working at mcdonald's for $6/hr and the luxurious lifestyle they are enjoying off of your dime?
More than "All the basics"
Cable TV, Smart Phones, Designer clothing, etc... Just read a few threads here...
You'll get all the "Real life examples" you need!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa
They invest it in China and India where their suppliers are, leaving you and I stuck paying their employees healthcare
Some, yes... There was an article linked to here recently which stated that even 40-60% (Don't remember exactly) of THAT stayed here...
And they don't send ALL their money to china and india... despite your claims.
You have to understand that the typical Walmart employee is not in the job for benefits and when you work at a minimum wage job, you are going to get minimum wage benefits. Most people that work at Walmart don't need the benefits-they are like your wife, a job for a second source of income. If you want better benefits, go to school, get a degree or learn a trade and get out of the minimum wage paying cycle. There are options.
I think this is true to a point....but it also points to how minimum wage jobs can become a trap, especially for someone who had a kid or two too young or who weren't taught middle class values growing up.
I actually have more a of a beef with the lack of retirement benefits than health care benefits. Personally, I think 401ks should be universal, have at least 3% matches, and vest immediately (and matches should not be in company stock unless the employees wants it that way).
The health care cost problem could be fixed with food reform and a true free mearket health care system with real competition (modeled after Switzerland's), which we haven't had since before World War 2. It would inevitably involve some government subsidies, but nothing like what we're spending now (for such lousy results).
The real problem is divorce. It takes two incomes to raise a child, or children. I often think about that, my great-grandparents were pretty miserable together, but they stayed married, miserably, for 65 years. I divorced my ex, because I was unhappy, and have suffered economically because of that, and so have my kids. I sometimes think, I should have just sucked it up, and stayed married...miserable, but better able to support my kids.
You've hit on a good point.
I think the big divide in our society the way we're going is going to be families that have one parent versus families with two parents.
Kids growing up in families with 2 parents are better off in every category -- education, financial, emotional adjustment, teen pregnancy rates, incarceration rates later in life, etc.
The idea we have that a single person should be able to raise and support kids alone is a miserable failure, and has never worked throughout history. One way or another, it takes two people, even if one isn't necessarily working outside the home.
Our big mistake is that we have falsely equated selfishness/short term happiness with long-term happiness. I think that many marriages fail because people know there is an out, so they don't have to try as hard to make it work. In the past, people knew there was really no out, so they tried harder to make it work.
We thought that encouraging various forms of selfishness and shortsightedness would make us happier, but that doesn't seem to be the case at all.
I think this is true to a point....but it also points to how minimum wage jobs can become a trap, especially for someone who had a kid or two too young or who weren't taught middle class values growing up.
I actually have more a of a beef with the lack of retirement benefits than health care benefits. Personally, I think 401ks should be universal, have at least 3% matches, and vest immediately (and matches should not be in company stock unless the employees wants it that way).
The health care cost problem could be fixed with food reform and a true free mearket health care system with real competition (modeled after Switzerland's), which we haven't had since before World War 2. It would inevitably involve some government subsidies, but nothing like what we're spending now (for such lousy results).
I think this is true to a point....but it also points to how minimum wage jobs can become a trap, especially for someone who had a kid or two too young or who weren't taught middle class values growing up.
I actually have more a of a beef with the lack of retirement benefits than health care benefits. Personally, I think 401ks should be universal, have at least 3% matches, and vest immediately (and matches should not be in company stock unless the employees wants it that way).
The health care cost problem could be fixed with food reform and a true free mearket health care system with real competition (modeled after Switzerland's), which we haven't had since before World War 2. It would inevitably involve some government subsidies, but nothing like what we're spending now (for such lousy results).
I do not think that immediate vesting is in the best interest for anyone. It's expensive for companies and it doesn't encourage longevity for employees. Walmart has a 401K option for employees as well as a generous ESOP program.
Keep in mind, you can have all the retirement plans you want, but the truth is, most people do NOT take advantage of those programs. Heck, look at threads here about people wanting to drop health care coverage or not taking advantage of 401K because it costs too much. There is a VERY, VERY small percentage of people in the US that does not have ACCESS to a health plan but a very large percent of those without health coverage that opt OUT of taking their plans...add in state pool plans and individual plans and pretty much every person in the US COULD have health insurance coverage.
Also, EVERYONE has access to an IRA of some sort. Not planning for your retirement years should NOT be at the burden of a company. Sure it's a nice perk. I would like to see more companies offer pension plans again, funded plans through a strong annuity program, but those became dirty words in houses (mainly people 99% of the people don't understand how they really work). THAT along with social security would at least give most people money for their needs in retirement years (housing, food, clothing, medical care, etc.) and they can take care of their wants (travel, spoiling grandkids, etc.) with 401K's, IRA's, etc.
not enough studies yet but there is data showing that people living longer and older would tax the health care system to the point of breaking.
short term the smoking ,obesity and general unhealthiness may stress the system but these folks dying younger may be a good thing for the system.
I disagree on the people dying younger part. The thing is, people who live truly healthy lifestyles use the health care system much less throughout their life spans. See this video:
The book, The Blue Zones, which the video was based on, talked about how in parts of the world where life expectancy is very high, people just don't need as much health care throughout their lives and they die in their sleep.
I think the big divide in our society the way we're going is going to be families that have one parent versus families with two parents.
Kids growing up in families with 2 parents are better off in every category -- education, financial, emotional adjustment, teen pregnancy rates, incarceration rates later in life, etc.
The idea we have that a single person should be able to raise and support kids alone is a miserable failure, and has never worked throughout history. One way or another, it takes two people, even if one isn't necessarily working outside the home.
Our big mistake is that we have falsely equated selfishness/short term happiness with long-term happiness. I think that many marriages fail because people know there is an out, so they don't have to try as hard to make it work. In the past, people knew there was really no out, so they tried harder to make it work.
We thought that encouraging various forms of selfishness and shortsightedness would make us happier, but that doesn't seem to be the case at all.
You might enjoy the book The Way We Never Were by Stephanie Coontz.
Here is a clip of a lecture she gave about differences between marriage and family in the past vs. how it is today
Some might observe the current situation and surmise that those who can afford to have children have the fewest and those who can't have the most. Isn't that really the problem?
there isnt enough data yet to come to a conclusion either way but bothsides seem to be supported .
"In a paper in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either obese people or smokers.
Van Baal and colleagues created a model to simulate lifetime health costs for three groups of 1,000 people: the "healthy-living" group (thin and nonsmoking), obese people, and smokers. The model relied on "cost of illness" data and disease prevalence in the Netherlands in 2003.
The researchers found that from age 20 to 56, obese people racked up the most expensive health costs. But because both the smokers and the obese people died sooner than the healthy group, it cost less to treat them in the long run.
On average, healthy people lived 84 years. Smokers lived about 77 years and obese people lived about 80 years. Smokers and obese people tended to have more heart disease than the healthy people.
Cancer incidence, except for lung cancer, was the same in all three groups. Obese people had the most diabetes, and healthy people had the most strokes. Ultimately, the thin and healthy group cost the most, about $417,000, from age 20 on.
The cost of care for obese people was $371,000, and for smokers, about $326,000.
The results counter the common perception that preventing obesity will save health systems worldwide millions of dollars."
Quit having children then, its that simple. Your salary is paid for YOU not for your children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
