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.
Just because something is intended not to do something does not mean it won't eventually be intended to do it. Things change and you have to adjust ideas and laws. It was probably not intended to be a living wage back then because most every person was already being paid a living wage and they did not need to make sure business were paying a fair wage.
Methinks you're living in a fantasy world. The past was not as glorious as you imagine it to be. In the past, people did not have kids out of wedlock, so that served as a kind of economic protection. In the past, people lived in multigenerational housholds and didn't expect that their kids would have their own bedrooms, etc. In the past, people cooparated more as families and didn't expect the government or employers to make up the difference if they couldn't make ends meet.
Sorry, but when were grocery store cashiers, bakers, managers, stockers, etc done by kids for spare coin? Never....
Bag boys represent a small fraction of grocery store workers and they are, as they were in the past, largely young men working part-time.
The thinking on this thread is fundamentally fallacious, everyone can't get more educated and get a better career.
Actually, yes, everyone can. That's why this is called the "land of opportunity", that's why people come here from all over the world to take a stab at that piece of the pie that EVERYONE has the opportunity to get. You just have to want it bad enough and stop making a bunch of b.s. excuses as to why you can't. If you have an excuse, you obviously do not want it bad enough.
Success doesn't come easy. Success requires years of hard work, starting at the bottom, putting up with a bunch of crap and working, HARD, to move your way up. No one ever said success was easy but it seems everyone wants it to be easy and then cries when it's not. You want it, go get it. Stop complaining.
Quote:
Grocery store jobs, retail, low-skill manufacturing, etc represent a large fraction of available jobs in this country. Getting more education, etc only improves your position if the majority aren't doing the same thing...
The majority of the people are not working in grocery and retail. That's why those jobs pay low.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
My age is irrelevant and so are your memories. Grocery stores still hire teenagers to do basic work, bagging, cleaning, etc. But you can't run a grocery store with teenage labor and that is just as much true today as it was decades ago. The turnover rate for teenagers is high and the quality of the work is poor....
That is horribly unfair to teen agers everywhere. Some of the hardest working people I have seen at the stores I visit are teen agers. It doesn't take a whole hell of a lot of experience to learn how to pack a grocery bag or push a broom or empty a trash.
The teens that work hard are the ones who show up on time, who do what they are supposed to do and look for more, who are courteous to everyone, who look presentable as if they care about themselves and their jobs, and who come back every summer or continue to work throughout the school year after school.
It's insulting that you say teenagers provide poor work.
Quote:
Though its certainly possible that grocery store workers 40+ years ago were younger on average, less people graduated high school and fewer went to college.
And 40 years ago, most women stayed at home. So your averages are meaningless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
I never suggested that workers become "magically good" after graduation, instead I stated that any job filed with teenagers is going to have a high turnover rate and as a result you're not going to get the same quality. Furthermore, teenagers just lack experience which again contributes to lower overall quality. Also, if the job requires any sort of training teenagers aren't going to provide good value, they are just too transient.
See above. You are insulting teen agers when the fact is, that is NOT how most teen agers act when they get a job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Right we're back to the delusion that everyone in the US can increase their education and gain a "real career". Let's ignore the fact that most jobs in the US aren't high skilled and rely on our teenage memories...
It's not a delusion. What is a delusion is to think that success will be easy. You can work hard at making something out of yourself or you can work hard at complaining about how unfair it all is.
Quote:
But without union protection the wages would likely be lower, the question is whether that outcome is actually desirable in terms of US society.
And when wages are lower, things don't tend to be so damn expensive to make up for those high wages.
Umm....my comments are about positions filled with a teenaged work-force. Teenagers change jobs often and they often only work during particular parts of the year, most notably the summer.
Right we're back to the delusion that everyone in the US can increase their education and gain a "real career". Let's ignore the fact that most jobs in the US aren't high skilled and rely on our teenage memories...
But without union protection the wages would likely be lower, the question is whether that outcome is actually desirable in terms of US society.
Then why not go the step further and just have the unions force businesses to cut these low skilled workers a check. Without even working. Most jobs may not require high skills but they require labor and attention.
You are very ignorant about history. Kids were dying in wars at the age you are insulting them at as being lazy. Guess who else makes a good work force. Seniors.
Last edited by 1AngryTaxPayer; 08-23-2011 at 05:22 PM..
Actually, yes, everyone can. That's why this is called the "land of opportunity", that's why people come here from all over the world to take a stab at that piece of the pie that EVERYONE has the opportunity to get.
No, everyone can't. You are mistaking the possibility of doing better than others with everyone doing better than everyone. The latter isn't possible, only the former.
Everyone in the US can't have a good career because there are tons of low-skill jobs and these jobs are essential to the operation of commerce throughout the country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow
It's insulting that you say teenagers provide poor work.
I'm not concerned with whether I'm insulting teenagers or not...
Then why not go the step further and just have the unions force businesses to cut these low skilled workers a check. Without even working.
I'm sorry, but how is union representation anything like cutting people a check for the heck of it?
A union represents its members and tries to get the best possible wages/benefits given the earnings of the business. A union can't get arbitrarily high wages for its members....
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer
Kids were dying in wars at the age you are insulting them at as being lazy.
Except, of course, I didn't call anybody lazy. It would be helpful if you actually responded to what I said....
We do need to do something as a country to develop higher wage jobs/industries.
Most of the lower paying jobs are domestic service sector jobs, how exactly do you do something to develop higher wages in this sector?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
Stopping illegal immigration and pushing for more skills/education are part of the solution. But I don't think jacking up the minimum wage from $8 to $12 per hour really helps.
Illegal immigrants make up around 5% of the work force and the vast majority can be found in a handful of industries (farming, etc).
Increasing the aggregate education of the population will only have very modest effects on wages, everyone can have a ph.d yet grocery stores will need cashiers, someone will need to cook the fries at McDonalds and so on.
Regardless, the jobs in the middle are slowly disappearing and the US has two choices, either try to create a more equal society or let the US turn into a sort of modern feudal nation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
I also think people having kids without being married is also a major contributor to income/wealth inequality.
If you isolate your attention to married couples or single individuals there is still massive inequality in this country..
Most of the lower paying jobs are domestic service sector jobs, how exactly do you do something to develop higher wages in this sector?..
Reduce the supply of people willing to do them, which will either eliminate those jobs or raise the wages in them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Illegal immigrants make up around 5% of the work force and the vast majority can be found in a handful of industries (farming, etc)...
It's definitely not a complete solution, but it's part of the puzzle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Increasing the aggregate education of the population will only have very modest effects on wages, everyone can have a ph.d yet grocery stores will need cashiers, someone will need to cook the fries at McDonalds and so on...
Depends on what they have PhDs in. If they're in humanities, then it's a problem. If there are more people qualified for the sciences & engineering, we'll do better. There are lots of jobs in these fields that Americans aren't qualified for. Some people will just never have the smarts, but others do, but never get there, partly because of low education standards. I will admit that this is a partial solution to the inequality problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Regardless, the jobs in the middle are slowly disappearing and the US has two choices, either try to create a more equal society or let the US turn into a sort of modern feudal nation...
Like I said, I concur with this to an extent. I don't have all the answers. But I don't think jacking up the minimum wage is a viable answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
If you isolate your attention to married couples or single individuals there is still massive inequality in this country..
Actually, the difference in houshold incomes and wealth between those who get married and stay married vs. everyone else is pretty huge. Having kids without being married is just a huge black mark on a person economically and in other ways. Of course, the out of wedlock birth problem is a big one which would require a multi-pronged apporach. But first, we have to admit it's a problem, and we have to admit it's adding a lot to income/wealth inequality.
The final thing that I'd like to see happen, and that i actually think is more important than increasing the minimum wage is universal 401ks with automatic enrollment with accounts that are automated that start out aggressive and get more conservative as people age. Countries like Australia already have plans such as this.
Once again, I'm not saying I have all the answers here, but I think the answers require a multi-pronged approach that go far beyond just what government can do and certainly go far beyond just increasing the minimum wage.
Methinks you're living in a fantasy world. The past was not as glorious as you imagine it to be. In the past, people did not have kids out of wedlock, so that served as a kind of economic protection. In the past, people lived in multigenerational housholds and didn't expect that their kids would have their own bedrooms, etc. In the past, people cooparated more as families and didn't expect the government or employers to make up the difference if they couldn't make ends meet.
What part of the past are you talking about? You are not being very specific. How good or bad the past was also depends on the person.Through out history some people lived with family and some did not. What happens if something happens to your family? We need people to be able to fend for themselves instead of avoid the real world costs by living with their parents.
Reduce the supply of people willing to do them, which will either eliminate those jobs or raise the wages in them.
How do you reduce the supply of people willing to do them? And how would society function if you eliminated domestic service sector jobs? I guess you can pick you food from the farm, pluck your own chickens, etc?
The underlying idea here is a bit strange, namely, that people getting degrees some how creates appropriate jobs. But that is fundamentally backwards, people get degrees for jobs and those jobs are limited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
Depends on what they have PhDs in. If they're in humanities, then it's a problem. If there are more people qualified for the sciences & engineering, we'll do better.
You're not getting the point. If everyone went to school for a ph.d it wouldn't eliminate the need for low-skill jobs. Someone would still have to butcher pigs, someone would have to pick strawberries, someone would have to cook your hamburger and so on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
Like I said, I concur with this to an extent. I don't have all the answers. But I don't think jacking up the minimum wage is a viable answer.
Why is increasing the minimum wage not a viable answer? It would largely transfer wealth from the top to the bottom which is exactly what is needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
Actually, the difference in household incomes and wealth between those who get married and stay married vs. everyone else is pretty huge.
This doesn't account for the very lopsided distribution of wealth in this country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger
and that i actually think is more important than increasing the minimum wage is universal 401ks with automatic enrollment with accounts that are automated that start out aggressive and get more conservative as people age.
Umm....yes giving wall street the ability to suck more wealth out of the economy will really help matters....
In terms of what the government can do, well, the government is the only game in town. Nobody else is going to change the structure of the economy....
Umm....my comments are about positions filled with a teenaged work-force. Teenagers change jobs often and they often only work during particular parts of the year, most notably the summer.
Right we're back to the delusion that everyone in the US can increase their education and gain a "real career". Let's ignore the fact that most jobs in the US aren't high skilled and rely on our teenage memories...
But without union protection the wages would likely be lower, the question is whether that outcome is actually desirable in terms of US society.
You sound as if your memories are still entranched in HS your current age?
The Case Against a Higher Minimum Wage (http://www.house.gov/jec/cost-gov/regs/minimum/against/against.htm - broken link)
Many think higher UE was a direct result. On a personal level I know shop owners who had to reduce head count during the last min wage increase. It doesn't matter whether Fed or State it has an impact.
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.
