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.
The biggest threat imo is to the middle-skilled, middle-compensated jobs.
Perhaps because that's the biggest threat in your specific experience.
Quote:
8 of them are relatively menial positions...pay somewhere from $12 to $20 an hour at best.
The reason that these lower level jobs don't pay more is the threat.
(I won't beat that horse yet again here)
When the employers have legitimate business based supply:demand reasons to pay more,
and of course to offer better hours and benefits whether they can have an advancement track
for these people as well or not... then the positions above will be paid more as well.
But if you're lamenting the declining number of higher positions available... you're right.
Those jobs are disappearing as well as the "menial" ones even...
if those folks work in air conditioned offices and wear nicer clothes while doing them.
Perhaps because that's the biggest threat in your specific experience.
The reason that these lower level jobs don't pay more is the threat.
(I won't beat that horse yet again here)
When the employers have legitimate business based supply:demand reasons to pay more,
and of course to offer better hours and benefits whether they can have an advancement track
for these people as well or not... then the positions above will be paid more as well.
But if you're lamenting the declining number of higher positions available... you're right.
Those jobs are disappearing as well as the "menial" ones even...
if those folks work in air conditioned offices and wear nicer clothes while doing them.
I'm also decrying the lack of growth potential. Most or all of those menial jobs offer little to no growth.
My wife has hit one of these ceilings. She's reached the max her current job will ever offer. Now her main negotiations involve betting more time off or flexibility... there's no more moving up. Quitting to get a 2nd master's degree or something she'd need for other positions in that organization is NOT worth it for an extra $5-10k a year.
There are lots of jobs available in town but they're all lateral moves at best. The higher positions are WAY higher. She'd have to start from scratch...she doesn't need to spend 6 years and tens of thousands redoing college, we're too old for that sh**
It's like the middle rungs of the ladder have been removed.
I'm also decrying the lack of growth potential. Most or all of those menial jobs offer little to no growth.
That's pretty much the definition of menial job. Always has been.
Quote:
My wife has hit one of these ceilings. ... there's no more moving up.
Quitting to get a 2nd master's degree ...is NOT worth it for an extra $5-10k a year.
There are lots of jobs available in town but they're all lateral moves at best.
But if those lower level positions were able to be justified to pay better...
wife could dip down a bit, not lose too much in wages, and gain some other useful experience.
Similar w/could apply in a layoff scenario too.
Quote:
It's like the middle rungs of the ladder have been removed.
That is the net effect of it.
The question that remains though...under what circumstances will the employers have
the needed legitimate business based supply:demand reasons to pay more?
Not forced to by way of MW rate edicts or by some "basic income" scheme...
but where the market and the underlying work actually warrants the change?Solve that and the rest falls into line.
The question that remains though...under what circumstances will the employers have
the needed legitimate business based supply:demand reasons to pay more?
Not forced to by way of MW rate edicts or by some "basic income" scheme...
but where the market and the underlying work actually warrants the change? Solve that and the rest falls into line.
Capitalist systems need a lot of "forcing" in order to function properly. It isn't hard to solve. The problem is that the people in charge like it how it is.
Stop boosting the US$ value and close the trade gap for starters. There is perpetually a > $500B gap between production and consumption. That's a lot of jobs.
Why did unions disappear? It certainly wasn't lack of need. I wouldn't push for the kind of unions we had before, but most developed countries have unions that function sanely.
Higher income taxes. Encourage domestic investment while discouraging extraction.
Basically take a very good look at how things were structured from the 30s-70s, because that was when the economy was designed for both maximum efficiency and maximum benefit to the average person.
But we also need a BI and better public benefits (nuke the healthcare parasites and start fresh).
BTW, I should mention that I believe a broad reduction in the amount of work being done would be a wonderful thing. We work a hell of a lot more than Germans for instance as it is.
That's pretty much the definition of menial job. Always has been.
But if those lower level positions were able to be justified to pay better...
wife could dip down a bit, not lose too much in wages, and gain some other useful experience.
Similar w/could apply in a layoff scenario too.
That is the net effect of it.
The question that remains though...under what circumstances will the employers have
the needed legitimate business based supply:demand reasons to pay more?
Not forced to by way of MW rate edicts or by some "basic income" scheme...
but where the market and the underlying work actually warrants the change?Solve that and the rest falls into line.
Perhaps I said I should have used a better word than "menial" to describe these positions. They're not menial in the sense that they demand that these people have degrees and relevant experience... it's not fry-cooking or digging ditches I'm talking about here... it's things like special ed counselor, case worker, branch manager, associate marketing manager, etc... It's just that there's no growth. You have to actually be a fairly skilled & educated person to do those jobs, yet they don't want to pay a wage that will enable someone to pay rent.
Automation sounds great and all.... on paper. But there's all sorts of un-answered questions and un-intended consequences:
Are the millions and millions (billions??) of newly-unemployed people just gonna stay calm and "take it"?
How will they get money?
How will they afford the basics such as food?
Will crime, unrest, violence rise dramatically in tandem with growing poverty/unemployment everywhere?
Because robots do not buy goods or pay taxes, how will government fund itself?
Etc
I think ultimately automation/robotics may just benefit "the usual 1%er suspects" such as Walmart and Wall Street. Pretty much everyone else will suffer severely from a sharp drop in consumer spending (again, robots do not buy goods or pay taxes). Our American economy is like 70%+ consumer spending, but what's gonna happen when people have no money to spend?
why does everyone insist on trying to predict or worry about what may or may not be the outcome of others instead of worrying about themselves ?
perhaps if people gave as much thought to their own financial outcome they would be better off . we can't know what others will do or a capable of doing .
we seem to be preoccupied with all the negative what if's of everyone else .whether it is automation , or every day a new article about how little everyone has or seniors have no savings .
it is like we just love to hear about potential bad news , only most of it is unfounded and folks adapt .
you have seniors doing okay on just social security , they make it work .
this automation is taking everyone's job's crap will pass too . those who fail financially would likely have failed financially regardless and in any time period ..
as has been happening since the beginning of time , those who really want to succeed will find a way -the rest will find an excuse
Our American economy is like 70%+ consumer spending, but what's gonna happen when people have no money to spend?
It's actually about 70% of GDP by distribution that goes to Personal Consumption Expenditures. The only other choices are Gross Private Domestic Investment, Government Consumption and Investement, and Net Exports.
PCE as a percent of GDP is a rough measure of the return to households and individual consumers on our national investment in economic effort. In China, the government has been trying to pump it up, but PCE is still below 50% of GDP. Neither the state nor the people are actually happy about that.
well they are not looking to me for help so it is something i don't need to dwell on for them .
far better i dwell on making my own outcome a positive one so i am not a burden on anyone else . .
i am doing as much as i can by working in retirement training newbees that enter the electrical and factory automation wholesaler end so they can have productive careers . .
Last edited by mathjak107; 05-20-2017 at 06:40 AM..
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.
