U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-02-2019, 07:39 PM
 
6,921 posts, read 2,054,687 times
Reputation: 11919

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
I am not better than the people working these jobs, I am better than their D bag CUSTOMERS and OWNERS of these places.
Glad to know. Carry on.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-02-2019, 07:52 PM
 
6,921 posts, read 2,054,687 times
Reputation: 11919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Yes and no, and good observation.

There have always been low-paid, low-security, no-future jobs. However, there haven't been the number, proportion and range of people trying to survive on them in past eras. Typically, they were supplementary-income jobs for teens and part-time mothers and the like, not careers.

We now have far too many people struggling to support themselves or a family on this substandard tier of employment... and it's only supported because we have built and can afford a vast service economy.
In decades past, people faced with meager prospects for future good jobs decided to move to the places where good jobs existed. Prior to that, there was a mass migration from rural farms to cities where industry provided those types of jobs.

We certainly still have economically disadvantaged areas across the country. The Opportunity Zones have been one imperfect attempt to lure business to such areas, but I've read they have more been used to game the system.

In some cases, the best thing we could do is give these people suitcases and bus tickets to get to where the jobs are.

One interesting trend is remote work where someone with a good skill/good job can negotiate the ability to work remotely thereby living in a lower COL area that might be one of those economically depressed areas. For example, I know several good patent attorneys who do not live anywhere near a population center (rural Wyoming, for example) where the only local jobs are low-value-add. It is the nature of patent prosecution; the attorney takes an invention disclosure from her logical "in-box," reads it, studies the area, schedules calls with inventors, asks questions.... and then spends a week to a month writing a patent application (which resembles a massive run-on sentence for which she would incur the ire of her 10th grade composition teacher), then repeats the process. Every now and then the patent prosecutor receives correspondence from the USPTO regarding an application, and then reads it, schedules a call with the inventors, writes a response.... Almost all that work can be done pretty much anywhere there is electricity and a good internet connection.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2019, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Henderson, NV
6,701 posts, read 6,854,334 times
Reputation: 8954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowpacked View Post
The ten dollar an hour jobs are still available for the less educated to perform. Full employment means the dumbest of the dumb are now working.
Yeah the people who haven’t noticed this probably never eat at fast food or deal with customer service. I’ve encountered some of the dumbest people lately and I assume it’s because these poor businesses have nobody left to hire. One burger chain the other day, my GF asks if they still have chicken stars. He looks at his manager and she nods, he says yes. Then he says umm we have uhh 1, 3, 5, umm 7? The manager is like no no don’t tell people 1! Nobody orders one chicken nugget. Then she starts speaking Spanish to him. He turns to us and says uhh ok 6, 9, or 12. My GF says 6. He says si. “I mean uh ok.” Then we are THE only people in there, not one other table used, he comes out and says, “Are you number 18?” He starts frantically looking for our number, turns it around, “Oh ok 18.” Dude this is the only table even occupied, what the heck is so hard about this?? How did he put on his shoes and show up for work at all? My cat isn’t that stupid.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2019, 10:44 PM
 
7,667 posts, read 3,715,601 times
Reputation: 4963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Exactly what politics do you think are leading things that direction?
It’s a very complex situation and the rich want things the way they are. Having a nice stock of poor people to prey on keeps them rich

If every one is FI and well educated then it gets way harder to exploit
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2019, 05:43 PM
 
7,728 posts, read 3,171,029 times
Reputation: 2865
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
It’s a very complex situation and the rich want things the way they are. Having a nice stock of poor people to prey on keeps them rich

If every one is FI and well educated then it gets way harder to exploit
Great posts pittsflyer. Cant rep you enough.
It was acceptable back in the day when you had sort of a stepping stone into the higher ranks.
The service economy was on the low end and accounted for maybe 10% of the job market. Perfect for those starting such as high school kids. Then people would move into factories where you could climb the ladder or go into one of the trades.

Now the majority of the market is the service economy.

The investment class sold the country out so they could make money off their stocks.

No, we will not raise fast food wages, that will cut into shareholder profits.
No, we will not bring factorys back, that will cut into shareholder profits.
No, we will not boot out the illegals in the trades, that will cut into shareholder profits.
No, we will not boot out H1B and other legal immigrants in the stem fields, that will cut into shareholder profits.

I think in capitalism, workers, customers and business owners are the main parties involved.
Any thitd parties in that mix are leeches.
All we heard for the last 40 years is how shareholders are the only ones that matter.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2019, 02:32 PM
 
951 posts, read 329,442 times
Reputation: 1490
Growing up I watched the east, then called “the rust belt”, vote in politicians that stumped about religious crap and sent great paying jobs, with benefits, away. People also believed the stories about how evil it was to have such jobs and benefits because it would break the backs of the owners. Those same owners preach the same crap today, while stuffing their pockets full of money.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 02:10 PM
 
4,635 posts, read 3,455,331 times
Reputation: 4481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140 View Post
I haven't seen that, but in our office we have been having a lot of trouble finding qualified people to fill vacancies with many retirements and several good people being poached by Amazon and others. For example, an Accountant opening that pays about $80,000 resulted in 30+ applicants, with only 4 that actually met the requirements. We interviewed them and selected the only one that was suitable based on the interviews, negotiated the starting pay and date, verified references, then the day before the start date the applicant called and bailed. We now have to re-announce and start all over. Currently we have 20 openings in progress, and a backlog waiting for HR to get to them.

You hit the nail on the difficult part. People are dangling the carrot of how hirable they are at other employers to seek higher wages with their existing employer. One of two things happens. They accept the new job and alter the pay scale of that position, or they keep their existing job and alter the pay scale of that position.


I think you have more people fairly comfortable with their current employer and only seek new digs for salary and/or title improvements. If they leave, it's usually because their current employer wouldn't seek their new salary request.

Also, pay across the board is better than it was immediately after the recession obviously. Many employers have experienced record or near record profitability and some of that has been extended to the employees in the form of salary increases, stock options, insurance perks, worklife perks, etc.


The trouble comes when you experience a recession and revenue is impacted across the board for employers. Wages freeze, layoffs happen, and the employees left behind are working harder for the same wage they received 2 or 3 years prior. It's a vicious cycle, which is why many individuals job hop throughout their career, to continue to lock in higher wages.


That individual just needs to be qualified!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 04:44 PM
 
Location: moved
9,904 posts, read 6,055,293 times
Reputation: 16799
Quote:
Originally Posted by aridon View Post
Dropping fries in oil isn't much different than filling paper or cleaning the floors or taking orders at the furniture store.
Dropping fried into oil isn't much different from operating a steam-shovel, or a rivet-gun on the assembly-line, or painting a house, or feeding punch-cards into a computer, or unrolling a firefighting hose, or mixing cement. The vast majority of jobs only require training, rather than genuine education, and that training can be obtained in a matter of weeks, on the job, as an apprentice. Very few jobs require genuine knowledge, backed by years of formal education. This holds even for quite prestigious occupations that stipulate a graduate degree, let alone a BSE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
There have always been low-paid, low-security, no-future jobs. However, there haven't been the number, proportion and range of people trying to survive on them in past eras. Typically, they were supplementary-income jobs for teens and part-time mothers and the like, not careers.

We now have far too many people struggling to support themselves or a family on this substandard tier of employment... and it's only supported because we have built and can afford a vast service economy.
We’re forgetting that for most of human history, most people lived materially miserable lives, on the literal edge of starvation. Most were subsistence farmers, serfs, servants, conscripts. The very idea of people looking for jobs, is only a few centuries old. Prior to that, one never “looked” for a vocation; it was assigned to one, essentially from birth. No amount of intelligence, verve or good-attitude would lift a peasant-boy (let along a peasant-girl) out of the muck. And except for a tiny minority at the apex of the social pyramid, the available vocations were drab, unremunerative, degrading, mind-numbing and severe.

Last edited by ohio_peasant; 06-12-2019 at 06:13 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 05:51 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,717 posts, read 4,067,203 times
Reputation: 13397
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
We’re forgetting that for most of human history, most people lived materially miserable lives, on the literal edge of starvation.
And so... what? We should be grateful for McJobs and the decreasingly common Horatio Alger story? Or that most of us don't live in lice-ridden huts? Or... what?

A civilization that can't find a way to care for all of its citizens doesn't deserve to survive. Most such... don't. And the castles get pulled down with the slums.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2019, 06:28 PM
 
Location: moved
9,904 posts, read 6,055,293 times
Reputation: 16799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
And so... what? We should be grateful for McJobs and the decreasingly common Horatio Alger story? Or that most of us don't live in lice-ridden huts? Or... what?

A civilization that can't find a way to care for all of its citizens doesn't deserve to survive. Most such... don't. And the castles get pulled down with the slums.
Yes and no. Should we be grateful to our "overlords" that we've not been lobotomized, neutered, chained to a machine and forced to work until we expire in a few months? No. Should we be grateful that society overall has advanced to the point that dying from starvation or communicable disease is relatively rare, even in Africa? Yes.

Here's the argument that troubles me. 60 years ago, Joe Sixpack could goof off in high school, graduating with a 2.2 GPA. The day after graduation, Joe saunters over to the factory across town, and is hired on the spot. Joe is neither a particularly accomplished talent, or a dedicated worker. But he generally does show up for work, and generally shows up sober and on time. His accident-rate is low, and most of the parts that he stamps-out pass through quality-control. Slowly, Joe gets promoted... not by much, not into upper management, but enough to earn some seniority. He accumulates towards a pension. He buys a house, marries, has kids... buys a boat, and an F-150 to tow it. 35 years later, Joe retires with a pension.

That was 60 years ago. For modern Joe Sixpack, such a path is more fraught and tenuous... maybe impossible. Do we say that this is an injustice? Do we say that modern-Joe deserves what 1959-Joe got? Do we say that society has declined, and in some sense reneged on the social-contract, in denying modern-Joe the opportunities readily available to 1959-Joe? Or do we say instead that the mid-20th century was an aberration, and an unsustainable one at that?

Let's instead consider 1459 Joe Sixpack. This Joe has the good fortune to survive into adulthood. Half of his brothers and sisters did not. As a serf, Joe owes three days a week of unpaid labor to his lord. He may even get conscripted into the lord's army, and never be heard-from again. But suppose not. Joe grows up and follows in the path of his father and grandfather, tilling the soil. Eventually the village selects a wife for Joe. He marries. He and Mrs. Joe have 7 children, of which 3 make it to adulthood. At age 46, Joe is too weakened and worn-out to be effective on the farm. Along comes a bout of plague, killing Joe, and thus sparing the family worry over how to take care of the impendingly-decrepit Joe.

What's the point of this? The point is that not even in the most dystopian fantasy are we considering a return to 1459. We are likely headed for 1859, not 1459. And in historical terms, 1859 is actually pretty good.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:21 AM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top