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.
So BEFORE the pandemic women were able to work and somehow deal with childcare, and now, with a lot of govt money coming their way for NOT working, it is a new problem?
They are already getting child tax credits (which can exceed any tax they owe). Are other people supposed to cover the costs of other people’s kids entirely?
There are a lot of couples who want a SFH, and that requires both parents working. Then daycare is a problem. They could always buy a townhouse, or rent an apartment, and let Mama stay home until the kids are older.
Did you honesty miss the key point that half of all childcare jobs have been lost since the pandemic started?
Translated, that means that there is NO childcare available for many people who previously utilized that service.
That means that people who want to work may not be able to do so, at least not until kids are back in school full time.
This again? Businesses can’t afford to pay their lowest skilled people $20 an hour, and then base everything above that on that floor. Businesses will fold, there will be fewer jobs in existence, and people will be forced to,just live on UBI type handouts from government.
A liveable wage for an unskilled high school grad means he or she can share a rental with others in similar situations. People with minimal market value aren’t just entitled to rent their own apartments. If they want more, they need to acquire better skills. It’s been that way for generations - and it’s a good thing. Encourages people to improve themselves and add more value to society.
My opinion? If a business can't afford to pay a livable wage, they shouldn't be in business. Businesses should fold so that businesses with more sustainable models take their place.
This again? Businesses can’t afford to pay their lowest skilled people $20 an hour, and then base everything above that on that floor. Businesses will fold, there will be fewer jobs in existence, and people will be forced to,just live on UBI type handouts from government.
A liveable wage for an unskilled high school grad means he or she can share a rental with others in similar situations. People with minimal market value aren’t just entitled to rent their own apartments. If they want more, they need to acquire better skills. It’s been that way for generations - and it’s a good thing. Encourages people to improve themselves and add more value to society.
So they should fold or improve, they are not entitled to anything. See how that works in reverse?
Meanwhile you are welcome to signup at mcdonald's and make the big bucks.
My opinion? If a business can't afford to pay a livable wage, they shouldn't be in business. Businesses should fold so that businesses with more sustainable models take their place.
I agree. Our whole economy is based on selling things we don't need to others who also don't need those things.
So if restaurants get more expensive because they have to pay their workers more, maybe we will go back to eating out only on special occasions like we used to do.
The wages being advertised are quite high for unskilled work - and signs advertising $18 an hour for grocery clerks and counter help is common. (I saw an ad for $16 an hour for waitresses - and tips were on top of that!)
Obviously, businesses currently have to compete with the federal government, who is “paying” people around $15 an hour to do nothing. So even if a business advertises $18, people still won’t take it because they figure they’re only earning $3 an hour.
Clearly, this can’t continue. Inflation is taking off, and it”s everywhere. Businesses overpaying workers will either have to keep raising prices to make a profit or just go out of business if they can’t get customers. So, once the government stops handing out the perverse incentive to refuse to work, will people then go back into the job market, thereby changing the supply:demand ratio, and wages drop back down?
Cost of living will just go up further than it already has.
I agree. Our whole economy is based on selling things we don't need to others who also don't need those things.
So if restaurants get more expensive because they have to pay their workers more, maybe we will go back to eating out only on special occasions like we used to do.
Right- I have no problem paying extra to know that a restaurant is paying people a liveable wage or providing them with benefits. Does that mean that I might have to eat out less often or change my restaurant selection? Sure, but if a person wants services to be available in their area, they have to understand that people need to be paid a liveable wage to come there and work.
While people might not be entitled to live and work in SF, if a place is paying minimum wage, employees have every right to say this is not worth it and go work somewhere around where they can actually afford to live. Since a lot of people living in urban areas were already commuting from other areas, this may mean that they’ve picked jobs closer to home in the more affordable areas.
The wages being advertised are quite high for unskilled work - and signs advertising $18 an hour for grocery clerks and counter help is common. (I saw an ad for $16 an hour for waitresses - and tips were on top of that!)
Obviously, businesses currently have to compete with the federal government, who is “paying” people around $15 an hour to do nothing. So even if a business advertises $18, people still won’t take it because they figure they’re only earning $3 an hour.
Clearly, this can’t continue. Inflation is taking off, and it”s everywhere. Businesses overpaying workers will either have to keep raising prices to make a profit or just go out of business if they can’t get customers. So, once the government stops handing out the perverse incentive to refuse to work, will people then go back into the job market, thereby changing the supply:demand ratio, and wages drop back down?
Wages were going up before the first stimulus package was handed out.
So not sure they will drop....also -- they want to keep employees not lose them.
So don’t expect the government to change its policies just to solve your problem of paying $8 instead of $5 for something at McDonald’s.
The rest of us don’t exist to serve you.
Governments polices are the main reason costs have risen.
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.
