|
The real cost of low wages
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 11:47:45
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Surprisingly enough, some doctors will wait until you're 30 to be able to do this at all.
Your doctors must be very progressive.
I know doctors around here will still tell you that 30 is "entirely too young" to consider sterilization.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 11:49:57
We need to have MORE children.
Why? Why would you want this?
So they can all stay at home and not have jobs, sucking up taxpayer money? We already don't have enough jobs.
Unless we get enough people to turn the Dakotas and Kansas into major metropolitan areas, we don't need a bigger population.
Edit: That is, unless you're just interested in engaging China or India in a "who can pump out the most biological units" contest...
Edit2: That would, actually, explain your staunch anti-birth-control feelings...(I know, I know. You say you're all for birth control, "just not abortion or post-conception medications".)
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 802
By Asura.Hoshiku 2015-04-21 11:51:41
Soon, Home Care Workers will be replaced by Baymaxes.
The unemployment numbers would absolutely skyrocket.
New technology does this, yes.
No, really. I don't think you realize the amount of people that work in home/nursing facility health care. It's got to trail only cashiers/food service in the "available, minimal skills needed" category of work.
Edit: But you are right. Which is why we need to stop having so many *** kids. We're not going to have anything for them to do with the way we keep mechanizing.
Yet we've outbred even China.
Would like to know how much of that is immigration and how much is birth. Most people I know are only children. Some of them have 1 sibling.
By fonewear 2015-04-21 11:51:50
We need to have MORE children.
Why? Why would you want this?
So they can all stay at home and not have jobs, sucking up taxpayer money? We already don't have enough jobs.
Unless we get enough people to turn the Dakotas and Kansas into major metropolitan areas, we don't need a bigger population.
Don't worry Hillary is working to expand the middle class !
By 2020 Hillary will have created 50 million jobs easily !
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-04-21 11:52:04
More children in the wake of oncoming automation and jobs shipped to IndoChina. lolololol.
The crisis of not enough work for humans to do is a great threat in the next century. We've got surplus population, dwindling resources and computers taking more and more menial tasks.
I'm a man of quality, not quantity.
[+]
Lakshmi.Aelius
VIP
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
By Lakshmi.Aelius 2015-04-21 11:52:56
You know...
I did some fact (people) checking on this article. I found some inconsistencies.
Terrence Wise still resides in Kansas City. Apparently, still living in his mother's house since his father and mother have separated. Also, there is no Myosha Johnson in the state of Missouri at all. There's only a handful with that name and they are only located in Illinois, California, Tennessee, and Texas. Most are too young to have kids, some are old enough to have young adults as kids.
Ebony Hughes still resides on Durham, North Carolina but does not work for Home Care. She actually is employed as a Warehouse Technician at Duke University Hospital.
Here's UC Berkeley's findings.
[+]
Serveur: Siren
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2020
By Siren.Lordgrim 2015-04-21 11:53:38
YouTube Video Placeholder
Here is a good direction. ceo cuts his own salary to gives his employees better living wages.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi
Serveur: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-04-21 11:53:44
We need to have MORE children.
Why? Why would you want this?
So they can all stay at home and not have jobs, sucking up taxpayer money? We already don't have enough jobs.
Unless we get enough people to turn the Dakotas and Kansas into major metropolitan areas, we don't need a bigger population.
Edit: That is, unless you're just interested in engaging China or India in a "who can pump out the most biological units" contest... Clearly the solution to a shitty economy with high unemployment is to have less people, not foster economic growth.
By fonewear 2015-04-21 11:53:55
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »More children in the wake of oncoming automation and jobs shipped to IndoChina. lolololol.
The crisis of not enough work for humans to do is a great threat in the next century. We've got surplus population, dwindling resources and computers taking more and more menial tasks.
I'm a man of quality, not quantity.
Well forced sterilization is an option...don't worry your dreams of starting a family will be replaced by owning a jet ski !
By fonewear 2015-04-21 11:54:57
YouTube Video Placeholder
Here is a good direction. ceo cuts his own salary to gives his employees better living wages.
Kill him with fire he is a communist !
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 11:56:15
Clearly the solution to a shitty economy with high unemployment is to have less people, not foster economic growth.
How does having more people foster economic growth, unless your plan is to turn them into slaves, either literally or figuratively? -.-;
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-04-21 11:56:26
We need to have MORE children.
Why? Why would you want this?
So they can all stay at home and not have jobs, sucking up taxpayer money? We already don't have enough jobs.
Unless we get enough people to turn the Dakotas and Kansas into major metropolitan areas, we don't need a bigger population.
Edit: That is, unless you're just interested in engaging China or India in a "who can pump out the most biological units" contest... Clearly the solution to a shitty economy with high unemployment is to have less people, not foster economic growth.
How do more people competing for less jobs foster economic growth? The major problem the US has right now are tons of open jobs with people lacking the skills to occupy them. Service is going to become crushed by automation the minute the tech dudes figure out how to setup the RoboBartender and RoboPrepCooks.
Which we then have to bring in people from overseas to occupy.
[+]
Serveur: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1837
By Valefor.Applebottoms 2015-04-21 11:56:54
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Surprisingly enough, some doctors will wait until you're 30 to be able to do this at all.
Your doctors must be very progressive.
I know doctors around here will still tell you that 30 is "entirely too young" to consider sterilization. I guess it depends on the area and doctor, but it's probably different all around.
People act like there's something wrong "if you don't want the childrens", but honestly, there's more to life than children. Priorities are different for everyone.
Personally for me, I don't want children right now, I might change my mind though in the future after I'm done with schooling and such. But we'll have to see. For others, they have their life planned out, schooling done and just want to further their career / do travelling and decided to get sterilized because children don't fit in that picture anywhere.
That and some people just think they won't be a good parent at all. Case in point, my brother. Mother of god I hope he doesn't procreate, and hopefully he said he doesn't. We'll see though.
[+]
By fonewear 2015-04-21 11:57:09
Clearly the solution to a shitty economy with high unemployment is to have less people, not foster economic growth.
How does having more people foster economic growth, unless your plan is to turn them into slaves, either literally or figuratively? -.-;
It's been long enough that slavery is a viable option. It isn't so bad it will only feel like an eternity !
By fonewear 2015-04-21 11:57:52
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Surprisingly enough, some doctors will wait until you're 30 to be able to do this at all.
Your doctors must be very progressive.
I know doctors around here will still tell you that 30 is "entirely too young" to consider sterilization. I guess it depends on the area and doctor, but it's probably different all around.
People act like there's something wrong "if you don't want the childrens", but honestly, there's more to life than children. Priorities are different for everyone.
Personally for me, I don't want children right now, I might change my mind though in the future after I'm done with schooling and such. But we'll have to see. For others, they have their life planned out, schooling done and just want to further their career / do travelling and decided to get sterilized because children don't fit in that picture anywhere.
That and some people just think they won't be a good parent at all. Case in point, my brother. Mother of god I hope he doesn't procreate, and hopefully he said he doesn't. We'll see though.
How dare you not have children ! The goal of life is to breed then die !
[+]
Lakshmi.Flavin
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-21 11:58:02
Because remember, 20 isn't too young to make the life-changing decision to have a baby, but it's too young to make the life-changing decision to not have one. To be fair... most people at 20 don't usually decide to have a baby it usually just happens and then they decide whether or not they want to keep it.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 11:59:43
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »People act like there's something wrong "if you don't want the childrens
It gets worse as you get older, trust me.
Buckle up.
[+]
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-04-21 11:59:47
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Surprisingly enough, some doctors will wait until you're 30 to be able to do this at all.
Your doctors must be very progressive.
I know doctors around here will still tell you that 30 is "entirely too young" to consider sterilization. I guess it depends on the area and doctor, but it's probably different all around.
People act like there's something wrong "if you don't want the childrens", but honestly, there's more to life than children. Priorities are different for everyone.
Personally for me, I don't want children right now, I might change my mind though in the future after I'm done with schooling and such. But we'll have to see. For others, they have their life planned out, schooling done and just want to further their career / do travelling and decided to get sterilized because children don't fit in that picture anywhere.
That and some people just think they won't be a good parent at all. Case in point, my brother. Mother of god I hope he doesn't procreate, and hopefully he said he doesn't. We'll see though.
How dare you not have children ! The goal of life is to breed then die !
The goal of life is to make money for the top earners. Know your place peon, lest I need send my knights to burn down your lodging and slaughter your pet dog, Squiggles.
[+]
By Enuyasha 2015-04-21 11:59:58
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »More children in the wake of oncoming automation and jobs shipped to IndoChina. lolololol.
The crisis of not enough work for humans to do is a great threat in the next century. We've got surplus population, dwindling resources and computers taking more and more menial tasks.
I'm a man of quality, not quantity. The ultimate solution would be to tell people to become technicians, NOT Nurses. But we are always going to promote the most saturated job market that makes the most money, because if we tell people to become teachers/technicians/anything else those markets would be saturated (And you know, we'd have to like pay them).
Or like here in Louisiana, you can become an oil worker and *** when you get layed off cause the gas prices went down and you are just an oil field worker.
With the advent of Skynet The Machine Worker, there should be more people that know how to work machines, code, and programming instead of more people that want to do what the machine does for free. This is why Skynet will rule the world, cause everyone is a Nurse.
By fonewear 2015-04-21 12:01:35
Who wants to teach kids ? They don't wanna learn and I don't wanna teach them !
[+]
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 12:01:43
Because remember, 20 isn't too young to make the life-changing decision to have a baby, but it's too young to make the life-changing decision to not have one. To be fair... most people at 20 don't usually decide to have a baby it usually just happens and then they decide whether or not they want to keep it.
Fair point. Though, like most people, I think in terms of my own life experiences, and I had several female friends for whom -- regretably -- their biggest ambitions were to get out of high school, find a man, and start having babies.
And most people at 20 won't actively pursue permanent sterility, either. But I think doctors have a responsibility to discuss the option with them if they're approached by their patients about it; not automatically start trying to convince them otherwise.
[+]
By fonewear 2015-04-21 12:03:21
I'm just hoping the Mt. Dew I drank in high school leaves me sterile !
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-04-21 12:03:49
I'm just hoping the Mt. Dew I drank in high school leaves me sterile !
I think we're all pulling for that.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 12:04:17
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »I'm just hoping the Mt. Dew I drank in high school leaves me sterile !
I think we're all pulling for that.
Oh *** I laughed hard.
By fonewear 2015-04-21 12:04:57
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »I'm just hoping the Mt. Dew I drank in high school leaves me sterile !
I think we're all pulling for that.
Oh *** I laughed hard.
Me too!
By fonewear 2015-04-21 12:05:41
If I have kids I'm sure they will continue my legacy of wasting their lives on video game forums !
I'll be sure to have a will for my various forum accounts.
[+]
Lakshmi.Flavin
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-21 12:12:03
Because remember, 20 isn't too young to make the life-changing decision to have a baby, but it's too young to make the life-changing decision to not have one. To be fair... most people at 20 don't usually decide to have a baby it usually just happens and then they decide whether or not they want to keep it.
Fair point. Though, like most people, I think in terms of my own life experiences, and I had several female friends for whom -- regretably -- their biggest ambitions were to get out of high school, find a man, and start having babies.
And most people at 20 won't actively pursue permanent sterility, either. But I think doctors have a responsibility to discuss the option with them if they're approached by their patients about it; not automatically start trying to convince them otherwise. Do you refer to it as regretably because it didn't work out for them or because you view that type of decsion as regrettable? Personally I think either choice is fine... If you don't want kids then go ahead and get steralized and if you want em early and you have a lifestyle that can afford em then go ahead and do that too.
I think doctors should discuss it with their patients as well. Even if you don't want kids at all at a younger age things change. It's a pretty serious decision to make and if you're committed and won't look back then that's great but if you're only there for the next 5 years or so and then you change your mind... well...
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-04-21 12:16:13
It's regrettable because most people who aspire only to children wind up hopelessly drowning in costs they can't afford, despair, children who are born into a mess, marriage strain, realizing they've outgrown their partner or worse. Remember, you're 19-20 years old here. Not exactly paragons of wisdom.
But if you have the money and desire to have children, feel free to! Nothings more awesome than parents who actually enjoy their children and have the means to raise them.
Serveur: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-04-21 12:30:05
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »Remember, you're 19-20 years old here. Not exactly paragons of wisdom.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news...but if you take a good look around you'll notice none of us have exactly ripened with age in the wisdom department....
<~ prime example
/looks over at chanti
there's exhibit B right over there
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 12:31:14
Do you refer to it as regretably because it didn't work out for them or because you view that type of decsion as regrettable?
One or two the former, most the latter, both in the case of one of them with whom I was particularly good friends growing up.
Americans are spending $153 billion a year to subsidize McDonald’s and Wal-Mart’s low wage workers
The Washington post
And because its behind a paywall....
Quote: The low wages paid by businesses, including some of the largest and most profitable companies in the U.S. – like McDonald’s and Wal-Mart – are costing taxpayers nearly $153 billion a year.
After decades of wage cuts and health benefit rollbacks, more than half of all state and federal spending on public assistance programs goes to working families who need food stamps, Medicaid, or other support to meet basic needs. Let that sink in — American taxpayers are subsidizing people who work — most of them full-time (in some case more than full-time) because businesses do not pay a living wage.
Workers like Terrence Wise, a 35-year-old father who works part-time at McDonald’s and Burger King in Kansas City, Mo., and his fiancée Myosha Johnson, a home care worker, are among millions of families in the U.S. who work an average of 38 hours per week but still rely on public assistance. Wise is paid $8.50 an hour at his McDonald’s job and $9 an hour at Burger King. Johnson is paid just above $10 an hour, even after a decade in her field. Wise and Johnson together rely on $240 a month in food stamps to feed their three kids, a cost borne by taxpayers.
The problem of low wages and the accompanying public cost extends far beyond the fast-food industry. Forty-eight percent of home care workers rely on public assistance. In child care, it’s 46 percent. Among part-time college faculty—some of the most highly educated workers in the country—it’s 25 percent.
Ebony Hughes is paid $7.50 an hour as a home care worker in Durham, N.C., and has a second job at a local KFC. While the home care industry has the fastest growing number of jobs in America, these workers are some of the lowest paid in the country – earning, on average, $13,000 a year. To get enough hours to pay the bills, Hughes works from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. But she and her daughter still rely on public assistance to make ends meet.
UC Berkeley’s Center for Labor Research and Education, which I chair, has analyzed state spending for Medicaid/Children’s Health Insurance Program and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and federal spending for those programs as well as food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit.
We found that, on average, 52 percent of state public assistance spending supports working families (defined as working for at least 26 weeks a year and 10 hours a week) – with costs as high as $3.7 billion in California, $3.3 billion in New York, and $2 billion in Texas.
In recent months, the substantial public cost of low wages has prompted elected officials to take action. Legislators in California, Colorado, Maine, Oregon, and Washington are considering increasing the minimum wage to $12 an hour. In Connecticut, a proposal currently moving through the state legislature would fine large companies that pay low wages in an effort to recoup the costs imposed on taxpayers.
When 73 percent of people who benefit from major public assistance programs live in a working family, our economy isn’t operating the way it should – and could – be. From 2003-2013, inflation-adjusted wages fell for the entire bottom 70 percent of the workforce. Over the same time period we have also seen a large decline in the share of Americans with job-based health coverage.
Today – on Tax Day – underpaid workers are striking and protesting in cities across the country and around the globe to call for $15 an hour and the right to form a union. Their success would increase family incomes for tens of millions of adjunct professors, fast-food, home care and child care workers, among other underpaid workers. Raising wages would also generate significant savings to state and federal governments, and allow them to better target how our tax dollars are used.
Public assistance programs provide a vital support system for American families. But when Americans like Wise, Johnson and Hughes are working as hard as they can and are still paid too little to get by without public support, we need action to raise wages. On Tax Day it is a good time to take a hard look at the high public cost of low wages in the United States.
|
|