Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

EconomyFollow

#177 Oct 29 2015 at 8:06 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I think Stupidmonkey wants to put it in your butt.
No Cupid-Me, I'm just not interested in you.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#178 Oct 29 2015 at 8:10 AM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I think Stupidmonkey wants to put it in your butt.
No Cupid-Me, I'm just not interested in you.
I was gonna make a Lassie joke on that one but I was too busy spamming posting in another thread.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#179 Oct 29 2015 at 8:13 AM Rating: Good
****
4,135 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
It saves time when all your opinions comes from one source.


Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
---> ( (


Jophiel wrote:
I think Stupidmonkey wants to put it in your butt.


Freud wrote:
Sometimes an arrow is just an arrow.


I was pointing out the fountain from which spring his opinions.
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#180 Oct 29 2015 at 8:34 AM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
"( (" is the Tea Party logo? I did not know that.




Or is it the logo of the Westboro Baptist Church? I can totally see gbaji being among that congregation.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#181 Oct 29 2015 at 8:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
I was pointing out the fountain from which spring his opinions.

So you're saying that, given the opportunity, you wouldn't put it in Lolgaxe's butt?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#182 Oct 29 2015 at 9:25 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Opportunity being several c-notes and an ice cream sandwich.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#184 Oct 29 2015 at 11:12 AM Rating: Good
Oh hey got a notice of a direct deposit in email.

So someone in payroll is, in fact, aware that I am working here after all.
#185 Oct 29 2015 at 11:19 AM Rating: Good
****
4,135 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
I was pointing out the fountain from which spring his opinions.

So you're saying that, given the opportunity, you wouldn't put it in Lolgaxe's butt?

It depends how drunk he got me first
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#186 Oct 29 2015 at 1:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
670 posts
Quote:
If you are being honest about your situation, then it's not "fine and normal". But that's the point. Most people are able to improve their economic condition over the course of their lives. If you have not, it's not because the system is broken, but because you have made a set of choices (or I suppose been ridiculously unlucky, just to give you a possible benefit of the doubt) that have resulted in an extremely rare outcome for you personally. But again, that's not normal. Most people don't get stuck in low wage jobs their whole lives. I know that's a narrative folks like to talk about and attempt to push for political change over, but it's just not the typical American worker experience.

So you would blame people who may have made a single mistake? Maybe in your comfortable job you can't imagine it, but it is really easy to get trapped in a low wage situation. Here is how it seems to go for people now.

1) Go to college out of school and end up with a massive amount of debt. Take whatever is available after graduation so you can make some progress towards paying back that loan, even if it means working fast food. Due to the ACA, you will be lucky to work 25 hours a week. So that means having to get a 2nd minimum wage job. Now, working 50 hours/week at 2 jobs is a lot different than 50 hours at a single job. Schedules rarely match up nicely so you have a very erratic schedule week to week, making it tough to find time to do any kind of serious job hunting.

2) Take whatever job you can get right out of high school, which will most likely be a minimum wage job. In order to get something better, you are told to get a college education. Good luck affording that on your current paycheck.

Either way, starting out in the work place today is a lot different than it was 20 years ago. Having connections is more important than ever, so if you don't have the social skills to have somebody hook you up with a job, welcome to a wonderful life of minimum wage employment.
#187 Oct 29 2015 at 2:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Gbaji fell into a tech job during a time when the market was booming and managed to stay with it. It was 80% luck that he was of an age and skill to get in during that window but conservatives love to stroke themselves saying how hard working and skilled they are and thus everyone else must be dumb and lazy. Shit, my ex got into a tech job during that window that she's kept and she's fucking dumb as a pillbug.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#188 Oct 29 2015 at 2:59 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,543 posts
It's like "I was there." "No, you weren't." "I'm watching it happen right now." "No, because from way over here it looks a lot different therefore no." Then I'm like Smiley: bangheadSmiley: bangheadSmiley: bangheadSmiley: bangheadSmiley: bangheadSmiley: bangheadSmiley: banghead

Meanwhile, the only thing that changes is it actually gets harder for people who are struggling the more time goes by. I just read today that if you're single and childless in North Carolina and have a low paying job you now get to choose between being homeless and fed or sheltered and starving because food stamps aren't in any way available to you anymore. But oh! If you just work harder your ****** job will raise your rate of pay and/or allow you to work more hours, or a new, better job will become magically available to you. Just make-believe that your rent doesn't cost so much and you can budget it all out! Promise! Why, our employees can survive eating dandelions can't they?

If for some reason I was ever forced to accept a low paying job again I don't know what I'd do. I would certainly not be able to control myself in the face of hostile customers and incompetent coworkers the way I have so many times in the past. I would no longer be able to work 39.9 hours a week on a schedule that changes sporadically every week for a paycheck that evaporates into thin air the moment it arrives.

I thank my lucky stars every day that I was able to marry into the middle class and escape that kind of life, but then I turn around and see so many people still trapped there-- nearly every single person I know. I am completely unable to help them and it is absolutely infuriating that this is allowed to continue the way it is for so many people.

Edited, Oct 29th 2015 9:03pm by Kuwoobie
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#189 Oct 29 2015 at 4:55 PM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
People like Gbaji aren't really people at all. They're not human. Almost.. de-human, if you think about it.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#190 Oct 29 2015 at 5:40 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Kavekkk wrote:
Answer my question, Gbaji. Do you post here at work or not?


Uh. Yeah. I didn't think that as actually in question. But there's a huge difference between firing off an opinion based response to an online thread and spending probably dozens of hours digging through raw data and number crunching the results. if I can find some source online that has the results in question already, I'll do a quick search and post a link. But Joph was saying that I should go looking through raw BLS data to determine some facts that aren't readily available elsewhere. That's more time than I want to spend proving something that I already consider likely to be true based on broader data that's available.

It's like the difference between me saying "We have more sunny days than cloudy days here in San Diego", and actually looking up the weather data for every single hour of every single day and calculating exactly how many hours of sun we have versus hours of cloud. Um... I don't actually have to do that to make the initial statement. Similarly, I don't think I actually have to dig through the raw data to make a basic statement like "There's a higher ratio of heads of households to non heads of households in the $10-$13/hour wage range than in the $7-$10/hour range". To me, that's a pretty likely thing to be true just because of common sense.

So no, it's not worth my time getting exact numbers. My claim is a pretty simple "more or less" assessment, and I think it's pretty obvious what the answer is.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#191 Oct 29 2015 at 5:49 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I already have a full time job, thank you.
A job that gives you just enough time to post your guesses on a video game forum yet not enough to google search to see if there's any actual validity to them.


I did google. I can find lots of sources agreeing with me that a minimum wage hike isn't a good idea. What Joph zeroed in on was the issue of whether there are more heads of household in the range above the proposed living wage level, versus those between the existing minimum wage and that which is being proposed. Which I haven't found, but it should be obvious that there are. Every single wage earner currently earning more than the proposed new minimum wage (which is a huge majority, at least 70% by Joph's own source) will be negatively impacted by an increase in minimum wage. That's got to be a much larger number of heads of households, right? Do I really need to figure out exactly how many more?

I don't think so. So demanding it is kinda silly.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#192 Oct 29 2015 at 5:56 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,135 posts
Let me Google that for you

Link

first link on google, first paragraph on that link wrote:

Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 89 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase to $12 per hour are age 20 or older, and 56 percent are women.
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#193 Oct 29 2015 at 7:36 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
xantav wrote:
Quote:
If you are being honest about your situation, then it's not "fine and normal". But that's the point. Most people are able to improve their economic condition over the course of their lives. If you have not, it's not because the system is broken, but because you have made a set of choices (or I suppose been ridiculously unlucky, just to give you a possible benefit of the doubt) that have resulted in an extremely rare outcome for you personally. But again, that's not normal. Most people don't get stuck in low wage jobs their whole lives. I know that's a narrative folks like to talk about and attempt to push for political change over, but it's just not the typical American worker experience.

So you would blame people who may have made a single mistake?


Who said anything about blame? Why is this presented as all or nothing and if I don't take someone's side or support them, I'm "blaming them". Huh? Your outcomes are based primarily on your choices and actions. That's not about blame, it's about outcomes. There's nothing wrong with pointing out that if you want good outcomes you need to take actions that increase your odds of achieving those outcomes. You can twist that around into some kind of blame for those who *don't* take those choices/actions, but I think that's incredibly counterproductive.

Quote:
Maybe in your comfortable job you can't imagine it, but it is really easy to get trapped in a low wage situation.


Yes. Because it's easy to not take the actions that will help you avoid that situation. It's "hard" to make the right choices. But that's why you get rewarded for them. You can choose to think of this as some kind of punishment, but it's not. The natural state, if you do nothing, is for you to have nothing. Similarly, if you do very little, you will also have very little. If you want to get ahead in life, you need to work at doing so. It's not easy. That's kind of the point.

Quote:
1) Go to college out of school and end up with a massive amount of debt. Take whatever is available after graduation so you can make some progress towards paying back that loan, even if it means working fast food. Due to the ACA, you will be lucky to work 25 hours a week. So that means having to get a 2nd minimum wage job. Now, working 50 hours/week at 2 jobs is a lot different than 50 hours at a single job. Schedules rarely match up nicely so you have a very erratic schedule week to week, making it tough to find time to do any kind of serious job hunting.


Sure. So blame it on Obama then. Some of us warned that this would be a side effect of the ACA back when it was being proposed. Here's the thing though. Another component to this is the unfortunately high percentage of students graduating colleges with degrees that have little correlation to actual jobs in the market. Perhaps pursuing a "hard" engineering degree instead of an "easy" social sciences degree might have produced better rewards?

Can't remember which source I saw this on, but your odds of working in the "near minimum wage" range if you have completed a bachelors degree or higher drops to a very small percentage. If you can't get a job with a degree, that's because there aren't jobs looking for people with your skill set. I guess I still have to conclude that it's something those people are doing if the other 96% or so of college graduates all have managed to get decent paying jobs.

Quote:
2) Take whatever job you can get right out of high school, which will most likely be a minimum wage job. In order to get something better, you are told to get a college education. Good luck affording that on your current paycheck.


And? You do understand that there are routes to higher paying jobs that don't require college. They do, however, require expending effort to build up some skills in some area. Are you going to make a 6 figure salary that way? Probably not. Will you make enough to support yourself and maybe even a family? Probably. It might take you 10 years or more, but you will get there. Unless you just give up and sit in some dead end minimum wage job wallowing in pity.

Quote:
Either way, starting out in the work place today is a lot different than it was 20 years ago. Having connections is more important than ever, so if you don't have the social skills to have somebody hook you up with a job, welcome to a wonderful life of minimum wage employment.


Sigh. If you approach it that way, then that's what will happen.


Um... BTW, if you read the Heritage page I linked, it actually talked about this very problem, but it tied it to minimum wage being too high. When minimum wage is high, it reduces the number of low paying entry level jobs in the market. Which has the effect of cutting off the bottom rung of the economic ladder for many just starting out workers. The kinds of jobs that might actually lead to higher paying jobs just don't exist in sufficient numbers anymore because employers are required to pay more than they can afford for those skills. If minimum wage were lower, more employers would create jobs with that low pay scale for low skill labor. But over time, those laborers who spend the effort can improve their skills and then move into higher paying positions within those fields. Right now though, there's no point in hiring anyone who doesn't already have a degree or experience in the field if you have to pay a given rate anyway.

Which is what can make people "stuck" in minimum wage jobs. I'm not denying the possibility for this to happen, I'm questioning the concept that simply raising minimum wage will fix the problem. I'd argue that it will only make things worse.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#194 Oct 29 2015 at 7:58 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Let me Google that for you

Link

first link on google, first paragraph on that link wrote:

Myth: Raising the minimum wage will only benefit teens.
Not true: The typical minimum wage worker is not a high school student earning weekend pocket money. In fact, 89 percent of those who would benefit from a federal minimum wage increase to $12 per hour are age 20 or older, and 56 percent are women.


And the second link says something very different.

As does the third link.

As does the fourth link

But hey. When we get to the 5th link, things go back to supporting the idea. So there's something.

There's also a bit of bait and switch. Recall that my response was to the idea that the minimum wage needed to be raised to be a "living wage". With living wage defined as being enough to support a household on. Thus, I spoke of those earning minimum or near minimum wage who are *not* heads of households and/or primary breadwinners. That's more than just "teens". It's great that the source you linked says that 89% of those affected by an increase in minimum wage to $12/hour are 20 or older, but what percentage of them are heads of households? Isn't that the relevant question if your argument is predicated on the minimum wage needing to also be a living wage?

Edited, Oct 29th 2015 7:16pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#195 Oct 29 2015 at 8:11 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Kuwoobie wrote:
Meanwhile, the only thing that changes is it actually gets harder for people who are struggling the more time goes by.


So you agree with my argument that things are worse today under Obama than they were 8+ years ago under Bush? Just checking.

Quote:
I just read today that if you're single and childless in North Carolina and have a low paying job you now get to choose between being homeless and fed or sheltered and starving because food stamps aren't in any way available to you anymore. But oh! If you just work harder your ****** job will raise your rate of pay and/or allow you to work more hours, or a new, better job will become magically available to you. Just make-believe that your rent doesn't cost so much and you can budget it all out! Promise! Why, our employees can survive eating dandelions can't they?


Ok. Now explain to me how raising the minimum wage will fix this. I have continually asked you (and others) to stop just whining about how things are now, but actually proposing a solution and supporting it with some kind of reason and logic. Yet, you just keep talking about how bad things are. How does that help?

Quote:
If for some reason I was ever forced to accept a low paying job again I don't know what I'd do. I would certainly not be able to control myself in the face of hostile customers and incompetent coworkers the way I have so many times in the past. I would no longer be able to work 39.9 hours a week on a schedule that changes sporadically every week for a paycheck that evaporates into thin air the moment it arrives.


Yeah. Low paying jobs suck. That's why they are low paying. The point I'm making is that there are two primary approaches to solutions to this:

A) Make low paying jobs pay more.

B) Make it easier for people to move out of low paying jobs and into higher paying ones.

I happen to think that B is a far far better solution. And I've explained at length why. If you think A is better, then try supporting that position. Or if you think there's another solution, then go ahead and propose one. I'm just waiting for you to do something more than insist that I'm wrong because things suck. I'm not making an argument about how things are, I'm making an argument about economic policy. Those are not the same thing.

Quote:
I thank my lucky stars every day that I was able to marry into the middle class and escape that kind of life, but then I turn around and see so many people still trapped there-- nearly every single person I know. I am completely unable to help them and it is absolutely infuriating that this is allowed to continue the way it is for so many people.


Setting aside my disbelief that so many of those you know are all stuck in minimum wage jobs (assuming you're not in your early 20s or something), I'll ask again: What do you propose we should do to prevent things from continuing this way? Instead of just complaining about it, why not actually engage in a discussion about what might make things better?

Edited, Oct 29th 2015 7:14pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#196 Oct 29 2015 at 10:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
As does the third link.

As does the fourth link

But hey. When we get to the 5th link, things go back to supporting the idea. So there's something.

Links #3 & #4 actually support a minimum wage hike, just not to $15/hr.

Edit: I said #2 & #3 but whatever. Y'all can figure it out.

Edited, Oct 30th 2015 9:08am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#197 Oct 30 2015 at 3:08 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,543 posts
gbaji wrote:

So you agree with my argument that things are worse today under Obama than they were 8+ years ago under Bush? Just checking.



Stopped reading here. Implying that Obama is the reason for Reaganomic's stranglehold over the planet is pretty much typical fair for Joe ****** on Facebook, and I thought it beneath you until now.
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#198 Oct 30 2015 at 6:34 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
As does the third link.

As does the fourth link

But hey. When we get to the 5th link, things go back to supporting the idea. So there's something.

Links #2 & #3 actually support a minimum wage hike, just not to $15/hr.

You're missing the point, all liberals insist that all jobs must start at $15. Smiley: rolleyes

____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#199 Oct 30 2015 at 6:45 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,543 posts
Debalic wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
As does the third link.

As does the fourth link

But hey. When we get to the 5th link, things go back to supporting the idea. So there's something.

Links #2 & #3 actually support a minimum wage hike, just not to $15/hr.

You're missing the point, all liberals insist that all jobs must start at $15. Smiley: rolleyes



Only a sith deals in absolutes! Smiley: mad (liberals are the sith)
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#200 Oct 30 2015 at 7:38 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
I can find lots of sources agreeing with me that a minimum wage hike isn't a good idea.
So can I. I can also find lots of sources disagreeing with you. I can also find sources stating the government is kidnapping citizens and installing RFID chips to track them. Using only ones that agree with you is confirmation bias. I mean, unless you actually do think the RFID chips are true ...
gbaji wrote:
So demanding it (verification) is kinda silly.
If you say your verifying your claims is silly, then it's also fine to just emote or one word reply to your claims.

Of course, if logic and common sense actually mattered to you as much as you say, then with your limited time you would post less frequently, or at least limit the content per post, and use the time that gave you to confirm your claims instead of just presenting your claims and complaining how no one just takes your word for it. But hey, what's one more obvious lie on top of a mountain, right?
gbaji wrote:
So you agree with my argument that things are worse today under Obama than they were 8+ years ago under Bush? Just checking.
In the same way the global economic crash is Dubya's fault.

Edited, Oct 30th 2015 9:45am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#201 Oct 30 2015 at 8:19 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
To allay your suspicions, the government has instead RFID chips in people, but it's unlikely that they have put one in you unless you were in Iraq/Afgnistan circa 2007.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 364 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (364)