Congratulations America - you got the president you deserve

[Seattle]

As I interpret it, much of the liberal/progressive movement is about (among other things) "affordable housing" and "liveable wages". There is a lot of talk from leaders of the left about something not being "fair" and everything is "unequal" and there is a lot of concern about the "minimum wage" and how unfair that is.

I never see anyone suggest any positive solutions and most of the talk is about making sure that everyone feels like a victim.

Here is a point that no one on the left or right ever brings up (that I'm aware of). The public sector makes up about 1/3 of our economy. The jobs are often useless and bloated but there are a lot of them, many and probably most, don't require a college education, it's almost impossible to get fired and almost no jobs, agencies or departments ever get closed down or even reduced in size.

Almost every government job would place you right in the middle of the middle class and there are public websites where you could view most listings for government jobs. Why does no one ever mention this? Why complain about minimum wages and how unfair life is and yet not mention that 1/3 of the jobs in the country pay well and are there for the asking?

Government jobs, for a comparable job, even pay about 40% more than the private sector when you consider the benefits as well as the wages. From my perspective much of it is unnecessary and bloated but that's beside the point I'm now making.

Why don't any of you alert "your people" of those jobs instead of complaining about minimum wages?

I'm not bringing up some "Republican talking points" since I've never heard anyone bring up this point nor do I read Republican talking points.

It seems like all you guys do is complain and name call like 3rd graders but I'm not seeing anything constructive.

 

[Pinball1970]

I met a local girl on a potential date. She mentioned that she was Jewish but said it was not so much in the religious sense but culturally she identified that way. She then proceeded to fit the proto type of a Jewish stereotype.

"My Uncle Saul, in LA, has the biggest and best dry cleaner service in LA, my other Uncle David has the largest auto dealership in Orange County."

I said that I didn't know a lot about Jewish culture but knew a little about modern Jewish history at least and mentioned the Six Day War in 1967 or the "Jewish/Arab War". She hadn't heard of it.

Perhaps it's a younger person thing? By young I mean anyone under 40.
The internet, Facebook, reality TV, mobile phones?

History, current affairs/politics and science does not penetrate those things without problems and it is much easier if you are equipped before you use them.

 

[Pinball1970]

I said that I didn't know a lot about Jewish culture but knew a little about modern Jewish history at least and mentioned the Six Day War in 1967 or the "Jewish/Arab War". She hadn't heard of it.

My niece had a nice Jewish friend but he was not aware of all the religious stuff. I did not get a chance to deep dive.

 

[Seattle]

Perhaps it's a younger person thing? By young I mean anyone under 40.
The internet, Facebook, reality TV, mobile phones?

History, current affairs/politics and science does not penetrate those things without problems and it is much easier if you are equipped before you use them.

She was over 40.

 

[Sarkus]

As I interpret it, much of the liberal/progressive movement is about (among other things) "affordable housing" and "liveable wages". There is a lot of talk from leaders of the left about something not being "fair" and everything is "unequal" and there is a lot of concern about the "minimum wage" and how unfair that is.

I never see anyone suggest any positive solutions and most of the talk is about making sure that everyone feels like a victim.

Here is a point that no one on the left or right ever brings up (that I'm aware of). The public sector makes up about 1/3 of our economy. The jobs are often useless and bloated but there are a lot of them, many and probably most, don't require a college education, it's almost impossible to get fired and almost no jobs, agencies or departments ever get closed down or even reduced in size.

Almost every government job would place you right in the middle of the middle class and there are public websites where you could view most listings for government jobs. Why does no one ever mention this? Why complain about minimum wages and how unfair life is and yet not mention that 1/3 of the jobs in the country pay well and are there for the asking?

Government jobs, for a comparable job, even pay about 40% more than the private sector when you consider the benefits as well as the wages. From my perspective much of it is unnecessary and bloated but that's beside the point I'm now making.

Why don't any of you alert "your people" of those jobs instead of complaining about minimum wages?

You make it sound so easy for people who are currently in jobs that only pay minimum wage to walk in to a a more-reasonable-paying government job.

Anyhoo - according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 1-2% of those paid hourly are actually receiving the minimum wage or less. (Of course, there are possibly many more being paid less outside of the official records, but that's a different matter.)
The federal minimum wage is only 7.25, which for a 40-hour week would be an income of 15k p.a. Can you really live on 15k p.a. in the US? The poverty level is over 18k, so minimum wage is clearly not great. Minimum wage also hasn't changed since 2009, despite inflation of 40-50% in that time, and apparently it was over 10 USD back in the 60s.
But, as said, it's only 1-2% of the workforce at that level or lower, so is it really a big deal? And I don't mean that it's not a big deal such that it's not really an issue, I'm suggesting that it's not that big a deal such that the raising of at least the federal minimum wage really ought to be an easy win. Heck, many states already mandate a higher minimum wage (NY is 15 USD/hr apparently, for example). Not raising it is, in my view, just continuing to legalise psuedo-slave-labour. Yes, there are other jobs out there. But not everyone is in a position to secure them, for one reason or another, and it is naive to just say "get a better job!" is even remotely the solution.

My starting point has always been that if you are willing to spend 40-hours of your week doing something for someone else as your means of earning a living, you should be paid enough not to have to live in poverty. You may choose to live in poverty by spending your money on the flashiest new car rather than shelter, food etc, but you shouldn't have to live in poverty.
In the UK, the minimum wage is now (or will be) £12.20 - so a 40-hour week would be over £25k (assuming you work 52 weeks a year), which is a very reasonable "minimum". Possibly too generous, but then we're a more left-leaning country. Two such people sharing a house would be earning £50k a year between them, doing the lowest paid work. That's not bad at all.
7.25 USD/hr is shameful in comparison.


In tangential news (regarding government jobs), Musk has already started doxing low-level government employees that he has earmarked for sacking, calling them "fake jobs", not based on who they are or the quality of their work, but based on their job title. He published on X the names and job titles of the four women, who are now being harassed by his followers to the extent that at least one has closed down their social media.
One of the employees was "Director of Climate Diversification" - and presumably the knee-jerking Musk saw the word "diversification" and assumed it was some DEI-related role, where in fact she helps identify solutions to protect agriculture and infrastructure from the effects of natural disasters. So, yeah, this is the guy that Trump has put in charge of "efficiencies".

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It occurred to me that regardless of capabilities, some people are not that interested in the world around them, just bills, school run, getting to work on time, save for the holidays.

I spent decades putting WWII files online, my passion and my hobby. Most of the world just doesn't care about yesterday or tomorrow.

 

[Pinball1970]

She was over 40.

In that case, it is a matter of a percentage of people simply do not care about the universe until it affects them directly.

Understanding how things operate in those cases will not go well because there is zero background.

Sound bites will do, the best sounding one.

 

[Pinball1970]

I spent decades putting WWII files online, my passion and my hobby. Most of the world just doesn't care about yesterday or tomorrow.

Too much effort for people, hopefully some director will stick some of your data in a film for authenticity, the WW2 vets are all gone. (Pretty much)

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Too much effort for people, hopefully some director will stick some of your data in a film for authenticity, the WW2 vets are all gone. (Pretty much)

Hyperwar gets a million hits a month during the US school year. That site and Project Gutenberg are the "hot" sites for University of North Carolina. They house Hyperwar for free.

The military appreciates the efforts, useful for their education programs. I've got commendations from the USN, US Army and Marine Corps. The USAF has their own program.

 

[parmalee]

Perhaps it's a younger person thing? By young I mean anyone under 40.
The internet, Facebook, reality TV, mobile phones?

History, current affairs/politics and science does not penetrate those things without problems and it is much easier if you are equipped before you use them.

Yeah, I think that--in the US, particularly--those under 35 or 40 have some pretty serious knowledge and understanding deficits. Largely for the reasons you cite, but also due to changes in public education. In the mid-90s, the SATs were recalibrated to account for consistently diminishing scores, essentially adding about 200 points (in the 2 section, 1600 max version) to scores--so if you got, say, 1400 in 1988, that would be equivalent to getting 1600--a perfect score--today. Then there was W's "No Child Left Behind Act" of 2001, a total catastrophe that was mostly dismantled by 2015. My partner, a Canadian who has taught in Central Europe, the Middle East and Central America, abandoned teaching after a few years in American public schools--something a lot of foreigners who come to the US wind up doing. She has told me stories about some curious facets to the students' ignorance that genuinely shock and horrify me--I almost even capitalized those words for effect.

Edit: Of course, I forgot to mention Republican efforts to erase teaching about slavery, genocide of American Indians, and the like, and replace it with a uniquely curated curriculum of biblical shit, that mostly erases the fact that Jesus was a "woke" ('cept for the slavery thing) anti-capitalist with a chip on his shoulder about the status quo.

Also, incidentally, all this Evangelical shit about Trump being a "flawed" savior or whatever: Jesus hung out with publicans and sinners (prostitutes, thieves, and the like), not with rapists and pedophiles.

 

[Seattle]

You make it sound so easy for people who are currently in jobs that only pay minimum wage to walk in to a a more-reasonable-paying government job.

Life isn't "easy". Effort is required.

Anyhoo - according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 1-2% of those paid hourly are actually receiving the minimum wage or less. (Of course, there are possibly many more being paid less outside of the official records, but that's a different matter.)
The federal minimum wage is only 7.25, which for a 40-hour week would be an income of 15k p.a. Can you really live on 15k p.a. in the US? The poverty level is over 18k, so minimum wage is clearly not great. Minimum wage also hasn't changed since 2009, despite inflation of 40-50% in that time, and apparently it was over 10 USD back in the 60s.
But, as said, it's only 1-2% of the workforce at that level or lower, so is it really a big deal? And I don't mean that it's not a big deal such that it's not really an issue, I'm suggesting that it's not that big a deal such that the raising of at least the federal minimum wage really ought to be an easy win. Heck, many states already mandate a higher minimum wage (NY is 15 USD/hr apparently, for example). Not raising it is, in my view, just continuing to legalise psuedo-slave-labour. Yes, there are other jobs out there. But not everyone is in a position to secure them, for one reason or another, and it is naive to just say "get a better job!" is even remotely the solution.

My starting point has always been that if you are willing to spend 40-hours of your week doing something for someone else as your means of earning a living, you should be paid enough not to have to live in poverty. You may choose to live in poverty by spending your money on the flashiest new car rather than shelter, food etc, but you shouldn't have to live in poverty.
In the UK, the minimum wage is now (or will be) £12.20 - so a 40-hour week would be over £25k (assuming you work 52 weeks a year), which is a very reasonable "minimum". Possibly too generous, but then we're a more left-leaning country. Two such people sharing a house would be earning £50k a year between them, doing the lowest paid work. That's not bad at all.
7.25 USD/hr is shameful in comparison.

There is nothing "shameful" about it. You both miss the point and allude to the point. Minimum wage doesn't apply to anyone other than high school kids in their first job, if that. Wages are determined by market rates.

In Seattle, and many large cities, it is $15/hr. If perspective and prioritizing are getting used, no one would be talking about this subject. The US is a big country, the UK is not. It makes no logical sense to suppose that a minimum wage in Seattle and a small town of 100 people would be the same. No one is trying to live on it nor it that how it is being used these day.

If it was eliminated all together (the better approach) it wouldn't change anything. The market is determining wages, as it should (and does).

In tangential news (regarding government jobs), Musk has already started doxing low-level government employees that he has earmarked for sacking, calling them "fake jobs", not based on who they are or the quality of their work, but based on their job title. He published on X the names and job titles of the four women, who are now being harassed by his followers to the extent that at least one has closed down their social media.
One of the employees was "Director of Climate Diversification" - and presumably the knee-jerking Musk saw the word "diversification" and assumed it was some DEI-related role, where in fact she helps identify solutions to protect agriculture and infrastructure from the effects of natural disasters. So, yeah, this is the guy that Trump has put in charge of "efficiencies".

Presuming itself is a knee-jerk reaction, isn't it? He is in salesman mode now. If your argument is that most government jobs are efficient and needed, you are mistaken.

 

[parmalee]

But, as said, it's only 1-2% of the workforce at that level or lower, so is it really a big deal?

One thing that is misleading about that stat is that it does not account for waitstaff, who make an even lower--often, much lower--wage than minimum, and the difference is ostensibly made up for with tips. In a few states--the ones you would expect, of course--the minimum wage for waitstaff is the same as the state's minimum wage.

So if you're working at a Waffle House in Alabama, say, you're getting 2.13 an hour. You read that right: two dollars and thirteen cents and hour. If you don't make sufficient tips to reach the regular minimum wage, the employer is required to make up the difference; though this often does not happen in practice. And Waffle House? Personally, I love Waffle House, but they don't exist in any state I would ever consider living in, so Waffle House is like a special treat for me on tours and road trips--I even have a Waffle House mug and a pin that says, "I'm a Waffle House Kid!" (A kindly old lady gave it to me.) But, dude, Waffle House is mostly frequented by drunks (the patrons of publicans) and other sinners, and they generally don't tip too terribly well.

Edit: And what do I order at Waffle House? A triple order of hash browns, of course, scattered, smothered, covered, diced and peppered--that is, scattered on the grill and topped with onions, tomatoes, diced peppers and cheese. I only eat cheese at Waffle House, but it's American cheese so it's mostly plastic anyway.

When a vile political figure visits, they sometimes get their hash browns shat upon, spat upon and vomited upon, but this is mostly unknown to the general public. I knew a woman who served the criminal mayor of Providence, RI, one Buddy Cianci, a bloodied tampon buried in his eggs back in the day.

 

[Sarkus]

Life isn't "easy". Effort is required.

Yes, but if one puts in a 40-hour week of work they should expect a wage that enables them a semblance of decency. The effort is there - in the 40 hour week. You still make it sound as though it is simple for them to get a better paying job, and that sounds patronising. You seem unable to put yourself in their shoes.

There is nothing "shameful" about it. You both miss the point and allude to the point. Minimum wage doesn't apply to anyone other than high school kids in their first job, if that. Wages are determined by market rates.

It is shameful. It really is. Maybe not to you, but to those of us in countries that actually seem to care about their citizens, yes, a 7.25 USD minimum wage is shameful. Most wages are of course determined by the market, but there ought to be a minimum that people should be required to get so that they can afford at least a reasonable standard of living, and not be pseudo slave-labour. Having a low minimum wage simply traps people in poverty.
But, sure, why don't they just go out and get one of the many government jobs that pays so much better, right.

In Seattle, and many large cities, it is $15/hr. If perspective and prioritizing are getting used, no one would be talking about this subject. The US is a big country, the UK is not. It makes no logical sense to suppose that a minimum wage in Seattle and a small town of 100 people would be the same. No one is trying to live on it nor it that how it is being used these day.

People are trying to live on it. Many of those who get paid it are trying to do just that.
I absolutely understand that variations in a minimum can be warranted. We have what's called the "London Living Wage", which is higher than the National Living Wage to account for the higher rents in London, for example. But that doesn't change the principle.

If it was eliminated all together (the better approach) it wouldn't change anything. The market is determining wages, as it should (and does).

Eliminating it entirely wouldn't change much, no, because there aren't that many people (as said, about 1-2% of the workforce) currently on it, and it's not exactly a high rate at the moment.
However, it is thought that raising the federal level to 15 USD/hr would raise the wage for almost 15 million Americans. Yes, it would raise unemployment (but you seem to think that they can just walk into a higher-paid government job, so that's not an issue to you, right?), and would raise inflation slightly, and hit the deficit very slightly.

Presuming itself is a knee-jerk reaction, isn't it?

No. It is an assessment of his reasoning. A knee-jerk reaction would be to assume it without giving it due consideration.

He is in salesman mode now. If your argument is that most government jobs are efficient and needed, you are mistaken.

You miss the point entirely. It's not that he's highlighting jobs that he feels are not needed, it's that he's doxing specific people on his social media platform, resulting in them being harassed for doing nothing wrong. Had he simply given examples of the types of jobs, that would be okay. Even naming the job title and what they do (to show that he actually understands what the job does and can demonstrate it to be a "fake job"). But he didn't do that. He named four specific employees (coincidentally all women, so the optics from that angle aren't great either), calling them out for having "fake jobs"? That's not "salesman mode", that's simply him being an obnoxious childish twat.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

My family lives mostly south of the Manson/Nixon Line and being stalwart defenders of America (aka Kluxxers) they're thrilled with the election results. That's not meaning most Southerners are, lots of them are rational.

 

[Seattle]

Yes, but if one puts in a 40-hour week of work they should expect a wage that enables them a semblance of decency. The effort is there - in the 40 hour week. You still make it sound as though it is simple for them to get a better paying job, and that sounds patronising. You seem unable to put yourself in their shoes.

It doesn't matter what it sounds like. It is reality. It doesn't matter if it "seems" to you that I am unable to put myself in their shoes. That's not accurate but it doesn't matter what someone thinks. Reality remains the same.

There is no economic principal around paying someone because they work hard or work for 40 hours or what they "need".

If you eliminate those jobs, you just have less jobs and less options. If you are a high school student you now just don't have the option. In reality, your approach isn't helping anyone. Quite the opposite. You are hurting those on the bottom rung.

It is shameful. It really is. Maybe not to you, but to those of us in countries that actually seem to care about their citizens, yes, a 7.25 USD minimum wage is shameful. Most wages are of course determined by the market, but there ought to be a minimum that people should be required to get so that they can afford at least a reasonable standard of living, and not be pseudo slave-labour. Having a low minimum wage simply traps people in poverty.
But, sure, why don't they just go out and get one of the many government jobs that pays so much better, right.

No, that's not "right". Just eliminate the minimum wage entirely if that is less "shameful" in your view. You must know that you don't have a strong argument when you are making it about "your" country that "cares" and another country that doesn't care. Salaries are much higher here in general than in the UK. Do you find that "shameful"?

People are trying to live on it. Many of those who get paid it are trying to do just that.
I absolutely understand that variations in a minimum can be warranted. We have what's called the "London Living Wage", which is higher than the National Living Wage to account for the higher rents in London, for example. But that doesn't change the principle.

Eliminating it entirely wouldn't change much, no, because there aren't that many people (as said, about 1-2% of the workforce) currently on it, and it's not exactly a high rate at the moment.
However, it is thought that raising the federal level to 15 USD/hr would raise the wage for almost 15 million Americans. Yes, it would raise unemployment (but you seem to think that they can just walk into a higher-paid government job, so that's not an issue to you, right?), and would raise inflation slightly, and hit the deficit very slightly.

Again, you're not "right". We would have the same number of higher paying jobs and we just wouldn't have those lower paying jobs. They would be eliminated. How is that helping anyone? You are just eliminating options. College students would get the job rather than a high school student. Two person jobs would be combined to one person jobs or automated. Some small businesses would just shut down. That's not helping anyone. Every job doesn't have to support someone.

No. It is an assessment of his reasoning. A knee-jerk reaction would be to assume it without giving it due consideration.

You miss the point entirely. It's not that he's highlighting jobs that he feels are not needed, it's that he's doxing specific people on his social media platform, resulting in them being harassed for doing nothing wrong. Had he simply given examples of the types of jobs, that would be okay. Even naming the job title and what they do (to show that he actually understands what the job does and can demonstrate it to be a "fake job"). But he didn't do that. He named four specific employees (coincidentally all women, so the optics from that angle aren't great either), calling them out for having "fake jobs"? That's not "salesman mode", that's simply him being an obnoxious childish twat.

OK, if you want to continue along the non-ending personal bashing of Musk and Trump, continue, I don't care one way or the other where that is concerned. I'm more focused on the signal and not the noise.

 

[Seattle]

I'll cut through a bit of the crap by pointing out that no one is starving here. We have food stamps (now called SNAP), section 8 public housing, Medicaid for women and children under the age of 18 and on and on.

Wages in the US are much higher than in the UK.

1% to 2% is nothing and my comments about government work is that fully one third of the economy is made up of government jobs. The government is the largest employer in the country. All jobs are middle-class jobs. If someone has been poor from generation to generation not being able to just immediately get a government job isn't a valid excuse.

I point those jobs out because no one else seems to be doing so. It's the elephant in the room.

If you look at how many people retire and start a small business to have something to do and where they barely make a profit whether it's to start a small used book store, sell antiques, or many other such businesses you would quickly reach the 1% figure.

If you want to close those businesses down, fine, but that's not helpful so why spend so much time talking about the minimum wage when it's just not how jobs are actually measured in the US these days.

Every sign in shop windows in Seattle (which has a $15 minimum wage) say something like help wanted, cashiers needed, salaries starting at $20/hr and up. You see these at grocery stores, drug stores, etc. The minimum wage is irrelevant in most cases. The starting wage at most McDonald's around the country is between $11 and $15. Almost no one is making $7.25 anywhere. High school student's helping out part-time in some retired person's used bookstore as their first job is who is getting that wage. That's not "shameful".

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"no one is starving here". Hmmmm

 

[Seattle]

The security staff at the Seattle Art Museum (a non-profit) are now on strike. They make over $40k/yr and do very little. At the Seattle Aquarium many who do a similar job (actually called customer service something...) are volunteers who are paid nothing. I volunteered one year for one shift (4 hours) a week.

The SAM would run without any of these people, they have no leverage, they can be easily replaced and going on strike is silly and is likely to go no where. This is the state of progressive policies, IMO.

 

[Seattle]

"no one is starving here". Hmmmm

Are we going to get "literal" again. Very few in the US are "starving". Is that one sentence all that you could pick out to discuss from the page that I wrote?

 

[Sarkus]

There is no economic principal around paying someone because they work hard or work for 40 hours or what they "need".

And therein lies the difference: society is more than just economic principles. Maybe not in America, though.