Originally Posted By fkurucz >>That's what I was wondering about too. Growing up, we had a neighbor who worked at Sears, I think selling appliances. A job like that could provide a stable middle class income for a family. Today, outside of perhaps a store manager level, I'd be surprised if that's the case. And I don't even pretend to know what can be done to really change all that.<< When I was a kid the father of the family next door was a produce clerk at a local supermarket. They owned their home and lived a modest, but steady middle class life.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Just how big is the gun that's being held to peoples heads that apply for jobs at walmart knowing what crap pay they have?<< What choice do they have when everybody pays junk wages? Or would you prefer they quit working altogether and just live off of welfare. I remember when castmembers at DL were paid a living wage. It seems that now to be middle class you need a masters degree in a technical specialty.
Originally Posted By SuperDry >>Just how big is the gun that's being held to peoples heads that apply for jobs at walmart knowing what crap pay they have?<< The answer is obvious: most people that work at WalMart feel that they don't have an opportunity to work elsewhere that pays more, otherwise they'd probably be doing so. Or, there's something else about the job that is appealing to them: only job in town, desire to get into management, etc.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I remember when castmembers at DL were paid a living wage. It seems that now to be middle class you need a masters degree in a technical specialty. >>> And the problem with the jobs that do pay a living wage and require a college education or other specialty training is that they increasingly don't pay enough to cover the cost of the education. Many younger people today that don't have exceptional skills in one area or another are stuck in a no-win situation: skip college and work unskilled service jobs, or finance a college or technical education and qualify for a job that pays more, but makes it nearly impossible to ever pay off the college loans and get ahead. And, as the labor market continues to shift downward, it will become easier and easier for employers to further externalize the costs of training and education, simply by requiring that new employees come "ready to work" and not in need of extensive training or education. When there are 100 applicants for every job, it's possible for each employer individually to hire that way, even if in the macro sense it's not sustainable.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Growing up, we had a neighbor who worked at Sears, I think selling appliances. A job like that could provide a stable middle class income for a family. Today, outside of perhaps a store manager level, I'd be surprised if that's the case. And I don't even pretend to know what can be done to really change all that. >>> It's going to be difficult. With the advent of WalMart, big box appliance stores, and retailers like Amazon, there simply isn't room in the marketplace for mainstream products to support a sales model where the price is marked up an additional 10% in order to pay a salesman a 10% commission. If given the choice (and they are given the choice), the consumer won't shop there.
Originally Posted By doombuggy "What choice do they have when everybody pays junk wages?" thank you, it's not just walmart but is sure is fashionable to pick on just them. "It seems that now to be middle class you need a masters degree in a technical specialty." THAT'S RIGHT! You are paid by the skill level and education you chose to get. Being a checker or stock person is NOT a career. How long has the lets all hate the evil walmart been going on? all this hub bub people have done has changed NOTHING. They are still getting built, People still get jobs there and clearly just about every one is flocking there in droves. The whole boycott is an exercise in futility.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Just how big is the gun that's being held to peoples heads that apply for jobs at walmart knowing what crap pay they have?<< High unemployment. Starving family. Republicans decimating support services for the poor. It's a pretty big gun. >>So what do you do? Tell companies they have to pay $15 per hour for someone running a point of sale terminal, or bring back MEANINGFUL employment to this country. I think the second option would be far better.<< For a better, more fair society? I'll take the first one as well.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<For a better, more fair society? I'll take the first one as well.>> How do you sell that to someone who spent a fortune going to college so that they could pick up a $15 per hour ($30K per year) job??
Originally Posted By mawnck >>How do you sell that to someone who spent a fortune going to college so that they could pick up a $15 per hour ($30K per year) job??<< They should make more too. Didn't you read what the Pope said?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<They should make more too. Didn't you read what the Pope said?>> But then they bump into people who currently make more than them, and those people end up feeling (many times legitimately) that they deserve an increase also. This continues the whole way up the ladder, and you end up with no one relatively better off than they used to be. Sure, now they all have more money. But when you have increased the money chasing the same number of goods and services, the result is inflation. Pretty soon no one is any better off than they started. That was the result in the 70's when many women entered the workforce for the first time. All of a sudden you had families with significantly more income, and the result was rampant inflation. Soon everything equalized and no one was any better off than than they were before. Except now it took TWO INCOMES to support the lifestyle that one used to support. As for the Pope, no haven't read the remarks yet. And I know Pope Francis goes very much against the status-quo, but I have real problems with the Catholic Church lecturing on the evils of wealth when the church controls a vast fortune while the majority of its members worldwide live in extreme poverty.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>This continues the whole way up the ladder<< It should not continue the whole way up the ladder. The rich need to be taxed to the point that there is no sense paying them so much. Like it used to be.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<It should not continue the whole way up the ladder. The rich need to be taxed to the point that there is no sense paying them so much. Like it used to be.>> I certainly agree when you get to executive level compensation. But they already make so much more than anyone else that overall fairness in America will not be changed a bit by giving small increases to everyone else. The top 1% will still control a majority of the country's income and wealth.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>thank you, it's not just walmart<< But they have led the "race to the bottom". Like I said in a previous post, once upon a time supermarket clerks were paid living wage, until employers like WalMart. And I'm not saying that they should be paid the same as an Engineer or other professionals. But if we cannot provide a living wage to about half the workforce, whose only sin is that they weren't blessed with an above average IQ, then we, as a nation and a society, have failed.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< But if we cannot provide a living wage to about half the workforce, whose only sin is that they weren't blessed with an above average IQ, then we, as a nation and a society, have failed. >>> As a stinging indictment to how poorly our education system has become, did you know that studies show that approximately half of all people entering the workforce have a below-average IQ? That's where we should focus our efforts.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Well by definition about half of people entering the workforce would have a below average IQ and about half would have an above average IQ. IQ is not so much the issue as complete lack of skills in reading, writing and math.
Originally Posted By SuperDry It's also true that about half the people have below-average skills in detecting sarcasm online.
Originally Posted By fkurucz Be sarcastic as you want. We used to be able to provide the "below average" with a living wage. Now, allegedly Christian America, sees them as throw away. And why? So the the obscenely wealthy can become even wealthier?
Originally Posted By mawnck Didn't you know, fkurucz? People who work retail aren't worth feeding! (/sarcasm)
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Yes, they need to be fed by SOMEONE because they don't have the training or skills to be successful in this job market. And that someone is US... whether we pay for it through increased taxes for food programs or increased prices on our Big Macs. The one thing I will absolutley ASSURE YOU is that big business will not feed them. I don't give a damn how profitable those businesses currently are, they will pass the increased costs onto us, the customer. Personally, I'd like to see those costs run through the government... the burden is spread most equitably. I doubt the wealthy eat many Big Macs or spend much at WalMart... higher prices at those businesses would not impact them. They DO pay taxes. And in the end, the government bears much of the responsibility for the problem. By fostering an economic, regulatory and tax environment that encourages U.S. companies to ship jobs overseas, they have created the problem.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Yes, they need to be fed by SOMEONE because they don't have the training or skills to be successful in this job market.<< The point: SCREW this job market. This is a societal problem. Stop accepting it as status quo. We MAKE big business feed them if necessary.
