• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Minimum Wage: Who needs a comfortable life anyway?

Murder Doll

Button Presser
I can't say I know how things are in the entirety of the US of A but if people are starving they should really check out the food banks...I used to be in a pretty bad situation and had to make use of them, they where actually over stocked on food.

And really as the only way for most people to exit the "cycle of poverty" is to climb up the ladder I don't get how you think there is less motivation to do so as of current.
 

BigLutz

Banned
not starving shouldn't be a motivational tool for people. i and the others arguing for an increase aren't suggesting giving everyone a super luxurious life for free. if i am living in a small apartment in an okay area of town with a small entertainment budget, i am still going to be motivated to get promoted so maybe someday i can afford a big house in the nice part of town with enough money to go on european vacations, for example. hell, i would say that right now there is even less motivation for people to do better if they are trapped in a cycle of poverty and know that there is no way out short of a miracle.

And that is great but for alot of people, they are more than happy to live off the Government dime and not work for a better life. A perfect example of this is the Katrina refugees that instead of using all the help available to get a job, or even better high paying jobs available in New Orleans, they decided to sit in their Government provided housing and wait as long as possible.
 

Zenotwapal

have a drink on me
The reality is that with a minimum wage of 7.25 you will struggle to make ends meet even if you do things how they're "supposed" to be done. If you make even the slightest of mistakes (or just have bad luck) then you're stuck in a pit with no way out, just treading water so you can stay afloat waiting on a miracle.
You can sustain yourself off of $7.25/hr in most areas of the country. Financial responsibility is a large portion of success monetarily. You have to be able to live within your means.

saying "life sucks and isn't fair" is pretty easy when it comes from someone who wasn't born into the vicious cycle of poverty. just looking at some of my own coworkers right now, some of them are living pretty much paycheck to paycheck and if their car breaks down, their kid has to go to the ER, or any other small emergency, they're completely screwed.
the system right now makes it nearly impossible for someone who is trapped to get out, and that should not be acceptable.
A start would be to live in an area where you can afford to live in. Live within your means. There is a decent start.
I'm pretty sure this will mostly affect small businesses. Larger corporations are fully capable of sacking up and eating a small dent in their profits to not screw over their customers.
And how will large corporations go about "stacking up" and "eating a small dent", while keeping up with the competition and maintaining profits? Job cuts. Or outsource (which the current economy has seen enough of). Or cut down on the quality of the product/service; pick your poison.
 

Blazekickblaziken

Snarktastic Ditz
Ok here a full time minimum wage job makes you about $1000 a month after taxes.

A one bedroom apt that includes utilities in a relatively safe area is about $500. ( You could go cheaper is you don't mind running the risk of getting shot [not sarcasm])
Groceries are about $100 a week, so $400 total
Plus cellphone bill lets say $50 (because you took out an economical plan)
Plus gasoline, lets say you live near your job so $20 a week, $80 total
New clothing for work or otherwise, let's say $25
Misc expences (toilet paper, shampoo, brooms, bed sheets, detergent, ect) lets say about $40

That's $1055 a month and that's just glossing it over, if you broke down the budget even more, you'd probably see the numbers just get bigger. That's ASSUMING 40 hours a week, most places that pay minimum wage give their employees part time, so in reality a minimum wage employee is making even less. You can budget all you want to, but at the end of the day $7.25 is still$7.25.
 

BigLutz

Banned
Ok here a full time minimum wage job makes you about $1000 a month after taxes.

Maybe we should stop collecting taxes on minimum wage employees?

Groceries are about $100 a week, so $400 total

Are they seriously eating steak every night? For a single person groceries are more like 40 bucks a week.

Plus cellphone bill lets say $50 (because you took out an economical plan)

Why is some one spending money on a cell phone when they are barely affording to live.

New clothing for work or otherwise, let's say $25

Clothes are a one time expense or are you suggesting that a person will be buying clothes for their job EVERY month
 

ellie

Δ
Staff member
Admin
I can't say I know how things are in the entirety of the US of A but if people are starving they should really check out the food banks...I used to be in a pretty bad situation and had to make use of them, they where actually over stocked on food.
food banks are a good resource if you have them, but not everyone does. and even still, food banks are charity, the government should be fixing things so that people dont HAVE to rely on it.

And really as the only way for most people to exit the "cycle of poverty" is to climb up the ladder I don't get how you think there is less motivation to do so as of current.
if people know it's completely hopeless they might stop trying to ever try to do better when it doesn't look like they're ever going to make it out.

And that is great but for alot of people, they are more than happy to live off the Government dime and not work for a better life. A perfect example of this is the Katrina refugees that instead of using all the help available to get a job, or even better high paying jobs available in New Orleans, they decided to sit in their Government provided housing and wait as long as possible.
it's not about the government dime though. these people will still have to be working at their jobs. if you suck at your job, you get fired. that should be enough motivation for people to do a good job but not be so stressed because they can't even afford to feed their family.

You can sustain yourself off of $7.25/hr in most areas of the country. Financial responsibility is a large portion of success monetarily. You have to be able to live within your means.
and again, that's easy to say for someone who isn't poor. for most poor people, it's not the day-to-day expenses that send them under, but when an emergency happens. if you can just barely break even with 7.25 you are not going to be able to put away money into savings for when your car breaks down or something.


A start would be to live in an area where you can afford to live in. Live within your means. There is a decent start.
because it's so easy to move when you are already in debt? moving costs money and if you move to a new place you will have to find a new job. if you are lucky enough to have one lined up when you arrive you will lose any raises/other advantages you may have gained at your last job.

And how will large corporations go about "stacking up" and "eating a small dent", while keeping up with the competition and maintaining profits? Job cuts. Or outsource (which the current economy has seen enough of). Or cut down on the quality of the product/service; pick your poison.
or by cutting the massive bonuses from their executives? also if everyone is forced to do these things there won't be a problem on competition.

Maybe we should stop collecting taxes on minimum wage employees?
i wouldn't be opposed to that but good luck getting rich people to agree to that.

Are they seriously eating steak every night? For a single person groceries are more like 40 bucks a week.
as i said awhile ago in this thread, poor people often don't have the knowledge to cook healthy cheaply or the time to make home-made meals. this could result in them buying a lot more frozen foods or things like that which are more money, especially if they are a parent (single or otherwise) and have to feed a child. it also depends on where you live, if you have dietary restrictions, etc. i would say $100 per week is a bit more than what i spend on groceries but it is not ridiculous. plus, bkb's post was meant to be an estimate of what it could look like.

Why is some one spending money on a cell phone when they are barely affording to live.
a cheap cell phone is pretty much a necessity these days. how many employers would hire you knowing they have no way to contact you if they need to call you in or you need to call out? probably not many when they have so many other options.

Clothes are a one time expense or are you suggesting that a person will be buying clothes for their job EVERY month
again it was meant to be an illustration but clothing isnt exactly a one time expense, especially if they only spent $25 on everything they needed for work. shoes/pants wear out, and they will do so more often if you buy cheaply made things. see the story about the rich man and poor man's boots if you havent read it already.
 

BigLutz

Banned
it's not about the government dime though. these people will still have to be working at their jobs. if you suck at your job, you get fired. that should be enough motivation for people to do a good job but not be so stressed because they can't even afford to feed their family.

Government Housing and Food Stamps, for some its all they need or want as we saw with Katrina.

as i said awhile ago in this thread, poor people often don't have the knowledge to cook healthy cheaply or the time to make home-made meals. this could result in them buying a lot more frozen foods or things like that which are more money, especially if they are a parent (single or otherwise) and have to feed a child. it also depends on where you live, if you have dietary restrictions, etc. i would say $100 per week is a bit more than what i spend on groceries but it is not ridiculous. plus, bkb's post was meant to be an estimate of what it could look like.

Typical Frozen Meals cost $2.50 at Wal Mart, even a week of them is less than 20 bucks, for a single person groceries are more around 50 bucks a week, for some one with a child I would say around 75.

a cheap cell phone is pretty much a necessity these days. how many employers would hire you knowing they have no way to contact you if they need to call you in or you need to call out? probably not many when they have so many other options.

There are ways to get second hand cell phones with free service, or if need be spend a couple bucks a month and get a land line, paying 50 bucks a month for a cell phone when there are better alternatives is a waste.

again it was meant to be an illustration but clothing isnt exactly a one time expense, especially if they only spent $25 on everything they needed for work. shoes/pants wear out, and they will do so more often if you buy cheaply made things. see the story about the rich man and poor man's boots if you havent read it already.

Clothes also are not a monthly expense, shoes/pants/shirts do not wear out by the time a month ends requiring new sets.
 

Blazekickblaziken

Snarktastic Ditz
Maybe we should stop collecting taxes on minimum wage employees?

Are they seriously eating steak every night? For a single person groceries are more like 40 bucks a week.

Why is some one spending money on a cell phone when they are barely affording to live.

Clothes are a one time expense or are you suggesting that a person will be buying clothes for their job EVERY month

1) I'm with Ellie. If you can find a way to make that happen, then go for it.

2) Where I live, food thends to be a bit on the more expensive side, so that might be part of it. Also, remember, people tend to have different dietary needs (I for example, need to eat a lot or I get sick)

3) Boss: Do you have a cellphone?
Employee: No, It's an unnecessary expense
Boss: What happens if I need to reach you to cover a shift?
Employee: Messenger pigeon.

Do we really need to discuss how having a cellphone today isn't really optional? Sure, they could get a prepaid one, but from what I've seen, those are extremely unreliable and cam be just as bad as not having one.

4) There's clothing for work, clothing for when you're not working, shoes, socks, underwear ect. Which wear out, faster if you buy the cheaper ones. I think $25 is a pretty safe estimate, some months you might spend a little more, others a little less, but $25 is not that excessive of an estimate.

Also you're entire argument is based of the assumption that people should only ever be spending their time working (and ostensibly sleeping), there is no consideration that people should have time for recreation. Remember, if you have to spend all your resources (time, energy, money) on JUST surviving, you're going to burn out. As much as the work-harder brigade likes to see it as something optional, recreation is extremely important otherwise a person is just going to be too stressed to function.

Not to mention the point Ellie brings up, what happens in an emergency? These jobs don't give enough money to save. So you better hope your car doesn't break down, you don't get sick, because if you do, you're up the creek without a paddle.

Also, I love how you say: if you can't afford food get government assitance, and then condemn those who do, sometimes in the same sentence!
 
Last edited:

BigLutz

Banned
1) I'm with Ellie. If you can find a way to make that happen, then go for it.
You have one party that wants to cut taxes, you have another party that wants to help the poor to keep voters, it seems a match made in heaven.

2) Where I live, food thends to be a bit on the more expensive side, so that might be part of it. Also, remember, people tend to have different dietary needs (I for example, need to eat a lot or I get sick)

No where close to 100 dollars, again unless you are getting steak.

3) Boss: Do you have a cellphone?
Employee: No, It's an unnecessary expense
Boss: What happens if I need to reach you to cover a shift?
Employee: Messenger pigeon.

Do we really need to discuss how having a cellphone today isn't really optional? Sure, they could get a prepaid one, but from what I've seen, those are extremely unreliable and cam be just as bad as not having one.

Free Cell Phones or getting a cheap land line, either way 50 bucks a month is on the expensive side.

4) There's clothing for work, clothing for when you're not working, shoes, socks, underwear ect. Which wear out, faster if you buy the cheaper ones. I think $25 is a pretty safe estimate, some months you might spend a little more, others a little less, but $25 is not that excessive of an estimate.

Again clothes do not wear out every month, especially working in a low work out area like the service industry where minimum wage is usually paid.

Also you're entire argument is based of the assumption that people should only ever be spending their time working (and ostensibly sleeping), there is no consideration that people should have time for recreation. Remember, if you have to spend all your resources (time, energy, money) on JUST surviving, you're going to burn out. As much as the work-harder brigade likes to see it as something optional, recreation is extremely important otherwise a person is just going to be too stressed to function.

Not to mention the point Ellie brings up, what happens in an emergency? These jobs don't give enough money to save. So you better hope your car doesn't break down, you don't get sick, because if you do, you're up the creek without a paddle.

Then the smart thing to do is taking the money you would use for recreation and putting some if not all of it aside for a rainy day fund?

Also, I love how you say: if you can't afford food get government assitance, and then condemn those who do, sometimes in the same sentence!

I condemn those who do not strive to do anything more in their life than live cradle to grave on the Government dole.
 

Murder Doll

Button Presser
if people know it's completely hopeless they might stop trying to ever try to do better when it doesn't look like they're ever going to make it out.

Even if the the pay was better giving up like that would cause a person to fail at life regardless.

I'll agree with you that the government should help but people need to realise that other resources exist, besides food stamps do exist.
 

Zenotwapal

have a drink on me
and again, that's easy to say for someone who isn't poor. for most poor people, it's not the day-to-day expenses that send them under, but when an emergency happens. if you can just barely break even with 7.25 you are not going to be able to put away money into savings for when your car breaks down or something.
I see this argument "well if you aren't X you can't understand X" a lot in this section of the forum, and honestly it's quite preposterous if you ask me.

Anyone with any sort of financial responsibility knows to have emergency money saved up somewhere. Again, it boils down to financial responsibility.
because it's so easy to move when you are already in debt? moving costs money and if you move to a new place you will have to find a new job. if you are lucky enough to have one lined up when you arrive you will lose any raises/other advantages you may have gained at your last job.
Well firstly, I fail to see how hard it would be to find another minimum wage job. It's just a matter of packing everything up in your vehicle and driving to wherever.


Might I add the types of jobs we are talking about (fast food, retail, you get the point, I hope) are not considered careers. Do they really deserve career level pay? There's a reason why these sorts of jobs have such a low level of pay; nearly anyone with a brain can perform the tasks in these jobs, and they aren't meant to be permanent positions.
 

Peter Quill

star-lord
Well firstly, I fail to see how hard it would be to find another minimum wage job. It's just a matter of packing everything up in your vehicle and driving to wherever.

I have job experience from 2009-2012 (which includes government positions), speak three languages and have certified first aid training. I'd like to think I'm pretty employable but here I am, at least a week into actively searching for a job without even an acknowledgement for an interview. I also have an access to a car (something not everyone has and is basically a requirement for any sort of supervisory position I can find), computer/printer so I can do online applications/send out my CV... and yeah, I'm applying for a minimum wage job lmfao. No bites. It's surprisingly difficult.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLfurFpZHFU

Basically, while the production of the average American worker is going up, we aren't seeing the profits. Americans are working harder and harder and statistically having nothing to show for it. The working poor and middle class are doing better in most of the nations that we compete with. Essentially, unless you're really wealthy, the U.S. is starting to become more and more outclassed. We should know better than to assume that minimum wage increases will kill incentive when we know that the populace of any other competitor country that has a higher minimum wage aren't total bums. The idea that if we give the poor just a little bit more to help them scrap by, they'll all suddenly become sorry sons of bitches that leech off the state is seriously just insulting and childish thinking.

Or to be more blunt,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5YxcPUdICg

I see this argument "well if you aren't X you can't understand X" a lot in this section of the forum, and honestly it's quite preposterous if you ask me.

Anyone with any sort of financial responsibility knows to have emergency money saved up somewhere. Again, it boils down to financial responsibility.

Right. People that aren't poor, have never been poor, or have no idea what it's like to struggle should totally be telling poor, struggling people how financially irresponsible they are and how they don't work hard enough. Makes sense.

This argument rests on the ignorant assumption that everyone can just save up, and when the time is right, dip into their piggy bank and wala! Success! The American dream! Prosperity! Reality doesn't parallel with your fantasy. Yes, ideally if you're poor, you get a job, you work hard, save up, go to school, get the degree, and from there get a house, a smoking hot wife, and make carbon copies of yourself. Everybody understands this general method for success. The point that is trying to be made is that many people are born into such crippling poverty, or have factors outside of their control contributing to their poverty, that makes that approach impractical if not virtually impossible. How are you supposed to save up money when every penny you have is spent toward survival? Unless you want to stay willingly blind to the fact that many Americans do live in that kind of poverty, and that amount is increasing, you must admit the argument you're presenting here is BS.

In fact, nearly every respectable source available demonstrates that class mobility in the U.S. has severely shrunk since the 1950's.

http://econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Social Mobility Rates in the USA.pdf

http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/1212/americas-decreasing-economic-mobility.aspx

Are they right to feel gloomy? Real median family income increased in near lockstep with productivity in the three decades following World War II, but since the mid-1970s, it has remained relatively flat despite continued improvements to productivity. Between 1988 and 2008, the richest 10% of Americans pocketed all the income growth, while the rest of the country - 90% of Americans - saw their incomes decline.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/09/news/economy/america-economic-mobility/

"The American dream" is more alive in Denmark than it is in America.

These are the numbers. These are the statistics. Ignore them in favor of whatever romanticized version of America you choose to believe in at your own peril.

Might I add the types of jobs we are talking about (fast food, retail, you get the point, I hope) are not considered careers. Do they really deserve career level pay? There's a reason why these sorts of jobs have such a low level of pay; nearly anyone with a brain can perform the tasks in these jobs, and they aren't meant to be permanent positions.

Why aren't they considered careers? You seem to say they aren't "real careers" because they don't pay very much, and that anybody can perform the tasks required. Well first off, not considering something a career because it doesn't pay very much is pure idiocy. There are droves of people that have worked jobs that pay next to nothing and they find personal fulfillment in their occupations. I suppose people that work in home health care for example don't have "real" careers, according to you. They make close to what someone makes at McDonalds after all. Would you dare to say that the person that will eventually be changing your shitty, piss stained sheets and hoisting you out of bed every morning doesn't have a "real career"? Moving on to your second stipulation, that it's not a "real career" if anyone can perform the task is also insanely and unbelievably asinine. Fast food jobs are actually really fast paced, stressful, and challenging. Do you know how I know this? I know this from people that have worked fast food jobs while going to college so they can get those "real jobs" that you're talking about!

Also you're entire argument is based of the assumption that people should only ever be spending their time working (and ostensibly sleeping), there is no consideration that people should have time for recreation. Remember, if you have to spend all your resources (time, energy, money) on JUST surviving, you're going to burn out. As much as the work-harder brigade likes to see it as something optional, recreation is extremely important otherwise a person is just going to be too stressed to function.

Not to mention the point Ellie brings up, what happens in an emergency? These jobs don't give enough money to save. So you better hope your car doesn't break down, you don't get sick, because if you do, you're up the creek without a paddle.

Also, I love how you say: if you can't afford food get government assitance, and then condemn those who do, sometimes in the same sentence!

This.
 
Last edited:

Zenotwapal

have a drink on me
Right. People that aren't poor, have never been poor, or have no idea what it's like to struggle should totally be telling poor, struggling people how financially irresponsible they are and how they don't work hard enough. Makes sense.
Didn't say they weren't "working hard enough". That's not my argument.
Poor money management is the reason why many are in the red financially. When you can find an example of someone that has cut all luxury costs (brand new car, eating out every other night, brand new smart phone the minute it comes out, cheaper clothing, etc etc) and is still financially in the red, please do show it.
This argument rests on the ignorant assumption that everyone can just save up, and when the time is right, dip into their piggy bank and wala! Success! The American dream! Prosperity! Reality doesn't parallel with your fantasy.
See above because it is possible.

Yes, ideally if you're poor, you get a job, you work hard, save up, go to school, get the degree, and from there get a house, a smoking hot wife, and make carbon copies of yourself. Everybody understands this general method for success. The point that is trying to be made is that many people are born into such crippling poverty, or have factors outside of their control contributing to their poverty, that makes that approach impractical if not virtually impossible. How are you supposed to save up money when every penny you have is spent toward survival? Unless you want to stay willingly blind to the fact that many Americans do live in that kind of poverty, and that amount is increasing, you must admit the argument you're presenting here is BS.
http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/excerpts/wilcox_thrift.pdf
Americans also spend more of their pay checks than any other country. And put less away.

Also you're entire argument is based of the assumption that people should only ever be spending their time working (and ostensibly sleeping), there is no consideration that people should have time for recreation. Remember, if you have to spend all your resources (time, energy, money) on JUST surviving, you're going to burn out. As much as the work-harder brigade likes to see it as something optional, recreation is extremely important otherwise a person is just going to be too stressed to function.

Not to mention the point Ellie brings up, what happens in an emergency? These jobs don't give enough money to save. So you better hope your car doesn't break down, you don't get sick, because if you do, you're up the creek without a paddle.

Also, I love how you say: if you can't afford food get government assitance, and then condemn those who do, sometimes in the same sentence!
^If you are living within your means it should be fairly easy to spend a little bit of money on entertainment here and there. Case by case basis really.
The whole point of being financially responsible is to save up money for those emergencies.
Very mature negative reps, by the way Ellie.
And there's a big difference between getting government assistance for a month or two while looking for a job and leeching off welfare for a year.
 
Last edited:

ellie

Δ
Staff member
Admin
Government Housing and Food Stamps, for some its all they need or want as we saw with Katrina.
that's not what we are advocating. we are advocating that a job which a person has to work at gives people enough to be able to survive. if you sit back and relax you will lose your job pretty much anywhere.


Typical Frozen Meals cost $2.50 at Wal Mart, even a week of them is less than 20 bucks, for a single person groceries are more around 50 bucks a week, for some one with a child I would say around 75.
how does that math work? assuming 2 meals a day at $2.50 each which is generously low, that's $35. and that leaves zero other food as well. and frozen foods don't cost $2.50 most of the time. i buy them some of the time because i can be lazy with cooking and i can afford to shop sales, and $3-4 is more normal for something that doesnt taste like complete garbage and gives you enough food. as i have said before, poor people also often don't have the option to wait for good sales, drive further to the better grocery stores, etc. i don't remember if i linked this article or not but this does a good job explaining some of it.

There are ways to get second hand cell phones with free service, or if need be spend a couple bucks a month and get a land line, paying 50 bucks a month for a cell phone when there are better alternatives is a waste.
free service? no cell phone gives you free service unless the only number you want to call is 911. you have to pay for some of it. unless you are talking about prepaid phones which 1. you still have to pay for minutes 2. are less reliable as bkb said. landlines also cost more than "a couple bucks a month" and are not as good to employers because then they can only reach you when you are at home. again, if the employer is picking between two roughly equal people for one job and one has a good cell phone that allows them to be reached at any time while another has either a cell phone with terrible coverage or a landline, who are they going to pick?

Clothes also are not a monthly expense, shoes/pants/shirts do not wear out by the time a month ends requiring new sets.
maybe not exactly monthly, but you do have to buy them somewhat often if you want ones that don't look horrible. and when your clothes start wearing out most workplaces will make you replace it because it looks unprofessional.



also, i am not trying to be rude but i am curious, have you ever lived on your own and had to pay for all of your own things? because before i moved out i didnt really have a concept of exactly how much things cost, i mean i knew they cost money but i didnt really see the breakdown of just how much things like food and bills cost.

You have one party that wants to cut taxes, you have another party that wants to help the poor to keep voters, it seems a match made in heaven.
they want to cut taxes for rich people though. not the lowly minimum wage slaves.

No where close to 100 dollars, again unless you are getting steak.
again, have you actually had to make a food budget? in some areas $100 a week for decent balanced food when you dont have the time/knowledge to shop sales isnt THAT high.

Then the smart thing to do is taking the money you would use for recreation and putting some if not all of it aside for a rainy day fund?
so if you are on minimum wage you should never be allowed to do anything fun ever? that sounds like a miserable way to live life.

I see this argument "well if you aren't X you can't understand X" a lot in this section of the forum, and honestly it's quite preposterous if you ask me.
no, it's really not preposterous. that's the whole idea behind privilege. there are a lot of things that a lot of us take for granted because we were not born into a position where we had to think about these things. i never thought about these issues when i still lived with my parents and didnt have to see how people who only get minimum wage or slightly higher live.

Anyone with any sort of financial responsibility knows to have emergency money saved up somewhere. Again, it boils down to financial responsibility.
the whole point is that on minimum wage you CAN'T save up. if your entire paycheck every month goes to your current expenses, there is nothing left to put away. it's really easy to say just save up when you have enough money to save up.

Well firstly, I fail to see how hard it would be to find another minimum wage job. It's just a matter of packing everything up in your vehicle and driving to wherever.
this article does a really good job of explaining why it's not as easy to just pick up and go wherever, especially if you are already poor.

Might I add the types of jobs we are talking about (fast food, retail, you get the point, I hope) are not considered careers. Do they really deserve career level pay? There's a reason why these sorts of jobs have such a low level of pay; nearly anyone with a brain can perform the tasks in these jobs, and they aren't meant to be permanent positions.
career level pay is a relative term. i don't think they deserve enough pay to live in fancy mansions but they deserve enough pay and benefits to be able to survive. they may not have started off meaning to be permanent positions, but our society has changed to the point that they often are for someone who was born into that cycle of poverty. if you are stuck there it's nearly impossible to get out, as we have covered extensively in this topic. more school? yeah that's a great idea when i dont have time with my two part time jobs and can't afford classes anyway. promotion? those are few and far between and often require a college degree anyway. internet/networking? good one when i barely have enough hours in the day as it is and probably can't afford internet. plus our society depends on people being in these positions, if everyone who was permanently in this field quit there would be a lot of problems.

Didn't say they weren't "working hard enough". That's not my argument.
Poor money management is the reason why many are in the red financially. When you can find an example of someone that has cut all luxury costs (brand new car, eating out every other night, brand new smart phone the minute it comes out, cheaper clothing, etc etc) and is still financially in the red, please do show it.
the sample budget bkb showed is a pretty good example. it's not uncommon. several of my coworkers are very financially responsible and are still in debt from the time their car broke down or their daughter had to go to the ER or they had to replace the refrigerator.

http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/excerpts/wilcox_thrift.pdf
Americans also spend more of their pay checks than any other country. And put less away.
maybe because we are forced to spend our money on healthcare and other things other developed countries get for free, and they pay their workers closer to a fair wage so they can actually afford to put some away. if your entire paycheck just barely covers your budget you HAVE to spend it every month

^If you are living within your means it should be fairly easy to spend a little bit of money on entertainment here and there. Case by case basis really.
The whole point of being financially responsible is to save up money for those emergencies.
And there's a big difference between getting government assistance for a month or two while looking for a job and leeching off welfare for a year.
and once again, what do you do if you literally do not have any money leftover to save? you are completely screwed if an emergency happens.
 

BigLutz

Banned
how does that math work? assuming 2 meals a day at $2.50 each which is generously low, that's $35. and that leaves zero other food as well. and frozen foods don't cost $2.50 most of the time. i buy them some of the time because i can be lazy with cooking and i can afford to shop sales, and $3-4 is more normal for something that doesnt taste like complete garbage and gives you enough food. as i have said before, poor people also often don't have the option to wait for good sales, drive further to the better grocery stores, etc. i don't remember if i linked this article or not but this does a good job explaining some of it.

If you go through Wal Mart you will find frozen dinners from Boston Market to what ever else range around 2.00 to 2.50 now people won't be eating those for lunch and dinner so I am figuring a week of mini pizzas or frozen chimichangas cost about 5 dollars

free service? no cell phone gives you free service unless the only number you want to call is 911. you have to pay for some of it. unless you are talking about prepaid phones which 1. you still have to pay for minutes 2. are less reliable as bkb said. landlines also cost more than "a couple bucks a month" and are not as good to employers because then they can only reach you when you are at home. again, if the employer is picking between two roughly equal people for one job and one has a good cell phone that allows them to be reached at any time while another has either a cell phone with terrible coverage or a landline, who are they going to pick?

Safe link Wireless and other providers are given payments by the federal government to provide free cell phones and service to needy people

maybe not exactly monthly, but you do have to buy them somewhat often if you want ones that don't look horrible. and when your clothes start wearing out most workplaces will make you replace it because it looks unprofessional.

Last time I checked low income jobs don't really care if you look very professional or not

also, i am not trying to be rude but i am curious, have you ever lived on your own and had to pay for all of your own things? because before i moved out i didnt really have a concept of exactly how much things cost, i mean i knew they cost money but i didnt really see the breakdown of just how much things like food and bills cost.

I do currently I get paid 11.90 a hour for 39 hours a week, I used to make minimum wage while in college but when I wanted more money i set out and found a similar job paying more

they want to cut taxes for rich people though. not the lowly minimum wage slaves.

So the Bush Tax Cuts the last massive set of republican tax cuts only affected the rich?

again, have you actually had to make a food budget? in some areas $100 a week for decent balanced food when you dont have the time/knowledge to shop sales isnt THAT high.

Yes I have which is why I know the exact cost of frozen dinners

so if you are on minimum wage you should never be allowed to do anything fun ever? that sounds like a miserable way to live life.

That sucks but it is life there are years where you cannot have fun and focus on work and survival
 

John Madden

resident policy guy
Last time I checked low income jobs don't really care if you look very professional or not

then you either haven't had to work a real low income job in years or you never have, because i worked two minimum wage jobs last year and both of them had professional dress requirements (and the first one involved a ton of cooking and dishwashing, so it's not like it was some Glam Office Job)

I do currently I get paid 11.90 a hour for 39 hours a week, I used to make minimum wage while in college but when I wanted more money i set out and found a similar job paying more

got roommates? got any kind of government assistance up to and including the EITC? then you ain't paying for your own things

So the Bush Tax Cuts the last massive set of republican tax cuts only affected the rich?

no, they primarily and most prominently affected the rich, given that fully 75% of their effect was on the top 20% of earners (and half of that still to the top 1%) and that the effective tax rates of those groups fell by significantly more than anyone else.

Yes I have which is why I know the exact cost of frozen dinners

the exact cost of frozen dinners in one part of texas, sure
the exact cost of frozen dinners everywhere in the country, nope

That sucks but it is life there are years where you cannot have fun and focus on work and survival

something you don't really hear people say to quite this extent in other first-world countries, for some reason.
 
Last edited:

The Admiral

the star of the masquerade
And how will large corporations go about "stacking up" and "eating a small dent", while keeping up with the competition and maintaining profits? Job cuts. Or outsource (which the current economy has seen enough of). Or cut down on the quality of the product/service; pick your poison.

You know, I had a lot of really good responses about this, but it looks like you literally didn't even read my post, so why bother?

Last time I checked low income jobs don't really care if you look very professional or not

Nonsense. What employer doesn't care if their employees are professional, or at least professional-looking? That's not good for business.

And frankly, that sounds kiiiiiinda classist.
 

John Madden

resident policy guy
You can sustain yourself off of $7.25/hr in most areas of the country.

assuming you have multiple roommates and someone around to bail you out, yes

a single worker trying to rent an apartment and pay for the most basic possible living expenses can't sustain themselves in the cheapest county in america, let alone anywhere else

A start would be to live in an area where you can afford to live in. Live within your means. There is a decent start.

yeah, everyone without a job should plan to move to the dakotas (with money they don't have) and hope those states' labor markets don't undergo total collapse while they do so.

or we could just hike one of a) the minimum wage or 2) the size of the social safety net, if making the exact policy choice we've made several times in the past is suddenly too unpalatable now that we're in a ~*Slow Recovery*~.

but, whoops, one of those things hurts Business and the other helps Big Government, because apparently living off welfare (that is not "paid for" in any meaningful way) is less honorable than the exact same living standard except now you have 40-80 hours of menial labor "paying for it".

And how will large corporations go about "stacking up" and "eating a small dent", while keeping up with the competition and maintaining profits? Job cuts. Or outsource (which the current economy has seen enough of). Or cut down on the quality of the product/service; pick your poison.

just like they went about doing those exact things as a direct result of the last several minimum wage hikes, or did i just hallucinate that not actually happening to nearly the extent that everyone was doomsaying?

like honestly, if your criteria for good policy is "doesn't hurt Employment anywhere for any reason" then i don't even know why you're in this thread because you should probably be fundamentally opposed to the existence of a minimum wage.
 
Last edited:

BigLutz

Banned
then you either haven't had to work a real low income job in years or you never have, because i worked two minimum wage jobs last year and both of them had professional dress requirements (and the first one involved a ton of cooking and dishwashing, so it's not like it was some Glam Office Job)

Working one as I speak and I have seen frayed pants, holes in pants, and old shirts being worn


got roommates? got any kind of government assistance up to and including the EITC? then you ain't paying for your own things

No and no

no, they primarily and most prominently affected the rich, given that fully 75% of their effect was on the top 20% of earners (and half of that still to the top 1%) and that the effective tax rates of those groups fell by significantly more than anyone else.

But not all which is why the repeal was only for over 250,000

the exact cost of frozen dinners in one part of texas, sure
the exact cost of frozen dinners everywhere in the country, nope

Care to provide evidence of a significant difference?

something you don't really hear people say to quite this extent in other first-world countries, for some reason.

It does help to get a month off like say in France
 
Top