• Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
  • Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex

I work 4 jobs and I'm still struggling

Right, because you won't admin you don't really understand anything about ecnomics, so that's your cop out.

You're confused. I'll try to help you out. This is what I wrote:

Really, because, growing up at the absolute fiscal bottom of this nation, I had been under the impression that it was a choice. But it turns out that personal responsibility is a talking point. Good to know.

In what part of that did I mention economics? I'm talking about concepts such as taking responsibility for your own actions, and how it's not okay to make shitty decisions and then absolve yourself of the consequences.

But what I'm talking about how your simplistic approach to a real work economic problem offers no real world solution in a economy that's dying. The "personal responsibility" meme does nothing to address the facts that there are many people in the US who did the right thing but have had jobs and careers take out from under them.

And now personal responsibility is a meme. Awesome. Apparently it's everything but personal responsibility.

Do tell Mr Perfect what would you do tomorrow to support your family at the same level of income if your means of income was taken away from you over night? What's your back up plan? You must have one because your perfect because "you" were able to pull yourself up out of poverty.

Oh, I don't know... Rely on money in the bank. Use the marketable skills I have. Use the skills in a new field that I've been learning. Continue to learn.Not bitch and moan about how life isn't fair. Not buy into the idea that personal responsibility is something for other people. And the most important: be willing to work hard, doing any job that I can get. You know, the way that I got out of poverty in the first place?
 
Personal responsibility is a great right wing think tank talking point but not when a lack of wages supports the ability for one to actually be self-sustaining in reality. Falling wages for those in the lowest income quintile, job insecurity along and the loss of tax progressiveness in the US makes it easier said then done. Empirical data clearly shows that upward social mobility is stagnant in the U.S.

So you believe our healthcare system can be fixed without personal responsibility being involved? WRT the economy, I agree that most of the problem is due to stagnant wages, but if you don't believe that personal responsibility is a significant issue you are delusional. It certainly needs to be a part of the solution because most people don't have it. I would not hold that to the poor either, the people who tanked the economy took zero responsibility and got punished nada.
 
Majority of Americans want minimum wage to be increased, poll finds - The Washington Post

Majority of Americans want minimum wage to be increased, poll finds

A large majority of Americans want Congress to substantially increase the minimum wage as part of an effort to reduce the nation?s expanding economic inequality, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

As a growing share of the country?s income flows to the very wealthiest, the poll found that 57 percent of Americans say lawmakers should pursue policies aimed at balancing an economic system they think is out of whack. Nearly two in three say federal policy is tilted toward helping the rich over Americans who are less well-off, according to the survey.

The findings come as President Obama has moved to refocus national attention on the problems of inequality and decreasing social mobility. Earlier this month, he called confronting the twin issues ?the defining challenge of our time.? He added that ?making sure our economy works for every working American? will be a central task of his remaining time in office.

Obama recently came out in favor of rasing the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour ? a much larger increase than he had proposed in his State of the Union address in February, when he advocated raising it to $9 an hour.

Increasing the minimum wage, which has stood at $7.25 an hour since 2009, is one of the chief policy tools economists recommend to address inequality. It is also popular among everyday Americans: About two in three say the wage floor should be lifted, and the average wage suggested is $9.41 an hour.

The idea of using public policy to combat inequality is much more popular among Democrats and independents than it is among Republicans. Three in four Democrats and 58 percent of independents say Washington should pursue policies to address inequality, a sentiment that was shared by just two in five Republicans.

A similar divide is evident when it comes to the minimum wage. Eighty-five percent of Democrats support raising the wage, while Republicans are split 50-45 on the issue, the poll found.

Republicans support a lower wage floor than Democrats, when asked separately about their preferred dollar amount. On average, Democrats favor a minimum wage of just over $10, while Republicans want it to be about $8.60 an hour. Independents fall in between, supporting an average minimum wage of about $9.40 an hour. All three groups set their preferred minimum wage higher than the current $7.25, but far below a $15 wage sought by some worker advocates.

Although partisans disagree about what should be done about inequality, economists say the issue has reached dimensions not seen since the years preceding the Great Depression.

Whether calculated by comparing the growth in wages of the highest-income Americans with the lowest, or the proportion of wealth controlled by the richest Americans, or the ratio of wages for production workers to those of chief executives, inequality has grown. Americans have consistently called for government to aim policies at shrinking the gap.

Two years ago, when the Occupy Wall Street movement helped move the issue into the mainstream of political debate, a Post-ABC poll found that more than six in 10 perceived a widening wealth gap and 60 percent wanted Washington to pursue policy to address it, similar to today?s 57 percent mark. In the fall of 2012, 52 percent of registered voters shared that sentiment.

Although some policymakers point to minimum-wage increases, more widespread unionization, better education opportunities and bolstering income-support programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit as possible remedies, enacting those policies has always proved difficult.

?A majority of the public might favor some policies that the minority that has the most influence is less enthusiastic about,? said Martin Gilens, a politics professor at Princeton University. ?On some policies, there is ambivalence among the public. While there is strong support for opportunity-enhancing policies to reduce inequality, there is less support for directly redistributive policies.?

Obama has periodically invoked inequality as a problem and promised to address it. Yet economic inequality has only widened on his watch.

Between 2009 and 2012, the incomes of the top 1 percent of earners grew by more than 31 percent, according to Emmanuel Saez, an economist at the University of California at Berkeley, while the incomes of the bottom 99 percent expanded by just 0.4 percent.

?He?s got a Republican House and even members of the Democratic Party who are strongly aligned with business interest, who are at best ambivalent about some of these policies that certainly are not popular among business interests that have to foot the bill,? Gilens said. ?When you have divided government and multiple veto points, policies that even a majority of people support can be difficult to adopt.?

The new Post-ABC poll was conducted Dec. 12-15 among a random national sample of 1,005 adults, including interviews on land lines and with cellphone-only respondents. The overall margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
 
why is everyone acting like they are signing the payroll checks, give people a livable god damn wage already. its good for everyone, its not rocket science. Were all in this together and I would prefer my country to be a wealthy prosperous caring country for all, and not turn into Africa or some other third world country where we have to drive thru ghettos to go to work or visit relatives
 
why is everyone acting like they are signing the payroll checks, give people a livable god damn wage already. its good for everyone, its not rocket science. Were all in this together and I would prefer my country to be a wealthy prosperous caring country for all, and not turn into Africa or some other third world country where we have to drive thru ghettos to go to work or visit relatives


"So what are the effects of increasing minimum wages? Any Econ 101 student can tell you the answer: The higher wage reduces the quantity of labor demanded, and hence leads to unemployment." -Paul Krugman
Living Wage: What It Is and Why We Need It. - Free Online Library





minwage_markperry.jpg



According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics less than 3 percent of all workers take home $7.25 or less an hour and half who do are 24 years old or younger. And the vast majority?77 percent ?of minimum wage earners belong to households that are above the poverty line.




Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity
by Peter Schiff
In a free market, demand is always a function of price: the higher the price, the lower the demand. What may surprise most politicians is that these rules apply equally to both prices and wages. When employers evaluate their labor and capital needs, cost is a primary factor. When the cost of hiring low-skilled workers moves higher, jobs are lost. Despite this, minimum wage hikes, like the one set to take effect later this month, are always seen as an act of governmental benevolence. Nothing could be further from the truth.

When confronted with a clogged drain, most of us will call several plumbers and hire the one who quotes us the lowest price. If all the quotes are too high, most of us will grab some Drano and a wrench, and have at it. Labor markets work the same way. Before bringing on another worker, an employer must be convinced that the added productivity will exceed the added cost (this includes not just wages, but all payroll taxes and other benefits.) So if an unskilled worker is capable of delivering only $6 per hour of increased productivity, such an individual is legally unemployable with a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.

Low-skilled workers must compete for employers' dollars with both skilled workers and capital. For example, if a skilled worker can do a job for $14 per hour that two unskilled workers can do for $6.50 per hour each, then it makes economic sense for the employer to go with the unskilled labor. Increase the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour and the unskilled workers are priced out of their jobs. This dynamic is precisely why labor unions are such big supporters of minimum wage laws. Even though none of their members earns the minimum wage, the law helps protect their members from having to compete with lower-skilled workers.

Employers also have the choice of whether to employ people or machines. For example, an employer can hire a receptionist or invest in an automated answering system. The next time you are screaming obscenities into the phone as you try to have a conversation with a computer, you know what to blame for your frustration.


There are numerous other examples of employers substituting capital for labor simply because the minimum wage has made low-skilled workers uncompetitive. For example, handcarts have replaced skycaps at airports. The main reason fast-food restaurants use paper plates and plastic utensils is to avoid having to hire dishwashers.

As a result, many low-skilled jobs that used to be the first rung on the employment ladder have been priced out of the market. Can you remember the last time an usher showed you to your seat in a dark movie theater? When was the last time someone other than the cashier not only bagged your groceries, but also loaded them into your car? By the way, it won't be long before the cashiers themselves are priced out of the market, replaced by automated scanners, leaving you to bag your purchases with no help whatsoever.

The disappearance of these jobs has broader economic and societal consequences. First jobs are a means to improve skills so that low-skilled workers can offer greater productivity to current or future employers. As their skills grow, so does their ability to earn higher wages. However, remove the bottom rung from the employment ladder and many never have a chance to climb it.

So the next time you are pumping your own gas in the rain, do not just think about the teenager who could have been pumping it for you, think about the auto mechanic he could have become ? had the minimum wage not denied him a job. Many auto mechanics used to learn their trade while working as pump jockeys. Between fill-ups, checking tire pressure, and washing windows, they would spend a lot of time helping ? and learning from ? the mechanics.


Because the minimum wage prevents so many young people (including a disproportionate number of minorities) from getting entry-level jobs, they never develop the skills necessary to command higher paying jobs. As a result, many turn to crime, while others subsist on government aid. Supporters of the minimum wage argue that it is impossible to support a family on the minimum wage. While that is true, it is completely irrelevant, as minimum wage jobs are not designed to support families. In fact, many people earning the minimum wage are themselves supported by their parents.

The way it is supposed to work is that people do not choose to start families until they can earn enough to support them. Lower-wage jobs enable workers to eventually acquire the skills necessary to earn wages high enough to support a family. Does anyone really think a kid with a paper route should earn a wage high enough to support a family?

The only way to increase wages is to increase worker productivity. If wages could be raised simply by government mandate, we could set the minimum wage at $100 per hour and solve all problems. It should be clear that, at that level, most of the population would lose their jobs, and the remaining labor would be so expensive that prices for goods and services would skyrocket. That's the exact burden the minimum wage places on our poor and low-skilled workers, and ultimately every American consumer.

Since our leaders cannot even grasp this simple economic concept, how can we expect them to deal with the more complicated problems that currently confront us?

Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity by Peter Schiff
 
^^ you are full of shit. How much money do you make? If your doing well a little extra for services wont effect your wallet. How much money are you saving to make it worth keeping a large group of people in poverty. You people lost sight of whats important in life
 
I don't know where you think it's only going to raise end user costs by 30 cents that's ridiculous. As an employer if I see my lowest paid workers wages double that's a 100 percent increase. Ie more than double taken from the bottom line. Then I will have to increase my charge rate. Also now I have to raise everyone else's wages because it is unfair to them they worked for the higher wages and now they're making the same price as the entry-level employee, it simply isn't feasible

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

Well, smart one, you are not taking into account the increase in the rest of the menu and how many meals they sell a day. lets say a McDonalds sells 200 big macs a day. That's 60 extra dollars they got from big mac increase and the higher pay for a single employee has been paid for. Now take into account the other items they sell and the increases in prices of them. It would be spread across the board so to think that a doubling of wages equates to doubling (or even drastically raising) of the price of a single item in a business that sells MULTIPLE items, is naive.

I'm not really for raising the minimum wage but I'm totally against dumb asses that think they got it all figured out. I know this is the "school is useless" thread, but you could benefit from one or two accounting courses.
 
When I graduated college, I entered the workforce at a Bachelor's level job in my field at only $12.50. Granted, that's my own fault for choosing Psychology as a major and future career, but there are plenty of jobs at this pay range that college grads end up in. I was one of the lucky ones to even find a job and a job in lines of my education. So if the minimum wage is increased to this, what is the incentive to go to college? I would rather not have the student debt and make $2.50 less. There is no way the college entry level wage would increase simply because the minimum wage would.
 
Muscle Gelz Transdermals
IronMag Labs Prohormones
This is all the same argument about people making money. Someone wants so much that they can't dream of someone else making enough to get by without government assistance. Saying "I made $X amount after finishing college so someone without an education shouldn't be making that much" is patently stupid. You sold yourself short. You took the job for that amount, that is what you decided you're worth. Because someone else believes they are worth more doesn't make them wrong or a deadbeat looking for a handout or wanting something they didn't earn. Wall Street is actually in the porn business because they are making a killing fucking the rest of us and the joke is they've got so many people convinced that businesses and investors are entitled to keep fucking everyone because they bought some stock. Investing is gambling. They might make money, they might not. They aren't entitled to anything any more than some welfare queen is entitled to three squares a day, a new car, and the latest iphone. But they have people convinced otherwise. They bought some stock so now they are entitled to an automatic return. Look at how companies bleeding money pay out dividends. They should be telling investors that there won't be a dividend because of the loss and that they are working on turning that around. If investors bail, they bail. It just makes an opportunity for a low-dollar investor to potentially make a killing. Giving people a pay raise isn't going to kill any companies, large or small. The threat of increased unemployment is simply that: A threat. Each time minimum wage was raise increased unemployment was threatened to leave vast swaths of the population unemployed, poor, and destitute along with a complete economic crash. Did that happen? It was just a bunch of threats to keep the few making more and the majority making less.
 
^^^Giving people a pay raise isn't going to kill any company????

Obviously you've never owned a company. I've never heard anything so rediculous in my life
 
^^^Giving people a pay raise isn't going to kill any company????

Obviously you've never owned a company. I've never heard anything so rediculous in my life

^^^Obviously either isn't old enough to remember minimum wage below what it is now or has completely forgotten what it used to be.
 
Walmart profit 2012 = 17 billion

Walmart employees = 2.2 Million

17 billion divided by 2.2 million = a raise of $7,727 per employee per year.

Equals a raise of $3.71 per hour per employee.


That's with Walmart making NO PROFIT.
 
might be time to find a better paying job... i thought thats what people did when they didnt make enough money lol
 
Walmart profit 2012 = 17 billion

Walmart employees = 2.2 Million

17 billion divided by 2.2 million = a raise of $7,727 per employee per year.

Equals a raise of $3.71 per hour per employee.


That's with Walmart making NO PROFIT.

They aren't entitled to a profit.
 
wow! why not?


if that's the case they'll close down and 2.2 Million people will have no jobs. you like that better?

That's the epitome of entitlement. "I spent some money on a business so I should automatically get a profit."

If Walmart closed it would probably be for the better. Most of those people are already on government assistance as it is. In effect WE are subsidizing Walmart and their profits. Is that right? Is that ethical? Why are you okay with corporate welfare on such a large scale?
 
That's the epitome of entitlement. "I spent some money on a business so I should automatically get a profit."

If Walmart closed it would probably be for the better. Most of those people are already on government assistance as it is. In effect WE are subsidizing Walmart and their profits. Is that right? Is that ethical? Why are you okay with corporate welfare on such a large scale?

it's not an automatic profit. that's crazy thinking. they earned it.

just think of all the tax revenue that would be lost if they closed. it's staggering. so the people on welfare would be affected too. and just think off all the companies and their products that Walmart sells. they'd lost out big time causing even more unemployment. it would be a ripple effect to the overall economy and jobs.


absolutely not, there should be no welfare, corp or personal.

you're way off on this. just think for a minute of what you're saying in your last two posts. there's no reason or logic.
 
the company i work for has the highest wage rate in the industry...a base entry no education 18 yr old can start at no less then slightly over $2 a hour above min wage...you know what that does for us?..gives us pick of the litter..we can be picky and hire the best people out of the type of applicants that are seeking employment in that wage range..we can afford it because when you have the best people you get the best production...so the most for your money..issue is the pick of the litter is not as big as the runt of the litter...

what happens when you raise min wage is you get unproductive labor at a price that is set for productive labor..and what happens when you get unproductive labor..you start heading for the red because work isn't done on time..work isn't done to standard..all because you were forced to hire somebody at a wage you would have never hired them at anyway..but the litter was empty of the picks due to wage increases..

btw there are plenty of unskilled 18 yr olds in our company by 25 are then making 50-60,000 a year with full benefits...you know why??..cause they performed and earned it...not sat at home smoking a J waiting on there government check to show up...

America is full of lazy ass people...and big Gov lets em keep being lazy...all at yours(for you with jobs) and mine expense...that's the real world and not some bullshit trend graphs and ass paper research done by some Economics expert...

so if your reading this and you don't have a job..GO GET ONE!!!
 
it's not an automatic profit. that's crazy thinking. they earned it.

just think of all the tax revenue that would be lost if they closed. it's staggering. so the people on welfare would be affected too. and just think off all the companies and their products that Walmart sells. they'd lost out big time causing even more unemployment. it would be a ripple effect to the overall economy and jobs.


absolutely not, there should be no welfare, corp or personal.

you're way off on this. just think for a minute of what you're saying in your last two posts. there's no reason or logic.

No logic to what I'm saying? You're willing to accept unethical actions which a company profits from simply because of the number of people it employs. Who is crazy?

Starting and running a business does not guarantee profit or success. Do you have any idea how few start-ups make it through the first year in business? How few are in business after two years? If starting a business means someone earned a profit then any new businesses would never fail. That is insane.
 
No logic to what I'm saying? You're willing to accept unethical actions which a company profits from simply because of the number of people it employs. Who is crazy?

Starting and running a business does not guarantee profit or success. Do you have any idea how few start-ups make it through the first year in business? How few are in business after two years? If starting a business means someone earned a profit then any new businesses would never fail. That is insane.


i see nothing unethical about Walmart.

i completely agree with your last paragraph. Many companies don't make a profit. especially small businesses.
 
the company i work for has the highest wage rate in the industry...a base entry no education 18 yr old can start at no less then slightly over $2 a hour above min wage...you know what that does for us?..gives us pick of the litter..we can be picky and hire the best people out of the type of applicants that are seeking employment in that wage range..we can afford it because when you have the best people you get the best production...so the most for your money..issue is the pick of the litter is not as big as the runt of the litter...

what happens when you raise min wage is you get unproductive labor at a price that is set for productive labor..and what happens when you get unproductive labor..you start heading for the red because work isn't done on time..work isn't done to standard..all because you were forced to hire somebody at a wage you would have never hired them at anyway..but the litter was empty of the picks due to wage increases..

btw there are plenty of unskilled 18 yr olds in our company by 25 are then making 50-60,000 a year with full benefits...you know why??..cause they performed and earned it...not sat at home smoking a J waiting on there government check to show up...

America is full of lazy ass people...and big Gov lets em keep being lazy...all at yours(for you with jobs) and mine expense...that's the real world and not some bullshit trend graphs and ass paper research done by some Economics expert...

so if your reading this and you don't have a job..GO GET ONE!!!

Which industry is your company associated with?
 
If you work minimum wage and bitch and are broke you're a fucking LOSER.

Theres so many jobs that pay better. Go serve somewhere nice or bartend.

In my field (EMS) emts (not paramedics) at the company I work for make a little over minimum wage starting.

Thats one semester of school. They work 2-3 24s a week. Run 0-10 calls a day (if u want a slow station you can work at a slow one) and there's unlimited overtime. So, 10 days a month and they can make 30-45k.

If you can't do one semester of school with 2 days of class 6-10pm (example of EMT sched) then save up your McDonald's money, buy a gun and put it to your head. I'll come pronounce you. Loser

so now you aren't happy making 35-40k. Well the company pays for paramedic school and works around your sched. So a year to 18 months later you're a paramedic making 45-60k. Not enough? Ok then they'll pay for whatever you want next. Say nursing. 60-80k where I live. Not enough? PA school. Etc. not that hard to not be a loser
 
Last edited:
That's the epitome of entitlement. "I spent some money on a business so I should automatically get a profit."

If Walmart closed it would probably be for the better. Most of those people are already on government assistance as it is. In effect WE are subsidizing Walmart and their profits. Is that right? Is that ethical? Why are you okay with corporate welfare on such a large scale?

Once again proving you have no clue what it entails to run a business.
 
i see nothing unethical about Walmart.

i completely agree with your last paragraph. Many companies don't make a profit. especially small businesses.

Of course you see nothing unethical about Walmart.
 


"Some analysts
have complained in the past that Costco's worker-friendly policies aren't so friendly to shareholders."


Costco's Profit Soars To $537 Million Just Days After CEO Endorses Minimum Wage Increase



Costco's Profit Soars To $537 Million Just Days After CEO Endorses Minimum Wage Increase

Posted: 03/12/2013 9:16 am EDT | Updated: 03/13/2013 4:14 pm EDT

Less than a week after Costco CEO Craig Jelinek spoke out in favor of raising the minimum wage, the big-box retailer's earnings showed that paying workers a living wage doesn't always hurt business.
Costco reported a profit of $537 million last quarter, up from $394 million during the same period last year, according to the Wall Street Journal. The healthy earnings report comes just six days after Jelinik urged lawmakers to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.


At Costco, we know that paying employees good wages makes good sense for business, Jelinik said in a statement last week. Instead of minimizing wages, we know it's a lot more profitable in the long term to minimize employee turnover and maximize employee productivity, commitment and loyalty. We support efforts to increase the federal minimum wage.

Costco is known for paying its workers wages that are generally above average for the retail industry. An average Costco worker made about $45,000 in 2011, according to Fortune. That's compared to an average of about $17,486 per year for a worker at comparable Walmart-owned Sam's Club.


And apparently the extra pay pays off. Costco makes more than $10,000 in profits per employee, while Walmart takes home about $7,400 per worker, according to the Daily Beast (Walmart and Costco aren't exactly the same type of business, however).


In addition to offering its workers high pay and the opportunity to unionize, Costco also provides a benefit many of its competitors don't: health insurance for part- and full-time employees.
Some analysts have complained in the past that Costco's worker-friendly policies aren't so friendly to shareholders. If Tuesday's results are any indication, those concerns may be exaggerated.
 
Last edited:
Costco CEO Supports Minimum Wage Hike - Business Insider

Retail More: Walmart Costco Retail Select
Costco Is The Perfect Example Of Why The Minimum Wage Should Be Higher

Ashley Lutz
Mar. 6, 2013, 10:45 AM

Big-box warehouse store Costco is often compared with Walmart's Sam's Club. Both stores are places where people go to buy in bulk and save money. But while Walmart employees are striking for higher wages and health care, Costco has some of the happiest employees in the business.
Costco pays its employees an average hourly wage of $11.50 to start. After five years, they make $19.50 an hour and get an "extra check," a bonus of more than $2,000 every six months, according to Slate.


While Wal-Mart's Sam's Club starts employees at $10 an hour, they make $12.50 after about five years, Slate reported.
Costco workers pay a 12 percent out of pocket premium for benefits, while Wal-Mart workers pay 40 percent.
This results in lower turnover and more skilled workers, Costco CEO Craig Jelinek said, according to the Puget Sound Business Journal.


He told advocacy group Business for a Fair Minimum Wage that he supports a national minimum wage increase.
The bill just introduced in Congress would increase the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour from $7.25 an hour over time.

Instead of minimizing wages, we know it's a lot more profitable in the long term to minimize employee turnover and maximize employee productivity, commitment and loyalty, Jelinek said in the statement.

Having more knowledgeable employees results in better sales, according to David Worrell at AllBusiness.com.
Costco averages $814 in sales per square foot, while Sam's Club makes just $586 per square foot.


In a recent earnings announcement, Wal-Mart Stores revealed that sales at Sam's Club were down.
Investing in employees creates loyalty and better customer service that trickles down to the consumer.

"Look at people as an investment and hire the best you can possibly afford," Worrell said. "Stretch to your limit to keep them excited about coming to work ... then watch as they actually perform."
 
Back
Top