Quote :

"What do you not understand about the fact that they have 4 children because they work at a low wage job?"

Did you really say that? Correlation != Causation, ever heard of that? Working low wage jobs does not cause people to have more kids, ignorance and lack of education does.

On the flip side, having more kids does in fact cause an already poor family working living hand-to-mouth to get poorer, that's just common sense.

1/28/2014 3:18:18 PM

Quote :

"On the flip side, having more kids does in fact cause an already poor family working living hand-to-mouth to get poorer, that's just common sense."

Except in America where +1 babies means more welfare $ and food stamp $.

1/28/2014 3:54:27 PM

^ and Western Europe. And Canada also I guess?

1/28/2014 4:21:02 PM

The guy stocking overnight at Walmart works harder than all of us combined. Just be happy you had the sense and intelligence to steer clear of that life.

I'd much rather be in my position having to pay a little extra in taxes, than his.

1/28/2014 4:29:08 PM

^ Works harder doing needless backbreaking labor. Those jobs should be automated.

1/28/2014 4:41:57 PM

They will be once the minimum wage is raised high enough...then what is Mr. FourKids No Skills going to do for food?

1/28/2014 4:55:10 PM

he'll work in one of the new jobs that rich people job creators made

1/28/2014 5:04:00 PM

If we implemented the universal basic income, the guy would get more education until he could get a decent job.

1/28/2014 5:07:41 PM

There isn't an unlimited supply of decent jobs though.

And what if a person can't be educated efficiently?

^^^^^Correct. And everybody gets cheaper stuff because that guy makes so little.

1/28/2014 5:16:07 PM

Frog, a couple posts back, regarding the shot and giving it out in schools... That's all well and good, I guess that eliminates taking it wrong... But what about after they graduate?

[Edited on January 28, 2014 at 5:19 PM. Reason : who says they come in on time?]

1/28/2014 5:18:53 PM

Those are good points.

It's a great idea in theory, but it would be unlikely to play out that way. The pill is still the preferred method by far. If women (even poor ones) could get universal access to it, its use would increase a great deal. I don't know why the shot isn't more popular. That might actually be too often to see the doctor, whereas pills can be refilled without the visit. Not sure, female users plz correct me.

1/28/2014 5:34:26 PM

they should drop BC pills and condoms out of planes

1/28/2014 5:43:09 PM

^^If someone had a methodology of making sure it was done where it was effective and administered correctly, I'd prefer my taxes pay for that than for welfare payments.

I just don't think we are set up to do something like that.

[Edited on January 28, 2014 at 5:44 PM. Reason : .]

1/28/2014 5:44:02 PM

^same here. way cheaper.

1/28/2014 5:44:35 PM

Kids don't wear condoms. Pills are OK but I was searching for something that would work with minimal reliance on a teenager remembering to do something on a regular basis -- so I came up with the shot but even that might be too quick to wear off.

Hard to believe that we haven't come up with something better than those.

1/28/2014 5:50:52 PM

They all have side effects that some girls and women find undesirable.

Nexplanon is supposed to be the game changer, but they've said that about every new development in birth control, and people are still getting pregnant so...

You guys really aren't getting it.

1/28/2014 5:51:53 PM

i'd support giving abortions on the taxpayer's dime

1/28/2014 5:57:41 PM

Quote :

"If we implemented the universal basic income, the guy would get more education until he could get a decent job."

What about people that due to bad luck (either genetics or upbringing) are being left behind forever in the US economy? This is the one thing I don't see any free-marketer acknowledging (publicly). That we've progressed so far that some people have basically zero to contribute no matter how hard they work or we work to try and educate them.

I posed this question on Cafe Hayek quite awhile back and the response was a one line (I'm paraphrasing): "There will always be work to do for those willing to work".

1/28/2014 6:00:03 PM

Quote :

"You guys really aren't getting it."

I saw your point about BC access not being an issue. I disagree that it isn't an issue at all. Maybe not that guys issue or as big as the other issue re: poor people having babies to get something out of life, but that's a lot harder to remedy. That problem requires a vast societal change. The 1st problem seems a lot easier.

1/28/2014 6:05:28 PM

Then Nexplanon is what you're looking for. It's an implant that takes seconds to insert in the arm, and it protects against pregnancy for over three years. It can be removed at any time, and the recipient will resume ovulation within six weeks.

If I was a parent, and my wild/crazy 14-year-old asked for birth control, I'd have one of those things shot in her arm as soon as possible.

1/28/2014 6:28:38 PM

too bad it wont save her from the clap

1/28/2014 6:52:25 PM

^Nah, ninth grade is prime time for unprotected sex.

Quote :

"What about people that due to bad luck (either genetics or upbringing) are being left behind forever in the US economy? This is the one thing I don't see any free-marketer acknowledging (publicly). That we've progressed so far that some people have basically zero to contribute no matter how hard they work or we work to try and educate them."

We need these people to sell us illegal drugs. Then we incarcerate them and create more jobs for police and prison guards. See? It all works out for everybody.

1/28/2014 7:04:54 PM

Hopefully Bill Gates condom prize is enough for someone to invent one that doesn't suck

1/28/2014 7:11:34 PM

poor people have to have lots of kids in case mumps takes one (or two)

also need them around FOR THE HARVEST

1/28/2014 7:16:33 PM

Quote :

"i'd support giving abortions on the taxpayer's dime"

Cheaper than a welfare baby

1/28/2014 10:39:58 PM

Quote :

"What about people that due to bad luck (either genetics or upbringing) are being left behind forever in the US economy? This is the one thing I don't see any free-marketer acknowledging (publicly). That we've progressed so far that some people have basically zero to contribute no matter how hard they work or we work to try and educate them."

The group of people who can't work due to physical circumstances is a small minority... or at least it should be. These people get special treatment in our current system. Apparently, it's been used to serve the role of welfare that our politicians are reluctant to fund as welfare. NPR had a recent segment that told the story of this situation in fascinating detail.

http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/

At some point, you start blurring the line between someone who can't work because they have diabetes and someone who can't find work because they grew up in a poor community and never got a decent start at life. This is a very real situation in the nation we live in today.

But the UBI is something quite different, and the goal is to take away the incentives that come with the bureaucracy as we're familiar with it. In other words, stop this system that literally makes people injure themselves in hopes of getting a handout. Just have a standard handout, then call it quits. This is a bit too ideal. I think it will be a long time before people can be convinced of it. Only drastic advancements in technology and robotics will enable that. But enable it, it might.

As for people who are too unmotivated to work, with UBI, they wouldn't. Perhaps they'll go find the meaning of life and then share it with us. I am 100% sure this would describe at least some people. If people don't have to work, they're often motivated to pursue something else. It would be opening up a can of bizarre activities we can't predict. Not sure if that's a bad thing... it would just be interesting.

1/29/2014 3:50:30 PM

We can't automate all manual jobs. No matter how smart, smart homes get in the future, we will still need plumbers and electricians. And chefs. And car mechanics. And builders.

People who are not smart enough to or don't have the desire to go to college should be semi-forced to go to vocational school and learn a trade or a craft instead of begging from the population/government.

1/29/2014 5:23:16 PM

semi-forced motivated

1/29/2014 5:26:41 PM

Whoa, those jobs aren't easy to do.

We're talking about people who, after 12 years of schooling, can't read or do arithmetic. And you think they're gonna be mechanics?

1/29/2014 6:10:31 PM

That's got to do nearly 100% with terrible schooling rather than low intelligence. There are so many case studies of black 15-18 year olds reading at a 3rd grade level jumping a couple of grades within a couple of months when given one-to-one attention at special learning centers.

Also, I have come across dozens of mechanics, plumbers, and electricians who can't read or write. The jobs I mentioned have, in an ideal word, not much to do with writing or math, at least from a training point of view. Furthermore, many people who are intrinsically bad at book studies are amazing at creating stuff with their hands.

Not everybody learns best in the prevalent teacher-focused method of education in this world, in fact, no one learns best in that mode.

1/29/2014 7:18:31 PM

Do you believe in intelligence, intelligences, aptitudes, etc...? If you do, then surely you'd concede that somebody is at the bottom. And, no, those people are not necessarily good with their hands. But if you wanna coach a 20 year-old through 7 x 4 = 28 because you think they're secretly a mechanical savant, you do that.

Of course, we already emphasize vocational studies in high school and community college because obviously we value those things. They're not intended to be a last resort for people who aren't good at school, as they're a legitimate study of their own. Furthermore, there is not an unlimited supply of jobs for mechanics and electricians. Some parts of the country definitely need more of these skilled workers, but we don't need to flood the market with our least "book smart" people. That's absurd and insulting.



Now, you've mentioned black males specifically, and I think it would probably be a good idea to pass laws that actually permit them to work jobs and pursue education. As it is, nonsense about their youthful criminal records bar many of them from work and school. It's an extraordinary injustice, and it can be addressed today.

1/29/2014 8:24:15 PM

Not to be overly crass, but toilets don't clean themselves. There are jobs for those who lack the aptitude to complete skilled labor. But that doesn't also mean there aren't people who would make competent mechanics that haven't been given the opportunity because of a shitty educational system.

Frankly this happens in all levels of employment. Incompetent people get certain jobs because they have a piece of paper, and competent people don't get jobs because they lack, have a lesser, or have a different piece of paper.

1/29/2014 9:04:27 PM

^I don't think it's crass. Cleaning is good, and I appreciate it a lot more than other kinds of "work." I also agree with your post for sure.

But a lot of our manual labor jobs are filled with immigrant workers...so it's legitimately hard out there.

1/29/2014 9:14:11 PM

Quote :

"As it is, nonsense about their youthful criminal records bar many of them from work and school. It's an extraordinary injustice, and it can be addressed today."

Will be interpreted on the street as "I can get away with shit because they'll purge my records when I hit 18." It's another genuinely good liberal idea that tugs at our heartstrings, but in the real world, the law of unintended consequences can be a bitch.

[Edited on January 29, 2014 at 9:27 PM. Reason : ads]

1/29/2014 9:26:53 PM

First off, when I say youthful, I mean like 16-25, not that it really matters. In case you were confused, juvenile records already aren't available to employers.

Secondly, one's ability to work or not work in the future is not what young people think about when they're committing crimes. Young people's brains don't work that way. The fact that they'll have trouble getting a job at 30 is not a deterrent.

Finally, a man's right to work is not a "liberal idea that tugs at heartstrings"--and neither is the notion that people shouldn't be perpetually punished for their crimes.

1/29/2014 9:59:45 PM

You said youthful criminal records. In case you're confused, 25 is not youthful.

And I'm not talking about someone's right to work as being a liberal idea. I'm talking about the possibility of somehow purging one's records so they can get a job. And how would you shield these "youthful criminal records" from employers to begin with? Would you have them stricken from public record? And to what extent would you define a purge? Would you stop it at a misdemeanor? I would kinda agree with that. Or would you strike felonies from their records? If so, to what extent? Are we just talking about drug related offenses? Should they be able to have attempted armed robbery hidden from employers?

How the hell would you implement something like that.

1/29/2014 10:06:27 PM

25 is still youthful in terms of brain development. Criminologists have found that the vast majority of people tend to stop committing crimes by their mid-20s. And insurance companies understand the young brain, too--it's the reason you have to pay extra if you want to rent a car at 24.

But, again, the age factor really isn't that important. I just mentioned it because it's so common.

Anyway, some states are taking steps to make it easier for these people to get jobs, and there are certainly a lot of things they have to consider. But it's not nearly as hard as you're making it out to be.

1/29/2014 10:35:08 PM

Quote :

"But a lot of our manual labor jobs are filled with immigrant workers...so it's legitimately hard out there."

You act like people want those jobs.

This thought reminds me of a conversation I had with someone when I was in highschool. This kid may have been a junior/senior, I was a senior at the time. I asked what he wanted to do for a living, curious what his plans were, since he mentioned he wasn't going to college. He said , "man I just want to ball.". I chuckled, and said yeah I'd love to play pro hockey, but that ain't gonna happen... What do you really want to do. He got dead serious and told me again, "I just want to ball. I want to play basketball." He was a competent highschool basketball player, but nobody was recruiting him to play at the next level, it really wasn't a viable option.

I have no idea what he does now, or if he's even alive for that matter. The point I wasted to make is, through whatever failings of society, parenting, self stupidity... This dude had no grasp on reality. He had no realistic plan to make money, or find a trade he could learn and make a decent wage. So, maybe he's working at McDonalds for minimum wage, instead of working in a trade where he could make >50% more.

1/30/2014 1:07:53 AM

quit suffocating dreams

rethug

1/30/2014 7:59:53 AM

HUR should realize that the additional public-assistance funds per child are notably less than the additional cost of actually raising that child; unfortunately, some mothers who brag about the extra welfare money don't realize that either

Quote :

"Like, people earning $250/month, so lets say due to no taxes and a cheaper standard of living, that's equivalent to $750 in the US"

Actually, depending on the country, it's probably the equivalent of a net $310 or so per month: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPPC.RF
(For example, in Saudi Arabia and Jordan, the relevant factor is 0.8, and 250/0.8=312.5)

1/30/2014 8:33:10 AM

that depends on your definition of "raising them."

[Edited on January 30, 2014 at 8:45 AM. Reason : -]

1/30/2014 8:45:09 AM

^ lol

A friend who is a respected English teacher in wake country says from talking his students a large % of his "minority" students either want to be a rapper, bball player, or drug dealer. Anything else is "acting white."

1/30/2014 9:18:58 AM

1/30/2014 9:21:10 AM

yeah but white kids all want to "design video games" for a living.

1/30/2014 9:54:07 AM

Wake ain't no country I ever heard of. They speak English in Wake?

[Edited on January 30, 2014 at 9:56 AM. Reason : .]

1/30/2014 9:55:29 AM

Quote :

"Not to be overly crass, but toilets don't clean themselves. There are jobs for those who lack the aptitude to complete skilled labor."

I flat-out don't agree. This is broken window fallacy stuff.

Today we have housekeeping staff. In several very specific institutions, it would be very difficult to get rid of those jobs (like hotels). However, most people working housekeeping jobs are there because low wage workers are like 5x as cheap as the regular staff.

If we had an egalitarian society, the regular staff would have to clean their own god damn toilets. It's the US mindset that would cause them squeal like a pig, because it conflicts with their social status self-perception. Engineers can empty their own damn office trash can. They do it at home!

What's more, if the higher-status workers had to be involved in housekeeping tasks, they wouldn't trash the bathroom so much in the first place! This stuff about "we need toilet cleaners" is like making jobs to dig a hole and then fill it back up.

The real heavy lifting for sanitation is automated. Sewer systems are a godsend, and there's a miniscule fraction of our population that works with those. In spite of that, it deals with the shit of all of society with fantastic efficiency. This is the way of things.

Now mechanics...

Mechanics and plumbers have productive, difficult to replace, jobs. However, if they can't also double as proprietors (running their own business), then access to markets can be restricted by white collar workers with different skill sets. It's become more and more difficult to start your own business in the US. This is obviously a source of inequality. New businesses are the arbitrage between compensation for entrenched labor and unconnected labor.

What good are these mechanic jobs if they don't offer an entry to the middle class? If it's just compensated like Walmart stockers and toilet cleaners, then it's not something to aspire to. It doesn't matter that you think there is a skill differential. If society (and the people with access to the markets) doesn't value those skills, it doesn't matter.

1/30/2014 10:24:19 AM

eh it's not as black and white. Emptying the trash can? Sure. I would actually PREFER that if I had the option. I already do it with my recycling at my desk. But sweeping the floor? vacuuming? Cleaning the bathroom? That's more than a few seconds worth of work. I also mow my own yard and trim my own bushes at home.(I don't see anyone I work with trashing our work place or treating the cleaning crew disrespectfully either but that's anecdotal)

At some point it becomes a business thing. A company's perception is that they aren't paying someone a 6-figure salary to spend time doing housekeeping or lawn care. Now in theory, could they save money but not having a cleaning crew do it and do some sort of schedule for the actual employees to take turns? Probably. But that kind of choice isn't up to the employees, it is up to the companies paying the bills. I wouldn't have a problem at all taking a break to vaccum or sweep my floor for an hour a week if they want to pay me my normal working wage during that time. But they don't. So they pay someone cheaper. It's not that I as the employee feel "above" the housekeeping. The company feels I would be grossly overpaid to do the same job. And regardless of whether I could fit it into my normal workweek without interruption or not, most companies would look at it and say "we paid Jamie $50/hr to sweep on Thursday?? We need to hire someone who would do that for $10/hr so Jamie can do what he is paid to do."

TLDR: I think it is less the higher-status workers call/problem and more the bookkeepers/companies.

I do agree about mechanics and plumbers though.


[Edited on January 30, 2014 at 11:19 AM. Reason : ]

1/30/2014 11:10:15 AM

^ But the people currently doing housekeeping should move up in the world and get a job that pays closer to what you're making. The 5x multiplier is too high. The low-wage workers make so little that it's degrading.... as a macroeconomic position. No, it's not a problem for your company. It's a problem for voters, for all of us.

My point is that we don't need the toilet cleaning job. There are lots and lots of roles that can be cut out. Cleaning the bathrooms takes a finite amount of time that honestly isn't much compared to the total hours the company pays for. If your company is working in a high-value industry, it won't feel the pinch. On the other hand, Walmart, McDonalds, meat packers, and many other industries couldn't keep operating they way they do. They would have no choice but to substitute labor with capital investment.

For this to happen, the market value of low-wage work must go up. This could be done by restricting the supply of low-wage workers. Since many nations are "greying", this is a natural evolution for them. But the US allows immigration.

I wish we could, but you can't have both: pro-immigration policies, and improving the lives of low-wage workers.

1/30/2014 11:29:38 AM

The janitor at your office is probably making $12-$15/hr, I don't think that's demeaning

1/30/2014 11:59:51 AM

Quote :

"Engineers can empty their own damn office trash can."

My old company made the engineers empty their own trash. Was a pain in the ass and as an added bonus if your neighbor ate fruit and
didn't take their trash out then you had fruit flies within a day or two floating around your desk.

Quote :

" A company's perception is that they aren't paying someone a 6-figure salary to spend time doing housekeeping or lawn care"

true.

At Corning, some of the union trades took over mowing the lawn. At $32-$40/hr (more if they were in OT due to scheduling) they
were a hell of a lot more expensive than having the lawn care pros come out to do the work. On the other hand
if we were going to pay them to just sit around the break room perhaps it all worked out.

Quote :

"currently doing housekeeping should move up in the world and get a job that pays closer to what you're making. The 5x multiplier is too high."

Is the multiplier too high? I think not. The housekeepers CAN move up if they take night classes at Wake Tech to gain a new skill that would
land them a better job.

Quote :

"My point is that we don't need the toilet cleaning job"

At my current job who is supposed to clean toilets? The floor for my office building has a common bathroom with 2 stalls and 2 urinals
for 4 different companies on the floor. Are we supposed to draw straws??? Instead our landlord pays an individual
to take care of the bathroom for all 5 floors which encompasses around 10 different companies that make up the building.

Quote :

"This could be done by restricting the supply of low-wage workers."

This is already happening where Americans feel like cheap unskilled minimum wage jobs are below them, this in combination with an increasing
minimum wage just leads to more illegal Mexicans coming in to do these jobs at market value.

1/30/2014 11:59:54 AM