No one wants to work, or no one wants to work for 13 an hour

Page 4 of 6 [ 91 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

04 Sep 2023, 5:59 pm

SabbraCadabra wrote:

goldfish21 wrote:

1/2 mill houses? Not around here.. :lol:

Here in West Michigan, $500k sounds about average right now for a decent-to-good house, in a good neighborhood, that doesn't need tens of thousands of dollars worth of repairs.

Anything selling for pre-pandemic prices usually looks like it needs to be bulldozed. Somehow, someone always manages to flip them. I can't imagine that's legal in any way.

goldfish21 wrote:

Another is a software engineer who did a bunch of work managing servers before but recently took a role with some AI company.

And another manages Facebook and Google ads for people.

Yup, that sounds about right. Seems like the only way to make a decent amount of money in this life is to find something morally reprehensible.

Or sell drugs.

Or become a surgeon.

Or just inherit the money.

Here $500k might buy you a condo in the suburbs somewhere - certainly not a 3 bedroom, though, unless it's very old then maybe.

Typical suburban houses like the one I live in are $1.8M now.

A house that needs to be bulldozed and built can be had for maybe $1.2Mish.

People are now teaming up to buy houses to share. Otherwise the only realistic possibility for most people is for their parents to die and they inherit their real estate wealth, sell the family home, then buy whatever it is they want to live in.

It's all crazy.

_________________
No :heart:

for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,904
Location: Stendec

04 Sep 2023, 6:04 pm

Here*, $500,000 will buy you a hectare of land (fenced and gated), a two-story house, a new SUV, and the services of at least one household staff member for a year.

(*Tagaytay, Cavite Province, Philippines)

_________________

No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.

uncommondenominator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Aug 2019
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,212

04 Sep 2023, 6:31 pm

Seems like only half the story of "supply and demand" is being told.

While there is truth to the notion that if there are few jobs and many people, the demand for jobs is likely high, and will favor the ability for employers to leverage the situation.

However, if there's more jobs than there are people, if there's enough jobs that everyone can get one, without having to resort to performing slave labor, then the market naturally favors the labor side, and jobs will have to offer competitive pay to get people to take those jobs, vs. jobs that pay fairly, and don't suck.

See, if there's 100 people, and 75 jobs, there's competition for jobs, and the employer can leverage that to drive down wages, by seeing who's willing to work for the least money.

But if there's 100 people, and 125 jobs, it's the labor that's in short supply, and the demand for labor goes up. Those unclaimed, unfilled jobs need to offer some incentive to get people to come to them.

A person can live w/o a job, much to the annoyance of businesses. A business can't live w/o labor.

GeekyFreak
Raven
Raven

Joined: 11 Jun 2023
Gender: Female
Posts: 114

04 Sep 2023, 8:15 pm

uncommondenominator wrote:

Actually had a meeting with a recruiter for a resume workshop. There are not a ton of jobs, but a ton of job listings. There is no rule in the US (at least) saying job postings have to be legit. They're often done because it looks better to investors (company is hiring and therefore doing ok) and sometimes because the company is required to post internal jobs for a short amount of time. Both of these on top of scams makes there look like a lot of jobs are out there.

colliegrace
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Nov 2022
Age: 30
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,263
Location: USA

04 Sep 2023, 8:22 pm

funeralxempire wrote:

But seriously, it's strange that expecting wages to cover both food and shelter is seen as an unreasonable expectation. It's like some people literally have zero consideration of others outside of how they might serve their needs.

And the "these jobs are for teenagers" schtick doesn't pass muster. I work at a grocery store and while a lot of our cashiers are indeed high schoolers, it's hardly all high schoolers. (How are we gonna be open while the youngsters are in school otherwise??)
And to get a career you gotta start at the bottom usually.

I swear those people don't have brains.

_________________
ASD, most likely have dyscalculia & BPD as well. Also dx'd ADHD-C, but don't think it's accurate.
RAADs: 104 | ASQ: 30 | Aspie Quiz: 116/200 (84% probability of being atypical)

Also diagnosed with: seasonal depression, anxiety, OCD

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,904
Location: Stendec

04 Sep 2023, 9:19 pm

funeralxempire wrote:

When I hire a person, I hire that person, and not his/her/their family. Employees do not get pay bonuses for the sizes of their families (although I have quietly introduced new parents to ten guys named "Franklin" as a personal gift). If they can make more money elsewhere, then they should do it. "I have found a better-paying job" is not a reason I have heard often, but I have heard it; and, while regrettable, I do not bear grudges against those who have left for greener pastures (unless they rage-quit).

I had consideration for my employees while they were on the job and/or on company property. Nothing more is necessary.

_________________

No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,574
Location: Right over your left shoulder

04 Sep 2023, 9:38 pm

Fnord wrote:

funeralxempire wrote:

Cool story bro. I'm not sure how that's relevant to the applicant's needs.

You're not obliged to consider their needs, but you must realize they will make their needs paramount. If you can't meet them, they'll apply elsewhere. If they don't like your attitude while interviewing, they'll follow up on other applications instead.

If you're completely oblivious to their needs and interests don't be surprised when they're willing to leave you high and dry on short notice.

_________________
Watching liberals try to solve societal problems without a systemic critique/class consciousness is like watching someone in the dark try to flip on the light switch, but they keep turning on the garbage disposal instead.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,904
Location: Stendec

04 Sep 2023, 9:41 pm

funeralxempire wrote:

. . . You're not obliged to consider their needs, but you must realize they will make their needs paramount. If you can't meet them, they'll apply elsewhere. If they don't like your attitude while interviewing, they'll follow up on other applications instead.

If you're completely oblivious to their needs and interests don't be surprised when they're willing to leave you high and dry on short notice.

Absolutely! I could pay and provide only so much, and if they could get more elsewhere, then I might never see them again.

That's corporate life for you.

But if someone is not qualified for any job that pays more than minimum wage, then it is not the employers' fault -- it is the prospective employees' responsibility to deserve the higher pay.

_________________

No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 25,574
Location: Right over your left shoulder

04 Sep 2023, 10:02 pm

Fnord wrote:

funeralxempire wrote:

The state has an obligation to ensure minimum wage is enough to survive on, but if they fail private employers need to pay enough to make it worth someone's time. If they don't those people will seek other means, whether part of the legitimate economy or not.

If they fail to offer enough to make it worth someone's time they don't get to turn around and blame people for being lazy, the problem is that people have all figured out ways to meet their needs without taking that position. That employer isn't entitled to someone's labour at whatever they're offering, they're entitled to someone's labour for a fair wage. What's a fair wage? Obviously more than they're offering if no one's applying.

If minimum wage is lower than a living wage, employers should be offering a living wage because that's what's required to attract worthwhile employees. If they only hire the barely employable (some of whom probably should be receiving benefits rather than working) they're going to deal with the problems that result from that. Even when more competent and ambitious people take those jobs, they move on as quickly as possible so the employers are left with people who don't believe other options exist or people who should be on assistance but can't even manage the process of applying/understand they'd likely be eligible/don't have the ability to wait for approval.

honeytoast
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Aug 2020
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,068
Location: 1Q84

04 Sep 2023, 10:14 pm

Whenever I read stuff titled similar to the OP post, or an article, I get a very bitter taste in my mouth. This is just a personal opinion of mine.

Before I landed my current job, I had sent 30/40 job applications to various places in my town or outside of it. They all had different pay ranges too. For most of them, I did not receive any kind of rejection, an invitation for an interview, or some kind of communication. I even followed up with some of the places I applied for to look at my resume. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I got three interviews, I did not get those jobs. I got ONE rejection email. On Indeed, they can look at your application and it will tell you they did, and STILL nothing.

People want to work. Nobody wants to f*****g hire anyone. A few articles came out about ghost postings where companies will say they are hiring for a job, but turns out they are not!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/ ... f2d8698d52

https://www.wsj.com/articles/that-plum- ... t-3aafc794

https://fortune.com/2023/03/22/ghost-jo ... -listings/

https://www.dailydot.com/news/what-are-ghost-jobs/

_________________
dear god, dear god, tinkle tinkle hoy.

~~~~

believe in the broken clock and who's side will time be on?

SabbraCadabra
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,694
Location: Michigan

05 Sep 2023, 8:52 am

funeralxempire wrote:

An average house in the area I'm in (Southern Ontario) is $1.5 million. 3x what you're describing.

Yeah, houses in the rich areas can be quite high around here too.

_________________
I'm looking for Someone to change my life. I'm looking for a Miracle in my life.

goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

05 Sep 2023, 12:36 pm

SabbraCadabra wrote:

funeralxempire wrote:

An average house in the area I'm in (Southern Ontario) is $1.5 million. 3x what you're describing.

Yeah, houses in the rich areas can be quite high around here too.

The problem is that neither of us live in the "rich areas." Regular houses in working class suburban neighbourhoods are $1.5 & 1.8M respectively. Some of the houses I've worked on in actual rich areas are $40-70M.

There's hardly a condo for sale in the city under $1M anymore, no townhomes. In the suburbs, yes.. but the price of the cheapest condo that's a bit of a stretch for a regular wage earner to buy is what entire houses sold for ~20 years ago. Everything just skyrocketed and now people who work jobs for a wage are all but shutout of home ownership entirely forever Unless they inherit a lot of money or something.

_________________
No :heart:

for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.

rse92
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Oct 2021
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,089
Location: Buffalo, NY

05 Sep 2023, 1:20 pm

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

Fnord wrote:

I could go into a long description about how even workers' labor is subject to "Supply & Demand", but the bottom line would be this: Employers are not obligated to pay more than what is required by law, especially when the labor being provided requires only that the worker be of legal age, legally entitled to work, and capable of performing the labor.

Employers are not required by law to provide more training than that which is necessary to safely and legally perform the labor.

If you are one of hundreds of workers applying for a single job, each of whom has to offer only the same capabilities as all the rest, you will be offered the same wage as all the rest. The employer will hire the first person who agrees to perform the needed labor for a specific wage. Anyone who turns down the offered wage will likely not be hired.

Simple.

You say that no one wants to work for minimum wage? Think again. There are people who will accept that wage without hesitation. As long as there are such people, minimum-wage jobs will be filled. Only if every applicant turns down the employer's offer will the employer even consider raising the wage.

Now, there are two basic ways around this dilemma:

1. If you want a higher wage, offer something more than what all the rest can offer -- certified technical skills, for example -- when all the rest have no such skills to offer. This is called "Common Sense".

2. The workers own the means of production, and share the profits equally among themselves. This is called "Socialism".

The choice is yours.

Or we could simply fix the tax code to disincentivize the hoarding of great sums of money. There's no reason why making more than $10m a year should result in further earnings being taxed at 90%. Which won't happen because of how corrupt the whole system is.

Then no one would be paid more than $10 million in earned income per year. They would be compensated in other ways (e.g., equity ownership).

And if you mean no one can incur more income (that is, earned income plus income from investments) than $10 million dollars with every dollar above that being taxed at 90%, you understand that would be the ruin of our economy as no business or person with that kind of money would invest here, plus tax receipts would go DOWN.

The tax code is neither corrupt nor illogical. It encourages investment in America.

goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

05 Sep 2023, 2:02 pm

rse92 wrote:

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

Fnord wrote:

Lol no.

The exact opposite is true.

History:

Quote:

The top 1 percent of Americans today do not face an unusually low tax burden, by historical standards. [1] The top federal income tax rate was 91 percent in 1950 and 1951, and between 1954 and 1959. In 1952 and 1953, the top federal income tax rate was 92 percent.

Back when high earnings were taxed over 90% in the USA, wealth wasn't retained by corporations and CEO's, instead it was Actually invested in growing the economy.. either by expanding companies or by paying higher wages or both. American companies boomed and were more prosperous, and so were the working class wage earners that worked at them.

And if those high earning companies didn't feel like reinvesting in their companies or people, then they'd pay higher taxes to the government so there were funds to better the lives of people via infrastructure projects and so forth. Higher marginal tax rates work and the USA has a historical record of having already done it to prove it.

_________________
No :heart:

for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.

blitzkrieg
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,442
Location: United Kingdom

05 Sep 2023, 3:08 pm

There is a balance that needs to be struck. The balance of money in the hands of a few has been disproportionate for far too long.

Businesses and corporations have been free to screw over the general population for far too long.

goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

05 Sep 2023, 3:27 pm

blitzkrieg wrote:

...which is why I'm considering investing heavily in a pitchforks & torches business. My forecast is for Very Strong demand in the not so distant future...

_________________
No :heart:

for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.

Page 4 of 6 [ 91 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

No one wants to work, or no one wants to work for 13 an hour Post Reply New Topic

No one wants to work, or no one wants to work for 13 an hour