|
The real cost of low wages
Serveur: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1837
By Valefor.Applebottoms 2015-04-21 12:46:35
If you don't want kids then go ahead and get steralized and if you want em early and you have a lifestyle that can afford em then go ahead and do that too. Bolded is very important.. sadly most people who decide to have gaggles of children forget about that part, and either have to live off credit for the rest of their lives, or live their lives is so much misery it's going to affect both parents and children and because of it.
Having the resources to have children is fine, but wanting them while knowing you have no job thinking it's going to fix everything is an entire new problem right there.
Especially the ones who think it'll "fix my marriage". No.. it never will.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 12:47:31
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Especially the ones who think it'll "fix my marriage". No.. it never will.
Ugh. True story.
[+]
Serveur: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1837
By Valefor.Applebottoms 2015-04-21 12:55:03
Also, people don't realize how hard it really is to have children without a solid family/system of friends backing you up.
How often you have someone watch them for you instead of daycare that costs money, them paying for stuff instead of you, etc.
Makes me sad when people don't realize that and hound on single parents without those resources for doing what they can to provide a better life.
***'s messed up.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-21 12:56:54
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »If you don't want kids then go ahead and get steralized and if you want em early and you have a lifestyle that can afford em then go ahead and do that too. Bolded is very important.. sadly most people who decide to have gaggles of children forget about that part, and either have to live off credit for the rest of their lives, or live their lives is so much misery it's going to affect both parents and children and because of it.
Having the resources to have children is fine, but wanting them while knowing you have no job thinking it's going to fix everything is an entire new problem right there.
Especially the ones who think it'll "fix my marriage". No.. it never will. Never say never. There are plenty of people all around even on this very site that have had a baby and it has kept them together when they might not have otherwise.
Serveur: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1837
By Valefor.Applebottoms 2015-04-21 12:59:52
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »If you don't want kids then go ahead and get steralized and if you want em early and you have a lifestyle that can afford em then go ahead and do that too. Bolded is very important.. sadly most people who decide to have gaggles of children forget about that part, and either have to live off credit for the rest of their lives, or live their lives is so much misery it's going to affect both parents and children and because of it.
Having the resources to have children is fine, but wanting them while knowing you have no job thinking it's going to fix everything is an entire new problem right there.
Especially the ones who think it'll "fix my marriage". No.. it never will. Never say never. There are plenty of people all around even on this very site that have had a baby and it has kept them together when they might not have otherwise. But you really have to think, if you didn't have a baby, would I still be with this person?
If you're unhappy with someone, getting a puppy or buying a house together isn't going to solve your problems, it's going to hide them until they come to a boil and then explodes.
Adding a baby into the mix just makes sure that someone has to experience the boil as well.
Adding something to the relationship is not going to fix it or make something bad go away. Especially a child.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 13:02:19
Never say never. There are plenty of people all around even on this very site that have had a baby and it has kept them together when they might not have otherwise.
I suppose this comes down to whether you think staying with someone just because of a child is a good thing.
I am of the opinion that it doesn't fix anything, but rather allows you to put it aside and ignore your own problems for the sake of the child.
I, for one, don't believe that's a healthy way to live.
Admittedly, all opinion. But one that's backed up by a lot of marriage and family councilors and psychological professionals. Not to mention the feedback of children who have been in both situations; divorced parents and parents who stayed together "for the kids".
Of the latter category, I can say they reported far more negative experiences between parents...parents who often think the children can't tell something is wrong.
Edit: That's not to say these case can't have outliers, so "never" may be too absolute. There are nearly always exceptions to the rule. There are instance where, say, a couple was in love but one partner has strayed into poor behavior (substance abuse, whatever) and having a child allowed them to re-evaluate their life and get back on track and everyone lives happily ever after.
[+]
Lakshmi.Flavin
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-21 13:05:13
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »But you really have to think, if you didn't have a baby, would I still be with this person?
If you're unhappy with someone, getting a puppy or buying a house together isn't going to solve your problems, it's going to hide them until they come to a boil and then explodes.
Adding a baby into the mix just makes sure that someone has to experience the boil as well.
Adding something to the relationship is not going to fix it or make something bad go away. Especially a child. While I wouldn't recomend anyone doing this it does get some people what they want.
Sometimes it just delays the inevitable and other times they end up falling for eachother again or at least forming that social contract. People change and grow and kids change you and what you might want out of life.
Adding something to a relationship is exactly what keeps many relationships alive and I don't know how you could say otherwise. I would never suggest a child though because if it doesn't well then you're just putting that kid through something too.
[+]
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 13:06:31
Y'arr, that's maybe a more balanced way of saying it for sure.
People can change. The problem is just that...having a baby is a big deal and banking on that to change a person is a dangerous bet for all involved.
[+]
Lakshmi.Flavin
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-21 13:07:56
I suppose this comes down to whether you think staying with someone just because of a child is a good thing. It might be. It might not be. Like most anything... what's good for one isn't always for the other just like what isn't for one is good for the other.
Serveur: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1837
By Valefor.Applebottoms 2015-04-21 13:08:32
Y'arr, that's maybe a more balanced way of saying it for sure.
People can change. The problem is just that...having a baby is a big deal and banking on that to change a person is a dangerous bet for all involved. It's like placing all your chips on red.. only to see it come up black. You're screwed, lol.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 13:10:21
I suppose this comes down to whether you think staying with someone just because of a child is a good thing. It might be. It might not be. Like most anything... what's good for one isn't always for the other just like what isn't for one is good for the other.
Well, like I said. I'm not saying "never", but I would put money on "vast majority".
Even of those who it hasn't had a negative effect directly, they can still tell when it's had a negative effect on their parents.
[+]
Lakshmi.Flavin
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-21 13:13:32
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Y'arr, that's maybe a more balanced way of saying it for sure.
People can change. The problem is just that...having a baby is a big deal and banking on that to change a person is a dangerous bet for all involved. It's like placing all your chips on red.. only to see it come up black. You're screwed, lol. I wouldn't necassarily say that. Just becase a relationship doesn't work out people can still be overjoyed about having a child whether.
Quetzalcoatl.Kenrusai
Serveur: Quetzalcoatl
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1899
By Quetzalcoatl.Kenrusai 2015-04-21 13:14:00
Gotta breed~
Gotta live the dream of being a mother at 15, then by 20 you're unemployed and you've had 4 more, each has a different dad, and you're just living off the child benefits for those cigarettes~
[+]
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 13:15:26
Valefor.Applebottoms said: »Y'arr, that's maybe a more balanced way of saying it for sure.
People can change. The problem is just that...having a baby is a big deal and banking on that to change a person is a dangerous bet for all involved. It's like placing all your chips on red.. only to see it come up black. You're screwed, lol. I wouldn't necassarily say that. Just becase a relationship doesn't work out people can still be overjoyed about having a child whether.
I assume she's just talking about the relationship status, not their take on being a parent.
Ragnarok.Nausi
Serveur: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-04-21 13:19:51
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »We need to have MORE children.
Why? Why would you want this?
So they can all stay at home and not have jobs, sucking up taxpayer money? We already don't have enough jobs.
Unless we get enough people to turn the Dakotas and Kansas into major metropolitan areas, we don't need a bigger population.
Edit: That is, unless you're just interested in engaging China or India in a "who can pump out the most biological units" contest... Clearly the solution to a shitty economy with high unemployment is to have less people, not foster economic growth.
How do more people competing for less jobs foster economic growth? The major problem the US has right now are tons of open jobs with people lacking the skills to occupy them. Service is going to become crushed by automation the minute the tech dudes figure out how to setup the RoboBartender and RoboPrepCooks.
Which we then have to bring in people from overseas to occupy.
Man you guys aren't paying attention today. We all agree that we need money to have kids and that people today don't have any money.
I'm not suggesting that more people competing over fewer jobs fosters economic growth. I'm saying that we need massive economic growth so that we can all keep having children.
Everyone here is seemingly content with the notion of "well I am just not gonna have any kids because the economy sucks so much."
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 13:23:24
I'm not suggesting that more people competing over fewer jobs fosters economic growth. I'm saying that we need massive economic growth so that we can all keep having children.
Why do we need more children again? And how do you suggest making these jobs without them being, as I asked before, slave labor. In effect, if not in name.
We're close enough to that in some sectors already.
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-21 13:43:38
Why do we need more children again? To pay into Social Security that may still be around when we all become old farts.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 13:45:16
Why do we need more children again? To pay into Social Security that may still be around when we all become old farts.
But you don't even like Social Security!
Ragnarok.Nausi
Serveur: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-04-21 13:45:21
Children are often cited as their own gift. Big families are also often cited as wonderful. Granted not everyone has that outlook, but so what? Why shouldn't people have as many kids as they want?
How will we make jobs for them all? Economic growth bro. Growth is like a tree, every step spawns new industries. It's exponential.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 13:50:16
Children are often cited as their own gift. Big families are also often cited as wonderful. Granted not everyone has that outlook, but so what? Why shouldn't people have as many kids as they want?
How will we make jobs for them all? Economic growth bro. Growth is like a tree, every step spawns new industries. It's exponential.
Keep living in that corny-*** religious Americana dreamworld.
Ragnarok.Nausi
Serveur: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-04-21 13:52:11
I mean what ever happened to all those bank tellers when we started using ATMs?
Should we ban all ATMs and go back to the tellers? Why not?
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-21 13:54:03
Why do we need more children again? To pay into Social Security that may still be around when we all become old farts.
But you don't even like Social Security! I don't, and my income will put me out of collecting much of SSB when I do retire, if it's still available for me at that time that is (there is talk in tax circles that they may prevent anyone who's income other than SS exceeds a certain threshold in the previous year to collect for the current year, thresholds ranging between 60k to 200k).
I still pay more into it than most anyone (except those, who are like me, are always capped at the SS limit, which last year was $117k of wages/self-employment income), but will not receive as much benefits as other people who pay far less and receive far more benefits from it.
Because, mainly, the program went from it's old purpose into a social insurance for people who either cannot or refuses to work.
Bahamut.Ravael
Serveur: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13624
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-04-21 13:58:31
So Ramyrez thinks having children is a bad thing now? Every time I see my little boy laugh and enjoy life in a way that only a child can, it gives Ramyrez's view on the world a big middle finger.
[+]
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 14:00:12
Because, mainly, the program went from it's old purpose into a social insurance for people who either cannot or refuses to work.
Or who worked jobs where they couldn't make enough that "savings and investing" were out of the question and lacked any sort of pension or other employer-funded retirement plan...
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-21 14:00:57
So Ramyrez thinks having children is a bad thing now? Every time I see my little boy laugh and enjoy life in a way that only a child can, it gives Ramyrez's view on the world a big middle finger. I think his argument is a sociopolitical standpoint.
I don't think he meant anything regarding feels, even though a lot of his arguments are based by it.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi
Serveur: Ragnarok
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6709
By Ragnarok.Nausi 2015-04-21 14:02:58
So Ramyrez thinks having children is a bad thing now? Every time I see my little boy laugh and enjoy life in a way that only a child can, it gives Ramyrez's view on the world a big middle finger.
I think it links to a greater sense of misanthropy. I find all the misanthropes I know loathe the idea of other people having children.
[+]
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-21 14:05:05
Because, mainly, the program went from it's old purpose into a social insurance for people who either cannot or refuses to work.
Or who worked jobs where they couldn't make enough that "savings and investing" were out of the question and lacked any sort of pension or other employer-funded retirement plan... I don't mind paying for the disabled or elderly.
I think if Social Security was geared more towards the elderly and the extremely disabled (like missing body parts or require outside care to survive), and (a whole lot) less on those who are "depressed" or minor disabled (like having a stubbed toe or their feels are hurt), we can actually pay more towards the first group (elderly and extremely disabled) and support them better than how we actually do, especially in cases where they have no family to help support them.
Just because you didn't feel like working is not an excuse to collect welfare and Social Security benefits.....
Seraph.Ramyrez
Serveur: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-21 14:05:37
So Ramyrez thinks having children is a bad thing now? Every time I see my little boy laugh and enjoy life in a way that only a child can, it gives Ramyrez's view on the world a big middle finger.
I don't think having children is a bad thing. I don't think having lots of children is necessarily a bad thing in and of itself.
I think the view that you must have children is a terrible thing.
I think people who have more kids than they can afford is a bad thing.
I think people who have kids because society tells them they should is a bad thing.
I think having too many people for a country that's increasingly losing jobs because of technology is a bad thing, especially in a world where people live longer and longer.
What's wrong with simply having fewer people by way of encouraging people to have fewer children? Maybe tax benefits for not having children. For not making the public pay for schooling and the like?
You're loving your child is a good thing and that he brings you joy is wonderful.
That -- if not you, then others -- seem to think it's the only way to live, or that I'm somehow a lesser person for choosing to not have children... that's the middle finger to a way of life here.
I think something that many of you fail to realize about so many of my "strong feels" is that I didn't just come up with these opinions and feelings and theories on things out of the blue and start trying to push them on people. They're a response to constantly being told everything that I feel so deeply at the core of me is wrong because "god" or "capitalism" or whatever.
Serveur: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-21 14:06:21
I think people who have kids because society tells them they should is a bad thing. I never heard of that excuse before. Is that real?
Serveur: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-04-21 14:06:37
Don't worry, the future promises more unemployed, surplus populations occupying our jails and perpetually under-equipped to participate in the greater economy.
There's a reason why our jails are bursting at the seams.
Americans are spending $153 billion a year to subsidize McDonald’s and Wal-Mart’s low wage workers
The Washington post
And because its behind a paywall....
Quote: The low wages paid by businesses, including some of the largest and most profitable companies in the U.S. – like McDonald’s and Wal-Mart – are costing taxpayers nearly $153 billion a year.
After decades of wage cuts and health benefit rollbacks, more than half of all state and federal spending on public assistance programs goes to working families who need food stamps, Medicaid, or other support to meet basic needs. Let that sink in — American taxpayers are subsidizing people who work — most of them full-time (in some case more than full-time) because businesses do not pay a living wage.
Workers like Terrence Wise, a 35-year-old father who works part-time at McDonald’s and Burger King in Kansas City, Mo., and his fiancée Myosha Johnson, a home care worker, are among millions of families in the U.S. who work an average of 38 hours per week but still rely on public assistance. Wise is paid $8.50 an hour at his McDonald’s job and $9 an hour at Burger King. Johnson is paid just above $10 an hour, even after a decade in her field. Wise and Johnson together rely on $240 a month in food stamps to feed their three kids, a cost borne by taxpayers.
The problem of low wages and the accompanying public cost extends far beyond the fast-food industry. Forty-eight percent of home care workers rely on public assistance. In child care, it’s 46 percent. Among part-time college faculty—some of the most highly educated workers in the country—it’s 25 percent.
Ebony Hughes is paid $7.50 an hour as a home care worker in Durham, N.C., and has a second job at a local KFC. While the home care industry has the fastest growing number of jobs in America, these workers are some of the lowest paid in the country – earning, on average, $13,000 a year. To get enough hours to pay the bills, Hughes works from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. But she and her daughter still rely on public assistance to make ends meet.
UC Berkeley’s Center for Labor Research and Education, which I chair, has analyzed state spending for Medicaid/Children’s Health Insurance Program and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and federal spending for those programs as well as food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit.
We found that, on average, 52 percent of state public assistance spending supports working families (defined as working for at least 26 weeks a year and 10 hours a week) – with costs as high as $3.7 billion in California, $3.3 billion in New York, and $2 billion in Texas.
In recent months, the substantial public cost of low wages has prompted elected officials to take action. Legislators in California, Colorado, Maine, Oregon, and Washington are considering increasing the minimum wage to $12 an hour. In Connecticut, a proposal currently moving through the state legislature would fine large companies that pay low wages in an effort to recoup the costs imposed on taxpayers.
When 73 percent of people who benefit from major public assistance programs live in a working family, our economy isn’t operating the way it should – and could – be. From 2003-2013, inflation-adjusted wages fell for the entire bottom 70 percent of the workforce. Over the same time period we have also seen a large decline in the share of Americans with job-based health coverage.
Today – on Tax Day – underpaid workers are striking and protesting in cities across the country and around the globe to call for $15 an hour and the right to form a union. Their success would increase family incomes for tens of millions of adjunct professors, fast-food, home care and child care workers, among other underpaid workers. Raising wages would also generate significant savings to state and federal governments, and allow them to better target how our tax dollars are used.
Public assistance programs provide a vital support system for American families. But when Americans like Wise, Johnson and Hughes are working as hard as they can and are still paid too little to get by without public support, we need action to raise wages. On Tax Day it is a good time to take a hard look at the high public cost of low wages in the United States.
|
|