More Americans Die of Poverty than Terrorism

[Kevin]

The military actually helps a lot with fighting poverty. It provides some of the best middle class jobs around, not to mention the fact that it's probably the only really good job option for most young lower class unskilled workers.

As for Nickel and Dimed, I found the entire premise to be ridiculous. It's required reading at my wife's school, but really--it's just about some PhD bitching about her low-wage job. She misses the whole point as to what low wage jobs are. They're low wage because the employer can get away with paying that wage. No one owes you anything. You either continue to work in work you find "degrading," which is such bullshit, nothing about cleaning toilets is degrading, it's honest work, most of us on GC have probably had to clean toilets at jobs we had in high school/undergrad. You either work that job forever or you work that job until you can build up a skill set someone values more.

The government is not going to fix poverty with entitlement programs. It'll possibly make poverty more palatable or even desirable, but it won't fix it.

That said, I do wish that the Air Force had to have bake sales to build its bombers instead of schools having to engage in that activity to buy textbooks.

[Drolefille]

Hmmm, who is more likely to be missing the point about low-wage jobs, someone who has one for a living, or Kevin.

Oh, I know the answer to this one.

Seriously, if you think poverty is ever desirable in any country including those with far more comprehensive assistance than we provide, you're an idiot. And if you think that everyone who works low wage jobs should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps and then they'd get ahead, you're an idiot.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Hmmm, who is more likely to be missing the point about low-wage jobs, someone who has one for a living, or Kevin.

Oh, I know the answer to this one.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The military actually helps a lot with fighting poverty. It provides some of the best middle class jobs around, not to mention the fact that it's probably the only really good job option for most young lower class unskilled workers.

As for Nickel and Dimed, I found the entire premise to be ridiculous. It's required reading at my wife's school, but really--it's just about some PhD bitching about her low-wage job. She misses the whole point as to what low wage jobs are. They're low wage because the employer can get away with paying that wage. No one owes you anything. You either continue to work in work you find "degrading," which is such bullshit, nothing about cleaning toilets is degrading, it's honest work, most of us on GC have probably had to clean toilets at jobs we had in high school/undergrad. You either work that job forever or you work that job until you can build up a skill set someone values more.

The government is not going to fix poverty with entitlement programs. It'll possibly make poverty more palatable or even desirable, but it won't fix it.

I disagree with much of this.

Originally Posted by Kevin

That said, I do wish that the Air Force had to have bake sales to build its bombers instead of schools having to engage in that activity to buy textbooks.

I agree with this.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by da.most

The problem is most blacks are too lazy to go to school and get jobs.

So pull up your damned pants!

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The military actually helps a lot with fighting poverty. It provides some of the best middle class jobs around, not to mention the fact that it's probably the only really good job option for most young lower class unskilled workers.

The military is great for people who don't have a lot of economic options in their hometowns. I've been told, " The only job in town was the mine/farm/factory and they weren't hiring." when asking guys why they joined.


You can use the skills and knowledge you learn while serving to give you that leg up but....... You have to utilize it, which a lot of people don't do causing them to end up in the same shitty situation they were in before they enlisted.

[Elephant Walk]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

But in all seriousness I agree with what KSUViolet says, just sending someone a food stamp or a stipend every month isn't going to end poverty; To start we need better paying jobs for people.

Or we need to get rid of the governments intervention in the marketplace which has caused poverty.

That would be a start.

(and Nickel and Dimed lacked logic, perspective, and consistency. It was just bad.)

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

Or we need to get rid of the governments intervention in the marketplace which has caused poverty.

That would be a start.

(and Nickel and Dimed lacked logic, perspective, and consistency. It was just bad.)

How does the government create poverty through marketplace intervention? In a truly "free market" would there be 0 government intervention? Is a minimum wage a government intervention that should be abolished?

[Elephant Walk]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

How does the government create poverty through marketplace intervention? In a truly "free market" would there be 0 government intervention? Is a minimum wage a government intervention that should be abolished?

Minimum wage is an example of government intervention in the marketplace. It propagates racism of the worst kind, denies the least educated/experienced the opportunity to gain education/experience, increases unemployment, and marginalizes the poorest.

So, yes that would be one of them.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

Minimum wage is an example of government intervention in the marketplace. It propagates racism of the worst kind, denies the least educated/experienced the opportunity to gain education/experience, increases unemployment, and marginalizes the poorest.

So, yes that would be one of them.

@ the bold: How so? Not being snarky. I'm genuinely curious why you feel that way.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

Minimum wage is an example of government intervention in the marketplace. It propagates racism of the worst kind, denies the least educated/experienced the opportunity to gain education/experience, increases unemployment, and marginalizes the poorest.

So, yes that would be one of them.

Without a minimum wage what would stop the underpayment of workers when there is high unemployment?

Are two jobs that pay $3.00 an hour actually better than 1 that pays $6.00 an hour?

[Elephant Walk]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

@ the bold: How so? Not being snarky. I'm genuinely curious why you feel that way.

Racism
Walter E. Williams came up with this simple work in theory:

If you went to a restaraunt and on the menu, you saw that the filet mignon and the hamburger was the same price. Naturally, you would prefer the higher grade dish -- the filet mignon. One would normally be hesitant to purchase the filet mignon due to the price. But when they are the same price, there is no reason not to.

Now apply this concept to the archetypal "racist white business owner" who has the ability to hire either a white person or a black person, who are both of equal strengths, weaknesses, education, etc. A black person who may come from a more disadvantaged community is likely to work for less in order to prove themselves and move through the ranks. When both are on the same wage scale (a minimum wage), there is no opportunity cost for racism and the "racist white business owner" can quickly hire the white worker with no qualms in his business sense.

Hate to quote a musician, but from one country-rock band:
"Ain't about no cotton fields or cotton picking lies
Ain't about the races, the crying shame
To the fucking rich man all poor people look the same"

Allegedly, African-American and white unemployment was practically equal before minimum wage. While that does not mean that minimum wage necessarily caused the disparity, I haven't ventured a guess at another cause.

denies the least educated/experienced the opportunity to gain education/experience
This is quite simple. The least experienced would (at least theoretically) be willing to work for less in order to gain employment and thus gain experience and eventually gain a greater wage. Thus, the minimum wage acts as an entry-barrier into the work marketplace.

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Without a minimum wage what would stop the underpayment of workers when there is high unemployment?

You would have to define underpayment.

Are two jobs that pay $3.00 an hour actually better than 1 that pays $6.00 an hour?

That decision isn't mine, it's the workers.

[Tulip86]

I feel minimum wage does in a way prevent companies to take abuse of those who have no other options than to take the "minimum wage" jobs. If there was no lower limit, they would just pay whatever they wanted to pay. Off course there are companies who do pay their employees well and treat them with respect, but for most, it's profits before people.

[Drolefille]

Wait, so because a minimum wage doesn't let a racist employer pay black people less, it's the law that's the problem?

How would the alternative, hiring only minorities and paying them less than white people be any better? And the origin of minimum wage dates before civil rights, the odds that minority unemployment was being adequately counted and that the wars didn't have a huge impact seems unlikely. How would this not bring back sweatshops?

Why is the assumption that the employer would eventually pay the worker better? Why not fire the employee and hire someone else at a cheaper wage if they caused a fuss.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

Racism
Walter E. Williams came up with this simple work in theory:

If you went to a restaraunt and on the menu, you saw that the filet mignon and the hamburger was the same price. Naturally, you would prefer the higher grade dish -- the filet mignon. One would normally be hesitant to purchase the filet mignon due to the price. But when they are the same price, there is no reason not to.

Now apply this concept to the archetypal "racist white business owner" who has the ability to hire either a white person or a black person, who are both of equal strengths, weaknesses, education, etc. A black person who may come from a more disadvantaged community is likely to work for less in order to prove themselves and move through the ranks. When both are on the same wage scale (a minimum wage), there is no opportunity cost for racism and the "racist white business owner" can quickly hire the white worker with no qualms in his business sense.

Hate to quote a musician, but from one country-rock band:
"Ain't about no cotton fields or cotton picking lies
Ain't about the races, the crying shame
To the fucking rich man all poor people look the same"

Allegedly, African-American and white unemployment was practically equal before minimum wage. While that does not mean that minimum wage necessarily caused the disparity, I haven't ventured a guess at another cause.

Interesting.

I'm glad you qualified that with "in theory," since minimum wage doesn't exist in a vacuum. Other things (affirmative action, etc) help to mitigate situations like this.

denies the least educated/experienced the opportunity to gain education/experience
This is quite simple. The least experienced would (at least theoretically) be willing to work for less in order to gain employment and thus gain experience and eventually gain a greater wage. Thus, the minimum wage acts as an entry-barrier into the work marketplace.

I am not getting this point, though. Minimum wage in and of itself doesn't act as a barrier -- it's actions like the one in the previously quoted section. Hiring someone on at minimum wage does not prevent that person from gaining experience and moving up within the company.