Quote:
Originally Posted by scottvd
Oh, all this - we should just stick to talking about cars and stuff! 
I appreciate all your input but disagree with most of it. I feel each individual is responsible for themselves and their decisions. Amazon and Walmart provide many entry-level jobs, not careers. The problem is not the with corporation that is creating jobs, contributing to the economy, providing products and services - but the problem lies with the individual who fails to equip themselves with the education and skills necessary to earn a sufficient income to support the American life style. I don't think Amazon and Walmart are responsible to create tons of career-level jobs for under-skilled and under-motivated Americans.
These jobs should be for youth working their way through school, not parents of children needing to support dependents. There's something wrong with the worker at that point, not the employer.
Education and equipping are available in abundance in this country, I'm not sure how anyone could make a case that they are unable to receive education.
An increase of $70/week would work about as well as the stimulus checks did. It's a fact that many people live above their means regardless of income. Look at what the average American home was in the 1940's - we'd hardly consider it a garage today. Our "low income" have more luxuries that most people around the world.
I see the problem not with the big bad corporations that make an easy target, but with the poor decision making/planning that characterizes so much of the populous:
Lack of education, direction, and equipping.
Lack of commitment in relationships, so children are being born outside of wedlock and being "raised" by two people who aren't even serious enough to commit to each other, but are nevertheless bringing new life - a life that is dependent upon both of them.
Everyone has a smartphone, a flat screen TV with cable, a car less than 10 years old, etc. you name it.
It sounds good to just give increase of $70-80 but this would be giving additional resources to someone who has already not proven themselves faithful with the resources they've already been entrusted with, why give (unearned) them more?
Many immigrants moved to this country for the opportunity to work and make a better life for themselves. They made a lot with a little and worked hard - that doesn't characterize many people today. This sense of American entitlement is bringing nothing but ruin.
Oh man.. how did we get here? So anyhow, what'd you do with your 986 today?! We can both agree that's cool! |
I agree with most of what you are saying, too many are poorly prepared for well ...reality. Was true in the past, is true now and will continue to be true in a country where such a large % of the students are being left behind relative to Asian states while the cost of college makes it a no-go. What one American A student spends on a BS, an A+ Indian student will spend on three engineering degrees. End result, a huge number of unskilled and uneducated working adults in the making.
But that's not really the point ultimate1 is raising (which many agree with). And it's not really a political point, more so a commercial one between consumer and corporation. You as consumer can support corporations that pay a living wage (like a Costco who I believe pay $15+ an hour for service labor) and reduce the possibility that this low skilled worker will lean on the tax payers for food and healthcare assistance or you can instead continue supporting
major U.S. corporations that fully acknowledge that they pay just barely above poverty wages -- in order to give you such low prices. Again, we're not talking about small businesses here. Now some argue that these were NOT meant to be career wages or full time jobs. And that's 100% true, they weren't
meant to be that but I put "meant" in the same bin as Congressional budgets being meant to avoid $5 trillion national debts, that became $10 trillion, that became $16 trillion and no matter who is power will become $30 trillion debts.
Budgets hold no water without Constitutional requirements and unskilled workers have few options to seek better education and training while meeting living expenses, so its working that low-wage job or they're on the street.
Now I'm not onboard with Ultimate1 in boy-cotting the Wal-Marts, McDonalds and Amazons of the corporate low wage world, because I believe that despite their "Mr. Smithers-esque" businesses practices, if not for their success (even at tax-payer expense) they wouldn't have jobs at all. But I also recognize that many of these low-wage corporate employers have run countless small businesses out existence who did a far,far better job of looking after their employees. Neither were these small businesses actively destroying U.S. manufacturing by undercutting the competition with retail prices that small business can't even buy at wholesale.
And also, we're not discussing privately owned small or mid caps here, but public corporations where the books are fully open to every shareholder as well as public interest groups who document these poverty level wages.
And if anything isn't disclosed to shareholders of these Amazons, Wal-Marts and McD's then that's a much bigger problem.