3 ms·

Again, I fail to see how being unemployed is superior to making money. Your point is correct, if you assume the person could get a job with the qualities you de

by tabeth 10y ago

Again, I fail to see how being unemployed is superior to making money. Your point is correct, if you assume the person could get a job with the qualities you describe. If they could, they wouldn't be unemployed to begin with (unless it's by choice, of course) Why is that foreigners are taking these jobs and not Americans?

true_religion 10y ago
At some point it becomes easier to beg for charity from family, friends and society so that it is not worth working. Hard labor that damages your body for minimum wage may not be worth it in the long term versus a cashier's position for the same wage.
TheAdamAndChe 10y ago
I view things differently. Back in the 60s when unions were strong and jobs weren't outsourced, employees got their fair share of corporate earnings, and a laborer could afford a middle class life with a car, house, and nuclear family. Look at things today. The return on labor has dropped significantly due to outsourcing and immigration dropping wages at a time when corporate earnings are higher than ever and socioeconomic mobility is at an all-time low[1]. Productivity is higher & GDP per capita is over $50k/yr, yet the majority of people, especially in the lower class, have not been benefiting from this. I guarantee the corporate managers make obscenely more money than the farm laborers do. I personally don't feel it's bad to feel entitled to my fair share of the work I put in. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-economic_mobility_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-economic_mobility_in_the...
- randomdata 10y ago
  Interestingly, here in Canada union membership has only waned slightly over the years and the current unionization rate is almost equal to the USA's peak. Yet, we have all the same problems with wage stagnation for the majority of the population and a small group at the top reaping all the rewards of higher productivity.
  - TheAdamAndChe 10y ago
    That is interesting, I did not know that. What do you think is driving the change in Canada? Globalization? Or something else?
    - randomdata 10y ago
      Protectionism. When the law grants a monopoly, small groups gain a huge advantage over everyone else. Ironically, unions play their own part in that. Here in Canada we like to pick on teachers because, thanks to a strong union, they can make almost $100,000 for 8 months of work. Which is fine, and good for them, but the problem is that they are able to achieve that high income only because they actively prevent other people from doing the job. Someone who is stuck in a low-paying job has no avenue to compete against them, leaving that person stuck in a low-paying job while the teacher can start amassing wealth with the high income their job provides. This is how inequality happens. Of course, not the same degree that you find with what is quite possibly the most insidious form of protectionism: Intellectual property. It's no coincidence that people like Bill Gates, who built a business on copyright law, are among the richest in the world. As soon as someone tries to offer the "Doors" operating system to fulfill the huge demand for such a product, they will get the pants sued off them. You can try to offer something sort of the same, but not really, but that doesn't put much pressure on the market for obvious reasons. It would be kind of like if diary and poultry (Diary and poultry products have their own protectionist system in Canada, so I use that example as more than just a hypothetical) products were controlled by a certain group. You can grow celery to try and compete against them, but that's not really going to stop people from buying dairy and poultry if that's what the market wants. Celery is not cheese. As such, those who control the market profit greatly. A family friend is in the chicken business and he's been willing to share his wealth, and let's just say that I think a lot of startups would be pivoting to that business if there was a viable way in. The problem is, of course, that the protectionism doesn't allow a viable way in for everyone else.
- tabeth 10y ago
  I'm still not seeing the relevance of this compared to unemployment vs. a low wage manual labor job. Are you saying it's better to be unemployed?
  - mistermann 10y ago
    For starters, human beings do not operate on pure logic, emotion has a significant effect on behavior.
  - Daishiman 10y ago
    If you're part of a household with multiple incomes, or you live with your parents, or you are able to take out a loan or live off savings such that you can take your time to educate yourself in a field or so on, then yes, it's definitely better to be unemployed.

by tabeth 10y ago

true_religion 10y ago

At some point it becomes easier to beg for charity from family, friends and society so that it is not worth working. Hard labor that damages your body for minimum wage may not be worth it in the long term versus a cashier's position for the same wage.

TheAdamAndChe 10y ago

I view things differently. Back in the 60s when unions were strong and jobs weren't outsourced, employees got their fair share of corporate earnings, and a laborer could afford a middle class life with a car, house, and nuclear family. Look at things today. The return on labor has dropped significantly due to outsourcing and immigration dropping wages at a time when corporate earnings are higher than ever and socioeconomic mobility is at an all-time low[1]. Productivity is higher & GDP per capita is over $50k/yr, yet the majority of people, especially in the lower class, have not been benefiting from this. I guarantee the corporate managers make obscenely more money than the farm laborers do. I personally don't feel it's bad to feel entitled to my fair share of the work I put in. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-economic_mobility_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socio-economic_mobility_in_the...

randomdata 10y ago
Interestingly, here in Canada union membership has only waned slightly over the years and the current unionization rate is almost equal to the USA's peak. Yet, we have all the same problems with wage stagnation for the majority of the population and a small group at the top reaping all the rewards of higher productivity.
- TheAdamAndChe 10y ago
  That is interesting, I did not know that. What do you think is driving the change in Canada? Globalization? Or something else?
  - randomdata 10y ago
    Protectionism. When the law grants a monopoly, small groups gain a huge advantage over everyone else. Ironically, unions play their own part in that. Here in Canada we like to pick on teachers because, thanks to a strong union, they can make almost $100,000 for 8 months of work. Which is fine, and good for them, but the problem is that they are able to achieve that high income only because they actively prevent other people from doing the job. Someone who is stuck in a low-paying job has no avenue to compete against them, leaving that person stuck in a low-paying job while the teacher can start amassing wealth with the high income their job provides. This is how inequality happens. Of course, not the same degree that you find with what is quite possibly the most insidious form of protectionism: Intellectual property. It's no coincidence that people like Bill Gates, who built a business on copyright law, are among the richest in the world. As soon as someone tries to offer the "Doors" operating system to fulfill the huge demand for such a product, they will get the pants sued off them. You can try to offer something sort of the same, but not really, but that doesn't put much pressure on the market for obvious reasons. It would be kind of like if diary and poultry (Diary and poultry products have their own protectionist system in Canada, so I use that example as more than just a hypothetical) products were controlled by a certain group. You can grow celery to try and compete against them, but that's not really going to stop people from buying dairy and poultry if that's what the market wants. Celery is not cheese. As such, those who control the market profit greatly. A family friend is in the chicken business and he's been willing to share his wealth, and let's just say that I think a lot of startups would be pivoting to that business if there was a viable way in. The problem is, of course, that the protectionism doesn't allow a viable way in for everyone else.
tabeth 10y ago
I'm still not seeing the relevance of this compared to unemployment vs. a low wage manual labor job. Are you saying it's better to be unemployed?
- mistermann 10y ago
  For starters, human beings do not operate on pure logic, emotion has a significant effect on behavior.
- Daishiman 10y ago
  If you're part of a household with multiple incomes, or you live with your parents, or you are able to take out a loan or live off savings such that you can take your time to educate yourself in a field or so on, then yes, it's definitely better to be unemployed.