6 ms·

Serious question, politics aside. How many jobs have been prior filled by teenagers or recent college graduates, that are no longer being filled by those groups

Serious question, politics aside. How many jobs have been prior filled by teenagers or recent college graduates, that are no longer being filled by those groups for whatever reason? Is every single type of profession required to support a family of 4? Edit: 5, per the photo on the article

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
princekolt 9y ago
It's the opposite. Middle aged people used to work in manufacturing, farming, and other industrial positions. Now that these industries have either died or gone automated, they have to join teenagers in service jobs as well. It is not a matter of how many children they have either because families used to be a lot more numerous in the past and it was not considered a problem at all.
- yorwba 9y ago
  > It is not a matter of how many children they have either because families used to be a lot more numerous in the past and it was not considered a problem at all. I think in theory you could raise an 1800s-size family today, but you'd have to settle for 1800s-level quality of life, which nobody is likely to do. And in practice you can't just set up a shed on unclaimed land, because there is no unclaimed land left and NIMBYs wouldn't want a slum anywhere near their property. If you tried making your children useful as labor, you'd quickly lose custody for your child exploitation. And so on. The things our society expects and accepts have changed, so you can't always point to the past and say "it worked then, so it will work now"; because if the social structure enabling it has changed, this may not be true.
frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
About half of minimum wage workers are at least 25 and three-quarters are at least 20. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/08/who-makes-minimum-wage/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/08/who-makes-mi... >Is every single type of profession required to support a family of 4? "A man must always live by his work, and his wages must at least be sufficient to maintain him. They must even upon most occasions be somewhat more, otherwise it would be impossible for him to bring up a family, and the race of such workmen could not last beyond the first generation." "They who feed, clothe, and lodge the whole body of the people should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed, and lodged." "Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price, and thereby lessening the sale of their goods both at home and abroad. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people." All from Adam Smith.
- falcolas 9y ago
  > the race of such workmen could not last beyond the first generation. I don't believe people (well, the people with the influence more accurately) care about this anymore, not with the promise of automation to replace that lost generation while lining their pockets with money.
- canadian_voter 9y ago
  Adam Smith is such a commie. The man clearly has an agenda. Good thing no one takes his work seriously.
  - dang 9y ago
    Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?
Sleeep 9y ago
Aren't cafeteria workers stereotypically ("in the old days") older women? (AKA "lunch lady") I used to work at cafeteria [non-school, for employees] part time and all the full timers were old woman who fit the stereotype to a T. The part timers were all teenagers though. The only people who see part timers where those who worked outside typical business hours.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  Line cooks, dish washers, night cleaning staff, and bus boys are often male. People "out front" are often female for various reasons. When I worked in a cafeteria, the men and boys often did the dirtier and heavier work like stocking freezers, cleaning grease traps, etc. I don't think it needs to be this way, but it's what happened. I'm not sure if that's typical or not, but it probably affects the longevity in food service work over time. That is, different work cultures and different managers may treat men differently.
nxsynonym 9y ago
It's education inflation. a college degree is the new highschool diploma. Even with a 4 year degree in a "real" field of study (business/stem/finance/whatever) it's becoming more and more difficult to land entry level jobs. If you pay 30/60/90k for said degree, you are going to feel entitled (rightfully or not) to working in a position that's not for the "uneducated". These positions still need to be filled though, because they are generally the jobs that make day-to-day life happen. Nobody wants to flip burgers but they still want to be able to eat one at lunch. I'm of the opinion that yes, even minimum wage jobs should be able to get the bare minimum expenses of an average family covered (housing/food/medicine), let alone two incomes making more than minimum wage.
- henraldp 9y ago
  Should minimum wage jobs pay well enough to raise a family in Palo Alto?
  - dsr_ 9y ago
    Yes. The minimum wage in Palo Alto must support a family in Palo Alto, or within a very reasonable commute.
    - humanrebar 9y ago
      I agree employers should pay that much, ethically and morally. I don't think legally they should be forced to pay that much.
    - SilasX 9y ago
      In order to rigorously capture the notion of a "reasonable commute", I've suggested we stop thinking in terms of nominal wages and start thinking in terms of "DIPHLoW": [real] discretionary income per hour lost to work. Discretionary income = subtract off taxes and housing. Hours lost to work = time at work plus time commuting or anything you have to regularly do to be able to work. That way, the measure is less susceptible to the dismissal of "just move farther out" -- that has a cost in terms of increasing hours lost to work and therefore decreasing DIPHLoW. It also highlights the impact of housing costs -- anything that keeps them from going down is effectively keeping DIPHloW down too.
jclardy 9y ago
I think the issue is that the rate we pay people at has not grown much at all, but the cost of living has skyrocketed (Especially housing.) Also education requirements for specialized jobs have increased, and if you fail to use your degree after school then you are pretty much screwed from the accumulated debt. My grandpa was a mailman his whole life, and supported a family of 5 on that income. He is pretty well off now. Today the average $15 an hour USPS carriers get paid will barely support one person in a small city.
rhizome 9y ago
It's been a long time since I've seen teenagers (or the college-aged) working at a grocery store, or even Target.
- turc1656 9y ago
  Really? That's odd, because that's at least half the staff where I live for all of those types of positions.
Consultant32452 9y ago
>Is every single type of profession required to support a family of 4? Certainly not. And anyone who says it should is being disingenuous unless they also support rabidly protectionist trade policy like not purchasing virtually anything from China or Mexico. What they really mean is that they don't like seeing poor people close to them.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

princekolt 9y ago

It's the opposite. Middle aged people used to work in manufacturing, farming, and other industrial positions. Now that these industries have either died or gone automated, they have to join teenagers in service jobs as well. It is not a matter of how many children they have either because families used to be a lot more numerous in the past and it was not considered a problem at all.

yorwba 9y ago
> It is not a matter of how many children they have either because families used to be a lot more numerous in the past and it was not considered a problem at all. I think in theory you could raise an 1800s-size family today, but you'd have to settle for 1800s-level quality of life, which nobody is likely to do. And in practice you can't just set up a shed on unclaimed land, because there is no unclaimed land left and NIMBYs wouldn't want a slum anywhere near their property. If you tried making your children useful as labor, you'd quickly lose custody for your child exploitation. And so on. The things our society expects and accepts have changed, so you can't always point to the past and say "it worked then, so it will work now"; because if the social structure enabling it has changed, this may not be true.

frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago

About half of minimum wage workers are at least 25 and three-quarters are at least 20. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/08/who-makes-minimum-wage/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/08/who-makes-mi... >Is every single type of profession required to support a family of 4? "A man must always live by his work, and his wages must at least be sufficient to maintain him. They must even upon most occasions be somewhat more, otherwise it would be impossible for him to bring up a family, and the race of such workmen could not last beyond the first generation." "They who feed, clothe, and lodge the whole body of the people should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed, and lodged." "Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price, and thereby lessening the sale of their goods both at home and abroad. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people." All from Adam Smith.

falcolas 9y ago
> the race of such workmen could not last beyond the first generation. I don't believe people (well, the people with the influence more accurately) care about this anymore, not with the promise of automation to replace that lost generation while lining their pockets with money.
canadian_voter 9y ago
Adam Smith is such a commie. The man clearly has an agenda. Good thing no one takes his work seriously.
- dang 9y ago
  Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?

Sleeep 9y ago

Aren't cafeteria workers stereotypically ("in the old days") older women? (AKA "lunch lady") I used to work at cafeteria [non-school, for employees] part time and all the full timers were old woman who fit the stereotype to a T. The part timers were all teenagers though. The only people who see part timers where those who worked outside typical business hours.

humanrebar 9y ago
Line cooks, dish washers, night cleaning staff, and bus boys are often male. People "out front" are often female for various reasons. When I worked in a cafeteria, the men and boys often did the dirtier and heavier work like stocking freezers, cleaning grease traps, etc. I don't think it needs to be this way, but it's what happened. I'm not sure if that's typical or not, but it probably affects the longevity in food service work over time. That is, different work cultures and different managers may treat men differently.

nxsynonym 9y ago

It's education inflation. a college degree is the new highschool diploma. Even with a 4 year degree in a "real" field of study (business/stem/finance/whatever) it's becoming more and more difficult to land entry level jobs. If you pay 30/60/90k for said degree, you are going to feel entitled (rightfully or not) to working in a position that's not for the "uneducated". These positions still need to be filled though, because they are generally the jobs that make day-to-day life happen. Nobody wants to flip burgers but they still want to be able to eat one at lunch. I'm of the opinion that yes, even minimum wage jobs should be able to get the bare minimum expenses of an average family covered (housing/food/medicine), let alone two incomes making more than minimum wage.

henraldp 9y ago
Should minimum wage jobs pay well enough to raise a family in Palo Alto?
- dsr_ 9y ago
  Yes. The minimum wage in Palo Alto must support a family in Palo Alto, or within a very reasonable commute.
  - humanrebar 9y ago
    I agree employers should pay that much, ethically and morally. I don't think legally they should be forced to pay that much.
  - SilasX 9y ago
    In order to rigorously capture the notion of a "reasonable commute", I've suggested we stop thinking in terms of nominal wages and start thinking in terms of "DIPHLoW": [real] discretionary income per hour lost to work. Discretionary income = subtract off taxes and housing. Hours lost to work = time at work plus time commuting or anything you have to regularly do to be able to work. That way, the measure is less susceptible to the dismissal of "just move farther out" -- that has a cost in terms of increasing hours lost to work and therefore decreasing DIPHLoW. It also highlights the impact of housing costs -- anything that keeps them from going down is effectively keeping DIPHloW down too.

jclardy 9y ago

I think the issue is that the rate we pay people at has not grown much at all, but the cost of living has skyrocketed (Especially housing.) Also education requirements for specialized jobs have increased, and if you fail to use your degree after school then you are pretty much screwed from the accumulated debt. My grandpa was a mailman his whole life, and supported a family of 5 on that income. He is pretty well off now. Today the average $15 an hour USPS carriers get paid will barely support one person in a small city.

rhizome 9y ago

It's been a long time since I've seen teenagers (or the college-aged) working at a grocery store, or even Target.

turc1656 9y ago
Really? That's odd, because that's at least half the staff where I live for all of those types of positions.

Consultant32452 9y ago

>Is every single type of profession required to support a family of 4? Certainly not. And anyone who says it should is being disingenuous unless they also support rabidly protectionist trade policy like not purchasing virtually anything from China or Mexico. What they really mean is that they don't like seeing poor people close to them.