3 ms·

Part of it is an identity thing, part of it is an age thing, but part of it too is a location thing. When plants like this out in the literal middle-of-nowhere

by _bxg1 7y ago

Part of it is an identity thing, part of it is an age thing, but part of it too is a location thing. When plants like this out in the literal middle-of-nowhere close, entire towns die. You might suggest that people just move, but what if they have a mortgage on a house that's suddenly worthless? And that's not even factoring in the "soft" costs of losing your community and possibly moving away from family. Given the U.S.'s aversion to social welfare, people end up stuck without any options.

manfredo 7y ago
Entire towns disappearing is a normal state of affairs. > Hundreds of workers have already transferred. His nephew packed up his family and moved to Flint. The alternative, working on natural gas wells in Pennsylvania, paid him $13 an hour, about half what he was making at G.M. > You might suggest that people just move, but what if they have a mortgage on a house that's suddenly worthless? Then he should blame his situation on his own gamble on real-estate speculation, and not NAFTA. > And that's not even factoring in the "soft" costs of losing your community and possibly moving away from family. My whole point is, the emphasis on these "soft" factors are what's holding him back. When you move, you don't "lose" community, you swap them out for a different one. Moving away from family may be challenging, but it's probably worse to not have a job. > Given the U.S.'s aversion to social welfare, people end up stuck without any options. I don't think lack of welfare is an issue here: > G.M. is a lifeline for Mr. Marsh, too. It will pay him a pension, a rare thing in today’s economy. He may have given up raises, but he gets a share of the company’s profits — last year, about $10,000. Under the union contract, he gets payments to supplement his unemployment check, and his family still has health insurance Ohio unemployment benefits pay half of weekly wages up to $424. Rick would be receiving $424 if $26 per hour was his wages while he was employed. So he's getting $22,000 per year in unemployment plus $10,000 from his GM pension on top of that. Is getting $32,000 per year in pension and unemployment benefits considered bad welfare? He's getting about 2/3 of his income while he was employed in unemployment benefits. Probably more if you take taxes into account. And health insurance. And the "payments to supplement his unemployment check" that the article doesn't explain in detail. There's a good chance that abundant welfare is why he isn't looking for work. If he took the $13 and hour job in Pennsylvania he may lose more in benefits than he'd be gaining in wages. I wouldn't blame him if this were the case, but the fact that our welfare system is actively discouraging people from seeking employment is the messed up part of this situation. Not the fact that manufacturing jobs are moving because of globalization.
- praneshp 7y ago
  > There's a good chance that abundant welfare is why he isn't looking for work The article calls out another reason. His daughter has celebral palsy I think, and they helped bring things into town for her.
  - manfredo 7y ago
    There are only a couple places were their daughter's condition is mentioned: > Then, when Rick Marsh got the biggest test of his life — the birth of his beloved daughter, Abigail, and her diagnosis of cerebral palsy at the age of one — his job became a central part of how he saw himself. He was her provider, her protector. That was his worth in the world. > Or he could transfer to another G.M. plant sooner, but he hates that idea. His biggest worry is for his daughter, Abby, now 14. He and his wife have spent years fighting to get her services in Ohio, aides in school and coverage under Medicaid. Moving would be wrenching. Nowhere does it state that aides in school or overage under Medicaid would be lost if he moved. If anything I suspect that services would be better in an economically healthy town that has a better tax base.
- klipklop 7y ago
  >Then he should blame his situation on his own gamble on real-estate speculation, and not NAFTA. Not everything is SV property greed. What if this person bought the home so he could just have a place to live? Not everybody buys a home with the intention of making money. Some just want a stable home for their kids. > My whole point is, the emphasis on these "soft" factors are what's holding him back. When you move, you don't "lose" community, you swap them out for a different one. Moving away from family may be challenging, but it's probably worse to not have a job. In general your family is always better than a job. When you are on your death bed I can guarantee you that your boss won't be there holding your hand. > I wouldn't blame him if this were the case, but the fact that our welfare system is actively discouraging people from seeking employment is the messed up part of this situation. Then how do you explain our current low unemployment numbers? If anything it appears working is preferred over our welfare system. Many people want purpose and want to work.

by _bxg1 7y ago

manfredo 7y ago

Entire towns disappearing is a normal state of affairs. > Hundreds of workers have already transferred. His nephew packed up his family and moved to Flint. The alternative, working on natural gas wells in Pennsylvania, paid him $13 an hour, about half what he was making at G.M. > You might suggest that people just move, but what if they have a mortgage on a house that's suddenly worthless? Then he should blame his situation on his own gamble on real-estate speculation, and not NAFTA. > And that's not even factoring in the "soft" costs of losing your community and possibly moving away from family. My whole point is, the emphasis on these "soft" factors are what's holding him back. When you move, you don't "lose" community, you swap them out for a different one. Moving away from family may be challenging, but it's probably worse to not have a job. > Given the U.S.'s aversion to social welfare, people end up stuck without any options. I don't think lack of welfare is an issue here: > G.M. is a lifeline for Mr. Marsh, too. It will pay him a pension, a rare thing in today’s economy. He may have given up raises, but he gets a share of the company’s profits — last year, about $10,000. Under the union contract, he gets payments to supplement his unemployment check, and his family still has health insurance Ohio unemployment benefits pay half of weekly wages up to $424. Rick would be receiving $424 if $26 per hour was his wages while he was employed. So he's getting $22,000 per year in unemployment plus $10,000 from his GM pension on top of that. Is getting $32,000 per year in pension and unemployment benefits considered bad welfare? He's getting about 2/3 of his income while he was employed in unemployment benefits. Probably more if you take taxes into account. And health insurance. And the "payments to supplement his unemployment check" that the article doesn't explain in detail. There's a good chance that abundant welfare is why he isn't looking for work. If he took the $13 and hour job in Pennsylvania he may lose more in benefits than he'd be gaining in wages. I wouldn't blame him if this were the case, but the fact that our welfare system is actively discouraging people from seeking employment is the messed up part of this situation. Not the fact that manufacturing jobs are moving because of globalization.

praneshp 7y ago
> There's a good chance that abundant welfare is why he isn't looking for work The article calls out another reason. His daughter has celebral palsy I think, and they helped bring things into town for her.
- manfredo 7y ago
  There are only a couple places were their daughter's condition is mentioned: > Then, when Rick Marsh got the biggest test of his life — the birth of his beloved daughter, Abigail, and her diagnosis of cerebral palsy at the age of one — his job became a central part of how he saw himself. He was her provider, her protector. That was his worth in the world. > Or he could transfer to another G.M. plant sooner, but he hates that idea. His biggest worry is for his daughter, Abby, now 14. He and his wife have spent years fighting to get her services in Ohio, aides in school and coverage under Medicaid. Moving would be wrenching. Nowhere does it state that aides in school or overage under Medicaid would be lost if he moved. If anything I suspect that services would be better in an economically healthy town that has a better tax base.
klipklop 7y ago
>Then he should blame his situation on his own gamble on real-estate speculation, and not NAFTA. Not everything is SV property greed. What if this person bought the home so he could just have a place to live? Not everybody buys a home with the intention of making money. Some just want a stable home for their kids. > My whole point is, the emphasis on these "soft" factors are what's holding him back. When you move, you don't "lose" community, you swap them out for a different one. Moving away from family may be challenging, but it's probably worse to not have a job. In general your family is always better than a job. When you are on your death bed I can guarantee you that your boss won't be there holding your hand. > I wouldn't blame him if this were the case, but the fact that our welfare system is actively discouraging people from seeking employment is the messed up part of this situation. Then how do you explain our current low unemployment numbers? If anything it appears working is preferred over our welfare system. Many people want purpose and want to work.