5 ms·

It's not the employers fault if an employee needs a job to survive. And the 400$ story really needs to be analysed some more. I don't think it means most of th

It's not the employers fault if an employee needs a job to survive. And the 400$ story really needs to be analysed some more. I don't think it means most of those people are broke, just that they don't keep that much cash around for immediate use. It might all go into saving accounts or other investments (including mortgage). I just googled it, apparently the story is 40% of Americans don't have 400$ in cash for an emergency. On the other hand, the median income in the US is 65000$ - that is 50% of all Americans earn more than 65000$. I don't think any of those are in the situation to not be able to come up with 400$. And below the 50% there won't be such a steep fall of income. However, it is such a nice story, so none of the leftist media seems to want to question it.

pmiller2 6y ago
Don't believe this so called "leftist media," then. Here's the data: https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2020-economic-well-being-of-us-households-in-2019-dealing-with-unexpected-expenses.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2020-economic-we... Read. Regardless of it being the employer's "fault" that the employee depends on the job, they are still exploiting the fact that they can literally disrupt that employee's chance at survival.
- psychiatrist24 6y ago
  That is just the same story, which is based on a survey. At least it mentions that many people would decide to pay for such an expense with credit, even though they would have the cash. And just because some person has financial issues, they are not being exploited. It is still not the employers fault if a person is in that situation. While I sympathize with that problem, the solution in my opinion is not unions, but the creation of more jobs. Then workers who would be fired could simply find another job.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    Well, if it's the same story, I guess the liberal media isn't responsible, right? How exactly do you figure exploiting someone's precarious financial position isn't exploitation, anyway?
ProfessorLayton 6y ago
The ~65k figure is the household income and not individual income [1]. Furthermore, household income is not evenly distributed by race, and this is relevant because 85% of the workers in this warehouse are black [2]. [1] https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2019/demo/p60-266.pdf https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/29/technology/amazon-union-vote.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/29/technology/amazon-union-v...
- psychiatrist24 6y ago
  The first article says poverty rate is 11%, which just goes to show that the "400$ expense story" is misleading (making it sound as if 40% were in trouble). I don't have time to read the details, but "poverty" is also an arbitrarily defined cut off.
bjourne 6y ago
The average weekly salary for American full-time workers were about $990 in 2020. Assuming 10 vacation days per year, that comes out to $49 500. Note also that only about 110 million Americans are employed full-time. The remaining are either underemployed, students, minors, retirees, etc. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf

pmiller2 6y ago

Don't believe this so called "leftist media," then. Here's the data: https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2020-economic-well-being-of-us-households-in-2019-dealing-with-unexpected-expenses.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2020-economic-we... Read. Regardless of it being the employer's "fault" that the employee depends on the job, they are still exploiting the fact that they can literally disrupt that employee's chance at survival.

psychiatrist24 6y ago
That is just the same story, which is based on a survey. At least it mentions that many people would decide to pay for such an expense with credit, even though they would have the cash. And just because some person has financial issues, they are not being exploited. It is still not the employers fault if a person is in that situation. While I sympathize with that problem, the solution in my opinion is not unions, but the creation of more jobs. Then workers who would be fired could simply find another job.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  Well, if it's the same story, I guess the liberal media isn't responsible, right? How exactly do you figure exploiting someone's precarious financial position isn't exploitation, anyway?

ProfessorLayton 6y ago

The ~65k figure is the household income and not individual income [1]. Furthermore, household income is not evenly distributed by race, and this is relevant because 85% of the workers in this warehouse are black [2]. [1] https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2019/demo/p60-266.pdf https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publicatio... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/29/technology/amazon-union-vote.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/29/technology/amazon-union-v...

psychiatrist24 6y ago
The first article says poverty rate is 11%, which just goes to show that the "400$ expense story" is misleading (making it sound as if 40% were in trouble). I don't have time to read the details, but "poverty" is also an arbitrarily defined cut off.

bjourne 6y ago

The average weekly salary for American full-time workers were about $990 in 2020. Assuming 10 vacation days per year, that comes out to $49 500. Note also that only about 110 million Americans are employed full-time. The remaining are either underemployed, students, minors, retirees, etc. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf