34 ms·

>how modern work for a lot of jobs has become de facto indentured servitude...The average worker can't afford anything without taking on debt. For people from

• notesinthefield 4y ago
  I dont think this comparison is as relevant as youre presenting it to be - why concern ourselves with the rest of the world when the GP and the linked article are US centric? Furthermore - why would someone struggling and feeling enslaved care one bit about how much harder anyone has it?
• pphysch 4y ago
  US and more socialist EU countries may have similar CPIs, but when we get to talking about education, rent, healthcare, transportation, etc the differences can be stark. Yes, people in US earn more and get taxed less. But they also spend a lot, lot more on necessities via shadowy cost structures like student loans and insurance and >$1,000 ambulance rides.
  • mrjangles 4y ago
    This is often measured by researchers. It is called a "cost of living" calculation, and every one of these that I have seen indicates that this isn't the case.
    • femiagbabiaka 4y ago
      Do you mind sharing a link to some data that you feel illustrates this? Pretty interesting.
    • jltsiren 4y ago
      For anyone who has lived in several countries, it should be obvious that direct cost-of-living comparisons rarely make sense. The actual costs depend so much on your income level and life situation that no single number can accurately reflect them. Let's take Finland, the UK, and the US as examples, as they are the countries I'm most familiar with. At $30k/year (individual income), the US is much more expensive than the other two, mostly due to things like healthcare, childcare, education, unemployment, sick/parental leaves, and pensions. The UK might be a bit more expensive than Finland. At $100k/year, the cost of living is more or less similar in all three countries. The weight of benefits and subsidized services is lower, because they take a smaller fraction of your income. The US may still be more expensive if you have kids, but it can also be cheaper if you don't have them and are never going to get then. The UK may also be a bit cheaper than Finland due to lower taxes. At $200k/year, the US is the cheapest country and Finland is the most expensive one, primarily due to taxes.
  • kopkreotrke4 4y ago
    The 42k AUD a year is equivalent to many professional jobs in the EU
  • dumpsterlid 4y ago
    Not to mention people in the US often are just more likely to straight up die from things that should be totally preventable in such a wealthy country, the abnormally high infant and maternal mortality rate in the US being just one example.
• Biologist123 4y ago
  Your argument is all numerator, no denominator.
• aaron_m04 4y ago
  I have heard reports online of people having to use a cane after a few years of working in these warehouses. 15 USD an hour is not so much when it costs you your health _and_ there is no proper system of universal healthcare.
  • swarnie 4y ago
    Its a bit old now but this article really stuck with me back in the day, it was my primary motivation for escaping the warehouse/agency environment and getting in to tech. I lost my hobby but that's a small price to pay long term i think. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-...
  • smrtinsert 4y ago
    It's nothing without health care. Not to mention time off for new parents or much better compensation for being laid off etc.
• abxytg 4y ago
  Cynically untrue. Amazon is not even close to bottom of the barrel. And it's clear you haven't paid market rent in a major city since you bought that starter home back in the 90s - 42k is a joke when your rent is close to $2500 and you get no benefits.
  • kopkreotrke4 4y ago
    What percentage of minimum wage earners live alone? There are hundreds of thousands of rooms available for rent on Craigslist for under $1000
    • dumpsterlid 4y ago
      • kopkreotrke4 4y ago
        Why? Because I know many minimum wage workers who rent rooms instead of entire apartments?
        • kareemsabri 4y ago
          Some poor people have families.
          • BobbyJo 4y ago
            How does that fit in with the conversation?
      • kanwisher 4y ago
        When I was mid 20s, I was making six figures in tech and had to share an apartment. I can't see why minimum wage workers wouldn't also
        • maxerickson 4y ago
• Avshalom 4y ago
  42k is just above minimum wage in Australia and 15 an hour is over double the minimum wage in 20 states in the US.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• t-3 4y ago
  Amazon is good job though. A shitty job would pay $10 an hour, lack the benefits, and still just get rid of you on a whim. Also, multiply by .8 to get the takehome pay - $15/hr isn't netting 40k without overtime.
  • chefandy 4y ago
    The existence of worse doesn't make something good.
    • t-3 4y ago
      Amazon is a desirable and good job in the low-skill, low-wage world. The only people who think otherwise are rich 6-figure making degree holders.
      • chefandy 4y ago
        > Amazon is a desirable and good job in the low-skill, low-wage world. The only people who think otherwise are rich 6-figure making degree holders. So incredible that I'd find an authority on that right here in the HN comment section! Please tell me more about my opinion! It's pretty close but I don't have a six figure salary and don't have a degree (but am getting one part time while I work.) 80% of my friends are grown adults working in the service industry, retail, and driving jobs with a few working in upper-level clerical jobs. My wife works in retail. Folks at work— mostly developers— are the exception rather than the rule in my life. Not one single person I've spoken to about it considers working in a wage or independent contractor job at Amazon desirable. I know a few people that did work there and they quit because if you want to run yourself ragged under authoritarian management, at least UPS/a paving crew/a bar will compensate you well for it and probably give you decent career prospects. Where I live, the $15/hr Amazon starts at is less than any McDonalds franchise pays entry-level openers and closers, less than you make as a prep cook, less than what you make working at CVS or Walgreens, less than what you make as a rideshare driver/delivery person. A impossibly cheap studio apartment— we're talking 200 square feet, probably not legal, in a crappy neighborhood— would take a minimum 70% of your take-home pay without considering health insurance or anything else besides taxes that might get deducted from your paycheck. The estimated take-home is about 1/3 of the area's calculated AMI— the federal poverty level. You're so far into what constitutes low-income for public housing that the numbers on the city chart don't even go below 30%. You're making the same exact mistake you're accusing people of here of making. There's a whole world happening outside of your own sphere of experience. No surer way to be consistently meaningfully wrong than assume nobody else knows what they're talking about.
• hereforphone 4y ago
  It's partly that we (the West, not just Americans) are so rich that we're out of touch with reality. Another way of looking at it is that hardship, which has not only been a part of life since the beginning of humanity but has arguably defined it, has been notably missing recently. So now we have young people complaining about things that would have very recently been appreciated and welcomed. At the same time they're bashing cultural values / norms that are in part responsible for this elimination of hardship.
• mschuster91 4y ago
  So what, even if Amazon pays slightly above a minimum living wage, the working conditions are extremely bad (e.g. no adequate toilets, extremely long walking times towards the break room, drivers being forced to piss in bottles, employees being pitted against each other by a relentless algorithm without respect for differences in age, body strength or whatever). Given that the social security system in the US (and to be fair, even in Europe) is pretty lacking and Amazon (as well as Walmart) is setting up shop exclusively in areas with high unemployment, it can very well be said that people have the free choice to work at Amazon instead of another employer that treats their workers better, so yes it is perfectly valid to call it "de facto indentured servitude".
  • yywwbbn 4y ago
    > is setting up shop exclusively in areas with high unemployment, How is that a negative? Would you prefer for those people to stay unemployed?
    • bandyaboot 4y ago
      Also, it’s not true.
  • basisword 4y ago
    >> extremely long walking times towards the break room This is a thing??
• newbamboo 4y ago
  Yes. Jeff Bezos is an unsung hero and has done more to help the poor than anyone. Without him, there would be massive unemployment and an underclass riddled with social problems like opiate addiction and spousal abuse.
• hn_neverguess 4y ago
  Whoever complains about slavery in the US should look up the 996 working hour system in China (spoiler: 72 hours per week). Why compare ourselves to China and not to a place like Argentina or wherever they take mid-day naps during weekdays? Because you don't want to fall behind in the global economic race. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, there are going to be fewer and fewer protections for the local industries. For example, back in the 20th century it was possible to ban imports of various foreign goods, because those same products could be manufactured anywhere. But we're increasingly getting to the point where there are only 2 or 3 options for most of the tech products (mobile phones, computer operating systems, anything AI-related). In 20-50 years from now, things are only going to get worse. As a first-world country, you might still have a chance to be a relevant exporter in the mid and late 21st century, which will hopefully pay for the cost of importing everything else you can't manufacture locally. But you won't get there with siestas.
  • bruce343434 4y ago
    "You can't complain because other people have it worse!"
    • Auracle 4y ago
      You can absolutely try and make things better, but most people have very little perspective. Countless times I’ve seen people say things about how they’d never bring a child into the world because of how bad things are now. They mean global warming, Donald Trump, or whatever happens to be in the current news cycle. We’re living in the very best time to be human so far. It wasn’t long ago that the world was living under the constant threat of global nuclear annihilation, before that two world wars, before that constant illness, famines, and other wars, etc. Long before that, just struggling to get enough food and shelter to survive. The same goes for current working conditions/life. Some things are worse than 20 years ago but some are better.
      • seibelj 4y ago
        My favorite part about people who use that as justification for not having kids is that they will not have kids. Let them exit the gene pool and the rational people can continue to have children.
• 3qz 4y ago
  > Americans are just so rich they are out of touch with reality. It’s this one. As a Canadian, I can’t take anything they say seriously about their housing “crisis” or cost of living. Almost everything is more expensive in Canada and most jobs pay a lot less, but things are still not really that bad, so I know that the Americans just like to complain. The only way it’s possible for an American to struggle financially is if they do it on purpose.
  • hn_neverguess 4y ago
    The irony here is that so many Americans will say "I'll move to Canada if things don't get better here." None of them have ever lived in Canada (or any other country), and just assume that things must be better elsewhere. The Greatest Generation was exceptionally patriotic, and I always assumed it had to do with living in a country that suffered much less industrial damage in WWII than other countries (which enabled a great standard of living while everyone else was still rebuilding). But I am starting to wonder how much of this has to do with just simply having spent a couple of years abroad and getting to witness first-hand how dysfunctional most other places are (during and in-between wars).
  • micromacrofoot 4y ago
    I think Canada still comes out ahead… in the US: * high monthly premiums for healthcare with high deductibles (I pay 14k a year with a 5k deductible for each person in my family) * high medication prices (people often buy drugs from canada) * 0 maternity leave (15 weeks max in Canada) * 0 vacation (2-3 weeks in Canada) * less accessible child care (Canada is working on building out ~$10/day child care, it can easily cost ~$20k a year in the US) * less affordable college tuition * higher crime rates, higher incarceration rates * lower minimum wage (canada’s is nearly double) * at-will employment, termination without cause or severance (in canada you can be fired easily, but reasonable severance is required) * reduced access to abortion (significantly in some states as of late)
  • rtlfe 4y ago
    > Almost everything is more expensive in Canada Everything except the most expensive things. Paying 20% more for cheese is fine when you're saving 95% on healthcare.
• noahtallen 4y ago
  Note also that $30k USD (not “42k AUD”) is pre-tax, and take home is more like $25k somewhere like Ohio. And that Amazon warehouse is going to exist near a population center, where CoL is a bit higher, like rent. But I really need to reject what you’re saying about the “bottom wage.” $15/hr is not the lowest, it’s actually on the very high end of the lowest income salaries: > Of those individuals with income who were older than 15 years of age, approximately 50% had incomes below $30,000 This isn’t 50% of low income jobs. 50% of all workers make less than what you say is a “normal” low skill wage. Minimum wage in the US is $7.25/hr. Anecdotally, when I was starting out a few years ago, I was paid minimum wage at a college IT job. Most restaurants (outside of HCOL cities) are going to start around minimum wage or slightly higher. Let’s also look at one of the biggest employers in country, Walmart. It’s not going to start you anywhere close to $15/hr. Say you get lucky and get a whopping $12/hr. That’s $24k/yr, or $21k net. Monthly rent in the cheapest CoL places in the US is going to be like $500. That’s $6k/yr. So your total income after paying rent, at an extremely common low skill job, is $15k/yr, or $1200/mo. You can cover these types of essential expenses with $1200/mo? - Food - Car and gas (there is not public transit to take you to Walmart in Ohio.) - Utilities, such as electric, water, trash, and internet. - A basic phone plan. - Health care. (think about what percent of $1200 a premium could be.) - Any kind of savings, including retirement? It is certainly possible to live extremely frugally, assuming no children, no existing debt (such as college), no vacations or travel, no big expenses, etc. It is certainly not possible to cover emergencies (like a medical one or your cheap car breaking down). I also question if you’ll ever save anything towards changing your future, like a retirement plan or better education. The bigger question is why the fuck, in one of the richest and most successful economies in the world, do a huge number of the participants in that economy — again, 50% make under $15/hr — have to make a wage which doesn’t enable them to be at least a little bit comfortable? And they don’t get any kind of meaningful protection against bad situations, like medical problems. Walmart isn’t going to pay you to be on an extended leave. It’s not going to be common to have any kind of retirement plan other than social security. It’s rare to have good health care plans at this salary. It is going to be challenging, in this forum, to gain empathy, because most of us are likely in the top 10% of earners. But I don’t see a way to look at this situation and think it’s good for our society.
• BlargMcLarg 4y ago
  >For people from other countries wondering about the veracity of these claims I don't think GP is out of touch with reality as much as sensationalizing what is going on. Given the trend of the housing market and wages across the entire west, it could be closer to reality quite soon. Rather, Average Joe is struggling with things that realistically, he shouldn't be struggling with given our global wealth. Comfort level of money has risen far above median wage. If you're not sitting on wealth yet, anything below that isn't going to feel comfortable for a myriad of reasons. Individuals can work around that and build up the wealth, but that won't make the road itself any more comfortable. Not to mention the majority of actions individuals can perform involve less spending, and every time that happens, politicians, economists and the news will quickly throw out a panic article how the economy is doomed if people don't start spending more quickly.
• rurp 4y ago
  Comparing income between countries without accounting for cost of living is highly misleading.
  • basisword 4y ago
    Although I don't agree completely with OP's point it is true to an extent. I'm in the UK. My US colleagues earn significantly more (for the exact same job), they pay less for accommodation and get much larger accommodations (even living in comparatively large cities), and general cost of living (food, gas, clothes etc.) is less. I'm talking tech here (so not comparing low-skill/earning jobs) but at least in this industry Americans have it pretty good.
• BobbyJo 4y ago
  The part that gets me is the 'modern'. There have been periods where things were somewhat easier in certain regards, but those aren't the norm and were for unsustainable reasons. The US had a nice honeymoon period after WW2 where our position as the world's factory and plentiful natural resources afforded food and housing to be cheap. Young people look around and think things are harder now than they've ever been and it's simply not true. My mom didn't have it easy, hell, my grandpa who was born in the great depression and got to be an adult through the 50's didn't have it easy. Houses and food may have been cheaper relative to other things, but people put in way more hours of way shittier work, at least my family certainly did.
  • BlargMcLarg 4y ago
    You'd actually have to accumulate everything before being able to make an absolute statement such as "Young people look around and think things are harder now than they've ever been and it's simply not true" (rather, them having it worse than those before them). I don't know how people can make this statement in such absolute terms, while at best their arguments are "well Y is worse, but X is better!" Let's not forget "young people" still have to live to see their retirement years. At least for someone outside the US, I don't expect to see most of my taxes funding the elderly's retirement returned by future generations (nor do I want that, for that matter). Nor is it very fruitful to have this measuring contest when it is evident several things have gotten worse for no other reason than greed.
    • BobbyJo 4y ago
      I'm actually not super clear on wat you are saying, but I'll try to respond. > You'd actually have to accumulate everything before being able to make an absolute statement such as "Young people look around and think things are harder now than they've ever been and it's simply not true" That's not an absolute. I did not say "All young people". I said "Young people". There are definitely young people who believe the US, and some the western world in general, is on some wild decline from a golden age where everyone with an entry level job owned a house at 25. Just look at Reddit (assuming it isn't trolls astroturfing that is). > I don't know how people can make this statement in such absolute terms, while at best their arguments are "well Y is worse, but X is better!" I'm actually not sure what you're saying here. > Let's not forget "young people" still have to live to see their retirement years. Here too. Are you pointing out young people need to save for retirement? That isn't new. My grandfather was employed his entire adult life and only one of his (out of 6 or 7) jobs came with a pension (which he didn't get). Likewise with my mother. No one in my extended family, old or middle aged, has a pension, and very few have significant savings. > At least for someone outside the US, I don't expect to see most of my taxes funding the elderly's retirement returned by future generations (nor do I want that, for that matter). It's not really feasible even if we wanted it. And it shouldn't be necessary. That is a very long, very separate conversation though, as my the point of my comment lies elsewhere. > Nor is it very fruitful to have this measuring contest when it is evident several things have gotten worse for no other reason than greed. This was the intent of statement actually. Calling work indentured servitude is drawing a comparison with the human rights dark ages which isn't apt.
• sudosysgen 4y ago
  Euro wages are typically after tax, but you are citing a before tax figure. In California for example where a 15$ wage is reasonable for a "shitty job", that's around 34,000$ take home. You can expect to pay 15,000$ in yearly rent, which leaves you with 19,000$. To get to the Amazon warehouse you work at, you'll have to pay around 5000$ a year on a car, because public transport won't get you there, leaving you with 14,000$. Then you have utilities, food costs, healthcare costs, etc..., and you'll be lucky if you manage to spare 2000-3000$ a year of disposable income. And of course, this is Amazon, so at least you get some form of insurance. Many are less fortunate. It is preferable to live as middle class in a third-world country (GDP per capita ~4000$/year) than as someone with a shitty job in the USA, having lived the former.
• heavyset_go 4y ago
  The abolitionist and former slave Frederick Douglass had this to say on the subject of wage labor[1]: > [E]xperience demonstrates that there may be a slavery of wages only a little less galling and crushing in its effects than chattel slavery, and that this slavery of wages must go down with the other From Wikipedia[1]: > Douglass went on to speak about these conditions as arising from the unequal bargaining power between the ownership/capitalist class and the non-ownership/laborer class within a compulsory monetary market: "No more crafty and effective devise for defrauding the southern laborers could be adopted than the one that substitutes orders upon shopkeepers for currency in payment of wages. It has the merit of a show of honesty, while it puts the laborer completely at the mercy of the land-owner and the shopkeeper" [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery#History