5 ms·

Not everyone is cut out for a high-paying white collar job. Some people are passionate about doing construction work, driving a truck across the country, or eve

by skurry 15y ago

Not everyone is cut out for a high-paying white collar job. Some people are passionate about doing construction work, driving a truck across the country, or even waiting tables. Or maybe one of these profession is most in line with their physical and intellectual abilities. These people believe (and rightly so I think) that if you put in your 40-50 hours of hard work per week in a blue-collar job, you should earn enough to afford a decent place to live, food, health care, child care, to send your kids to college and to retire once you're 65. The problem is today that this is less and less the case. This is what people are complaining about. They're not envious of the "Top 1%" making a lot more money than they do, instead, they are noticing that the "ruling class" is actively pushing blue collar wages down, either directly or indirectly by outsourcing, dismantling entitlement programs, slashing union rights and so on, with the help of politicians they bought. Of course, the money saved goes back into the pockets of the upper class, for example in the form of tax cuts, bonuses, or dividends, and at the same time they claim that these are hard times and everyone has to tighten their belts. It's not a tyranny of the meritocracy, it's a tyranny of the power elite.

grandalf 15y ago
Your argument is a nostalgic argument... one might as well argue that an honest and hard working blacksmith deserves to be able to earn a living wage to support a family... This ignores the changing economy -- these days people use bicycles, public transit, and cars for transport rather than horses. Other areas of the economy are changing too. Most technological innovations exist b/c they do something cheaper or faster than the human labor alternative. No matter how much a person may enjoy menial labor, someone else is working hard to make that work unnecessary. To fight against this trend is a doomed effort and frankly longs for the dark ages.
- skurry 15y ago
  Believe it or not, there are still working blacksmiths and horse carriage drivers. But that's beside my point. My point was that the author of the article assumes that with enough work and educational opportunity, anyone can join the meritocracy. But I believe that getting a college degree requires a certain set of talents, which I believe a sizable chunk of the population simply does not possess (I admit that I may be wrong here, and that some people might see this as offensive elitism). It's unfair that those who don't win the talent lottery should be doomed to a life in poverty. Therefore, there should be a bottom in labor compensation, and that this bottom should guarantee a certain standard of living, and that this standard of living should depend on the wealth of a society as a whole. The US has a minimum wage, but that is way to low to guarantee any sort of comfort in many parts of the country.
  - grandalf 15y ago
    I think the amount of variation in innate human talent is vastly overstated. But every year that goes by in which a human fails to thrive (intellectually, etc.) he/she falls further and further behind. In America, many people are already significantly damaged by the 2nd or 3rd grade. By the time Junior High rolls around, it would take a drastic intervention to correct someone's course. So I think it comes back to our educational system... both those who run it and those who consume it (the people). As a daycare/assimilation system it works great, which is not surprising since this is its primary purpose. Your comment advocates a welfare state where I'd estimate the bottom 40% of earners would be on welfare. I'm not sure that such a system is good for peoples' sense of self-worth. Instead, people should realize that the secret to success is personal empowerment, learning, etc. It's never too late to learn new skills, etc. Many who share your view think that it's unreasonable to ask Joe Sixpack to learn anything new... that his pride at doing unneeded, outdated work is so precious that we should simply give him welfare. As long as society's notion of a "normal" life includes working 9 to 5, watching sports and drinking beer on weekends, etc., then few will ever have the time to improve their lot in life. Every successful person I know works like a dog and has earned what they have, at great sacrifice (skipping parties and fun activities, working weekends, late nights, etc.). The fact to be remembered is that motivation is not evenly distributed in society and that many of the people struggling are simply not all that motivated. In fact, many teach their kids to disdain learning and education, etc. Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India?
    - skurry 15y ago
      Regarding human talent, we both can't prove either standpoint, so we'll just leave it at that. Welfare is not the only solution to this problem. If minimum wage is not enough to allow a single mother to pay for child care, then we should just offer free child care, financed by taxes. Mom still has an incentive to work for a living, but is much better off. Scandinavian countries demonstrate that this works very well. >Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India? Because as I said, the US as a society is incredibly wealthy. It's possible with a few political tweaks to fix this, and not a single person will be noticeably worse off. There's no real reason not to fix it, except for the extraordinary greed of a few.

by skurry 15y ago

grandalf 15y ago

Your argument is a nostalgic argument... one might as well argue that an honest and hard working blacksmith deserves to be able to earn a living wage to support a family... This ignores the changing economy -- these days people use bicycles, public transit, and cars for transport rather than horses. Other areas of the economy are changing too. Most technological innovations exist b/c they do something cheaper or faster than the human labor alternative. No matter how much a person may enjoy menial labor, someone else is working hard to make that work unnecessary. To fight against this trend is a doomed effort and frankly longs for the dark ages.

skurry 15y ago
Believe it or not, there are still working blacksmiths and horse carriage drivers. But that's beside my point. My point was that the author of the article assumes that with enough work and educational opportunity, anyone can join the meritocracy. But I believe that getting a college degree requires a certain set of talents, which I believe a sizable chunk of the population simply does not possess (I admit that I may be wrong here, and that some people might see this as offensive elitism). It's unfair that those who don't win the talent lottery should be doomed to a life in poverty. Therefore, there should be a bottom in labor compensation, and that this bottom should guarantee a certain standard of living, and that this standard of living should depend on the wealth of a society as a whole. The US has a minimum wage, but that is way to low to guarantee any sort of comfort in many parts of the country.
- grandalf 15y ago
  I think the amount of variation in innate human talent is vastly overstated. But every year that goes by in which a human fails to thrive (intellectually, etc.) he/she falls further and further behind. In America, many people are already significantly damaged by the 2nd or 3rd grade. By the time Junior High rolls around, it would take a drastic intervention to correct someone's course. So I think it comes back to our educational system... both those who run it and those who consume it (the people). As a daycare/assimilation system it works great, which is not surprising since this is its primary purpose. Your comment advocates a welfare state where I'd estimate the bottom 40% of earners would be on welfare. I'm not sure that such a system is good for peoples' sense of self-worth. Instead, people should realize that the secret to success is personal empowerment, learning, etc. It's never too late to learn new skills, etc. Many who share your view think that it's unreasonable to ask Joe Sixpack to learn anything new... that his pride at doing unneeded, outdated work is so precious that we should simply give him welfare. As long as society's notion of a "normal" life includes working 9 to 5, watching sports and drinking beer on weekends, etc., then few will ever have the time to improve their lot in life. Every successful person I know works like a dog and has earned what they have, at great sacrifice (skipping parties and fun activities, working weekends, late nights, etc.). The fact to be remembered is that motivation is not evenly distributed in society and that many of the people struggling are simply not all that motivated. In fact, many teach their kids to disdain learning and education, etc. Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India?
  - skurry 15y ago
    Regarding human talent, we both can't prove either standpoint, so we'll just leave it at that. Welfare is not the only solution to this problem. If minimum wage is not enough to allow a single mother to pay for child care, then we should just offer free child care, financed by taxes. Mom still has an incentive to work for a living, but is much better off. Scandinavian countries demonstrate that this works very well. >Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India? Because as I said, the US as a society is incredibly wealthy. It's possible with a few political tweaks to fix this, and not a single person will be noticeably worse off. There's no real reason not to fix it, except for the extraordinary greed of a few.