3 ms·

> But how is it better to sit at home making $0 than working and having an income? I had that very discussion with a co-worker leaving. They told me working wa

> But how is it better to sit at home making $0 than working and having an income? I had that very discussion with a co-worker leaving. They told me working wasn't worth their time, and they'd better care for their home, family, themselves etc. instead. And it wasn't that they were rich or their partner had a high paying job, more that the cost of daycare, private teacher, eating outside every day, work related stuff (clothes, commuting etc.) and their general health and mental impact made it a net negative for them. Working a job they didn't enjoy just didn't make any sense. The interesting part to me is that the calculus didn't change overnight, it's more because one day they stopped for a while and thought long and hard about their life, and came to that conclusion that was there for a very long time already.

thinking4real 4y ago
Ok, but this is still missing a very important element - where the hell are they getting finances to live? The point OP is making us these people probably need ~$2000 a month to live at an absolute minimum. No luxury, no gadgets, just getting by. How does one decide “working isn’t worth it” but still magically has these funds?
- aorloff 4y ago
  My assumption is that these workers were absorbed into the economy of work at home - whether to be a homemaker, or to do childcare or eldercare that would previously have been contracted out, at the expense of the salaried worker, now are being done without pay outside of the auspices of the labor market.
- jiqiren 4y ago
  they were likely so underpaid at terrible jobs they already had subsidized healthcare, section-8 housing, and know all about food pantries etc. Going out less, not spending money on childcare, getting rid of extra car, and spending time cooking for self instead of going out - a bad low paying job is easy to lose.
- redox99 4y ago
  I think the only 3 possibilities are A) Their partner or family works B) Welfare C) Informal economy There's also the 4th but unlikely in this case D) Investments
  - Mezzie 4y ago
    C can make up for a lot depending on your network and skills. I'm not particularly well-embedded in my local community and if necessary I could get at least the following things free: * Car repair work * Basic healthcare (luckily I have state insurance so I don't need it, but if I did it's possible) * Home/apartment/other home repair or improvement * Tailoring/alterations/well-fitting clothing (including free clothes if I ask - even if I don't, I get given clothing on a semi-regular basis) * Cooking equipment Now, in return I need to offer some skills (mostly technical, academic, or navigating bureaucracies - skills that are in fairly short supply on the lowest part of socioeconomic ladder), but like I said, I'm not particularly involved so people with more history and social credit can get more stuff taken care of. I also at one point paid like...50% of market rate for rent because I was willing to be free, on-call childcare for 3 children under the age of 7.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > How does one decide “working isn’t worth it” but still magically has these funds? Most likely because even if, as GP says, their partner doesn't have a high-paying job, their partner doea have a job that clears the minimum necessary for household survival. (Which is often less than $2000/person-month.)
- lnsru 4y ago
  The whole working Germany comes with close to ~2000$ well. Many poor European countries have enough people living from 300-500$. I could also do that if needed. What’s so expensive in US that you need 2000$? Last time I checked housing in Florida was super cheap by German standards.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  They budget for the whole family, with one “bread winner” remaining. I’d still expect them to get back to a stable job after their kid grow, but as it was a year or two ago, they just weren’t pulling their weight in the balance. > ~$2000 a month to live at an absolute minimum. No luxury, no gadgets, just getting by. Assuming 2000 is what you need as a standard working person, you need less than that in average when you’re in a couple, and the calculus is yet different with kids. When one of the adults stops working, a lot costs shift and it balances out. Gov aids, taxes and other benefits also change depending on your situation.
altacc 4y ago
I wonder if being forced to spend more time at home during the pandemic reset people's exceptions. To your point specifically, we used to be one of those families. Once we had children it did not work out a benefit for my partner to work in the field that she wants to work in (healthcare) as it did not pay enough. The additional net income of a full time job worked out to be about $200/month, which just wasn't worth it. This changed once we moved country, to one where getting people with children back into the workforce is supported by both the government and companies, with greater flexibility from work and better subsidised childcare.

thinking4real 4y ago

Ok, but this is still missing a very important element - where the hell are they getting finances to live? The point OP is making us these people probably need ~$2000 a month to live at an absolute minimum. No luxury, no gadgets, just getting by. How does one decide “working isn’t worth it” but still magically has these funds?

aorloff 4y ago
My assumption is that these workers were absorbed into the economy of work at home - whether to be a homemaker, or to do childcare or eldercare that would previously have been contracted out, at the expense of the salaried worker, now are being done without pay outside of the auspices of the labor market.
jiqiren 4y ago
they were likely so underpaid at terrible jobs they already had subsidized healthcare, section-8 housing, and know all about food pantries etc. Going out less, not spending money on childcare, getting rid of extra car, and spending time cooking for self instead of going out - a bad low paying job is easy to lose.
redox99 4y ago
I think the only 3 possibilities are A) Their partner or family works B) Welfare C) Informal economy There's also the 4th but unlikely in this case D) Investments
- Mezzie 4y ago
  C can make up for a lot depending on your network and skills. I'm not particularly well-embedded in my local community and if necessary I could get at least the following things free: * Car repair work * Basic healthcare (luckily I have state insurance so I don't need it, but if I did it's possible) * Home/apartment/other home repair or improvement * Tailoring/alterations/well-fitting clothing (including free clothes if I ask - even if I don't, I get given clothing on a semi-regular basis) * Cooking equipment Now, in return I need to offer some skills (mostly technical, academic, or navigating bureaucracies - skills that are in fairly short supply on the lowest part of socioeconomic ladder), but like I said, I'm not particularly involved so people with more history and social credit can get more stuff taken care of. I also at one point paid like...50% of market rate for rent because I was willing to be free, on-call childcare for 3 children under the age of 7.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> How does one decide “working isn’t worth it” but still magically has these funds? Most likely because even if, as GP says, their partner doesn't have a high-paying job, their partner doea have a job that clears the minimum necessary for household survival. (Which is often less than $2000/person-month.)
lnsru 4y ago
The whole working Germany comes with close to ~2000$ well. Many poor European countries have enough people living from 300-500$. I could also do that if needed. What’s so expensive in US that you need 2000$? Last time I checked housing in Florida was super cheap by German standards.
makeitdouble 4y ago
They budget for the whole family, with one “bread winner” remaining. I’d still expect them to get back to a stable job after their kid grow, but as it was a year or two ago, they just weren’t pulling their weight in the balance. > ~$2000 a month to live at an absolute minimum. No luxury, no gadgets, just getting by. Assuming 2000 is what you need as a standard working person, you need less than that in average when you’re in a couple, and the calculus is yet different with kids. When one of the adults stops working, a lot costs shift and it balances out. Gov aids, taxes and other benefits also change depending on your situation.

altacc 4y ago

I wonder if being forced to spend more time at home during the pandemic reset people's exceptions. To your point specifically, we used to be one of those families. Once we had children it did not work out a benefit for my partner to work in the field that she wants to work in (healthcare) as it did not pay enough. The additional net income of a full time job worked out to be about $200/month, which just wasn't worth it. This changed once we moved country, to one where getting people with children back into the workforce is supported by both the government and companies, with greater flexibility from work and better subsidised childcare.