4 ms·

> The crux of your argument is unconvincing. Service jobs have to be near the wealthy? What kind of myopia is that? Actually, what's myopic is this: > Un-weal

> The crux of your argument is unconvincing. Service jobs have to be near the wealthy? What kind of myopia is that? Actually, what's myopic is this: > Un-wealthy people go out to eat and get their car repaired just as much as Richie Rich. People who aren't wealthy don't eat out as much and don't spend nearly as much when they go out to eat. They buy food that has smaller margins and expect less in the way of service, meaning lower wages for the workers. And of course service jobs have to be near the wealthy. When it doesn't matter where a worker is located, that job gets outsourced. Location-dependent jobs are the ones that are least likely to disappear in the future (or to have disappeared already). > It's also awful presumptuous to say, "Well I'm wealthy, this is where I want to live. You are poor, you don't get a choice, live near me" It's no more presumptuous than Henry Ford was when he expected workers to move to Detroit to work in the booming automotive industry, rather than setting up a bunch of small factories all across America so he could accommodate them. Moreover, in this case, such a policy would help to keep workers from having to move (to the Sun Belt, or another low-cost-of-living locale) away from their families and communities in the first place. You can dream all you want of a utopia where people can live in the middle of nowhere and have their ideal job. But that isn't going to make it a reality.

sliverstorm 13y ago
People who aren't wealthy don't eat out as much and don't spend nearly as much when they go out to eat. My apologies, I didn't mean they spend the exact same $$$. Poor choice in wording on my part. My point is being poor doesn't mean your car never needs a mechanic. And of course service jobs have to be near the wealthy. When it doesn't matter where a worker is located, that job gets outsourced. Non sequitur. Plenty of un-outsourceable jobs exist serving people who are not wealthy. You can dream all you want of a utopia where people can live in the middle of nowhere and have their ideal job. But that isn't going to make it a reality. Where do I speak of dream jobs? I'm just saying it's awfully self-centered to think that the poor exist to serve the wealthy.
- w1ntermute 13y ago
  > My point is being poor doesn't mean your car never needs a mechanic. I know poor people who are decent at basic car maintenance (once again, the sorts of things where you get high margins). I also know wealthy people who are car enthusiasts, but they wouldn't want to get their hands dirty, so they'd rather pay someone to do it for them. You're speaking in absolutes when the market relies on relative differences. This particular point isn't too significant though, since ideally, most poor people wouldn't need to own a car (they would use public transit instead). > Non sequitur. Plenty of un-outsourceable jobs exist serving people who are not wealthy. Non sequitur. The goal is to optimize new job creation. The service industry is one of the fastest growing in America, so it makes sense to harness that. > Where do I speak of dream jobs? I'm just saying it's awfully self-centered to think that the poor exist to serve the wealthy. And I'm just saying that worrying about whether the poor can have their dream job (where they don't have to serve the wealthy) is something you can worry about when chronic unemployment hasn't been dragging down the economy for the last several years.

sliverstorm 13y ago

People who aren't wealthy don't eat out as much and don't spend nearly as much when they go out to eat. My apologies, I didn't mean they spend the exact same $$$. Poor choice in wording on my part. My point is being poor doesn't mean your car never needs a mechanic. And of course service jobs have to be near the wealthy. When it doesn't matter where a worker is located, that job gets outsourced. Non sequitur. Plenty of un-outsourceable jobs exist serving people who are not wealthy. You can dream all you want of a utopia where people can live in the middle of nowhere and have their ideal job. But that isn't going to make it a reality. Where do I speak of dream jobs? I'm just saying it's awfully self-centered to think that the poor exist to serve the wealthy.

w1ntermute 13y ago
> My point is being poor doesn't mean your car never needs a mechanic. I know poor people who are decent at basic car maintenance (once again, the sorts of things where you get high margins). I also know wealthy people who are car enthusiasts, but they wouldn't want to get their hands dirty, so they'd rather pay someone to do it for them. You're speaking in absolutes when the market relies on relative differences. This particular point isn't too significant though, since ideally, most poor people wouldn't need to own a car (they would use public transit instead). > Non sequitur. Plenty of un-outsourceable jobs exist serving people who are not wealthy. Non sequitur. The goal is to optimize new job creation. The service industry is one of the fastest growing in America, so it makes sense to harness that. > Where do I speak of dream jobs? I'm just saying it's awfully self-centered to think that the poor exist to serve the wealthy. And I'm just saying that worrying about whether the poor can have their dream job (where they don't have to serve the wealthy) is something you can worry about when chronic unemployment hasn't been dragging down the economy for the last several years.