|
Post by JGRobinson on Jun 26, 2011 7:51:10 GMT -5
I have been told by one employer or another at one time or another, "If you dont like the way things work around here, you can go elsewhere". I suggest the saying is just as appropriate for this situation!
If you cant live off what you are earning, thats your problem really!!! Get another job, I can say that because Ive done that my entire life. One job wouldn't come close to supporting me while working much less in retirement!
There is no Constitutional right to be able to live well off of working 37.5 Hours a week, there just isn't, its not even reasonable to hope for that in these times.
|
|
|
Post by longtimer on Jun 26, 2011 8:39:45 GMT -5
While I basically agree with you JGR I think we do have to recognize there are a lot of complicating factors these days.
There was a time when the "American Dream" (if you believe in such a thing) was attainable for many with one working parent and one stay at home parent, that is no longer the case.
The poor and even those in the middle class are working two jobs, it is just that in most homes I know both are working one job and in many of them one of the two is working a second so they are really working 3 jobs just to stay afloat. Now these folks may have a few things they could do without but I am not referring to people living way beyond their means. Then the issue of nobody supervising the kids and all the issues that go along with that end up being a cost to everyone else.
A basic rule of economics is that money is attracted to money, wealth will always pool. Those with the money get the influence, power and the rules tend to get written in their favor. There is no arguing that the wealthy are getting richer at a faster rate each year, the wealth is pooling. That is not a critical problem until those without feel they have no hope of getting ahead, then watch out. Personally I feel we are headed there pretty soon, not in my lifetime maybe but it is coming in my kids lifetime for sure.
Now with all that said, there are times when people are in a situation where they have to suck it up and the public sector needs to be brought in line with the private sector if we are to have even a remote chance of getting through this mess.
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Jun 26, 2011 11:09:04 GMT -5
I see nothing wrong with with a society striving for what we used to call "the American Dream.," where Dad could support a family with one job and there was time left over for family life, reasonable vacations and other pursuits. If we are truly all in this together in life, what's wrong with working toward that goal?
And are there economic reasons why that isn't possible? Have we run out of natural recources, talent and people willing to work hard? I don't think so. The problem Dad has is prying some money out of the tight fists of his employers, some of whose salaries are at historically cockeyed multiples beyond their employees. I think it's complicated, sure, but a big factor is an unequal distribution of rewards. Therefore, the disappearance of the Middle Class.
Because the "complicating factor" mentioned by longtimer is Greed. It's the only explanation of the gross difference between the American Dream of yesterday and 3 or 4 jobs shared by Mom and Dad today just to make ends meet. I'm all for Capitalism and believe that it has accomplished economic efficiencies that have eventually benefitted all layers of society. But we need to take a good look at our rewards system. And if it's efficiency you're looking for, you can start by not sending every kid off to college, where they'll pay more for a cheapened degree so that can be just like everyone else.
I had lunch with a fellow this past Friday who works for the company I retired from after 30 years. It has changed drastically. He had taken the day off to do some chores and take a break. He had just finished working 46 12 hour days in a row. No overtime, because he's classed as exempt (a joke.) He told me a few stories and I quickly concluded he was working in a Archipelago Prison Camp. This is the same company where a few years ago a dozen executives legally ripped off $9 million in bonuses for themselves while the company was doing poorly and the employees were receiving pay cuts.
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Jun 26, 2011 11:13:36 GMT -5
I left one fact out. The price of engergy. It used to be quite cheap. It will never be so again, because we're not willing to murder half the people in the MidEast to make it so.
|
|
|
Post by JGRobinson on Jun 26, 2011 18:33:57 GMT -5
We blew right by Rich and never even knew it! Most of us in the Middle Class are rich but fail to realize it. Our poor families have things only the rich could afford in underdeveloped countries. My Granddaughters have more stuff than 5 families in Botswana yet we Americans do feel deprived when we don't have everything we want when we want it.
Don't get me wrong, there are many in this country that have as much money as god it would seem, we call them the Filthy Rich, There are 200,000 of us Middle Class stiff for each one of them and just about as many lower income schleps as Middle Class Grunts.
The Jersey Public Workers will survive, some may change their line of work, but all of them will eat better, live in nicer Housing, get better Educations and Medical Care than the 70% of the Worlds Population or more. Things could be much worse!
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jun 26, 2011 18:54:59 GMT -5
I don't need to be enormously wealthy. I WOULD like to be able to afford a tank of gasoline though, just like in the old days. Entertainment was as cheap as filling the truck and going for a ride, stopping for a meal, and enjoying the scenery and sunshine.
Even as a teen, we "poor folk" used to enjoy a ride in the country and a picnic lunch.
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Jun 26, 2011 20:40:52 GMT -5
Unless my math is fuzzy, someone earning $400,000 is not a millionaire. Factor in FICA and federal taxes, you're talking a salary below $250,000. If one is jealous that they missed out on their opportunity to earn the same is no reason to demand the hardworkers who earned it to cough it up to the state for your satisfaction!
|
|
|
Post by JGRobinson on Jun 27, 2011 5:40:02 GMT -5
Taxes, greed and lifestyles of the rich and famous have screwed up our economy. Living within ones budget and saving for a rainy day have been replaced by no payments and interest free for 2 years. At the end of the 2, many still default!
Hell, my daughter and her Boyfriend decided to spend $500 dollars they didn't have on a birthday Party for my Granddaughters 5th and a month later she calls me to say she lost her job, her power is being shut off and shes Pregnant!
Working 37.5 hours a week was never the norm for most of my neighbors when I was young, many were farmers or owned there own businesses but most worked as much as two people do today. We have tripled our outlay without doing the same with our income!
Just compare standard utilities for my parents house in 1960 to today. We had Propane, Fuel oil, Phone and Electric to pay for every month, no premium anything. In the 21st century, I have that plus Internet, Cellular Service, Television, Garbage pick up and more.
Now add the 12 different insurances a typical US Family has for 3 cars, a Jetski and a camp, instead of just the 3 we had before and thats getting expensive. Parents often lived with their adult children in retirement, that doesn't happen much anymore and I cannot think of anyone I grew up with that Vacationed oversees, Cruised in the Bahamas or spent any time at all in a Spa.
When I say were rich, by most standards we are very wealthy. Most Homes have a car for every drivers license, a Cell phone for every mouth, a computer for each pair of hands, A TV for each Bedroom and family room, a vacation for every member of the family, hell some pay more to keep their pets healthy than we did to to care for a family of 4's medical needs.
Americans are the real Slumdog Millionaires of the 21st century. Rich with stuff but when we cant make ends meet, we beg for handouts, most of the time we get it! Most social Services Recipients in this country have many of the expenses I listed prior to this yet they cannot afford to feed themselves or their children because they spent their money on wants not needs.
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Jun 27, 2011 7:09:45 GMT -5
Even then, many welfare recipients spend the monies stolen from the private sector on expensive tvs, high-priced cellphones, etc. while their children live in such disgust, not even pigs would live in it! My downstairs neighbor finally moved out. The new guys who moved in told me how they had to remove empty potato chip bags full of soiled diapers! The new guys bathed in chlorox after cleaning out the apartment, it was THAT disgusting!
|
|
|
Post by dgriffin on Jun 27, 2011 7:51:04 GMT -5
JG, you're right. What many young families consider the basics these days far exceeds what we remember years ago. I didn't grow up in a farm community, but I did grow up on Cornhill where most families had one job, held by the father. But each family had only one car when I was a kid and one television set with an antenna up on the roof for free reception.
The expectations of many young couples today far exceeds what our parents considered adequate. Driving down the Thruway, I'll often ask my wife, "Where are the old cars?" No one drives an old beat-up car like we often did. Everyone evidently prefers a car payment book.
The question becomes, Are there couples/ families living "reasonably" (similar to how we lived a generation ago) and can they do it with one job, one ordinary job? No, I don't think that even a reasonable ... or let's say modest ... lifestyle can today be supported by one ordinary job. And if I'm correct, we've regressed as a society, for what is the purpose of an adequate income if not to allow one to enjoy their life with family.
|
|
|
Post by firstamendment on Jun 27, 2011 11:23:45 GMT -5
I don't typically watch Meet the Press, although I did like Tim Russert on there, RIP. Yesterday while flipping channels, I believe it was Meet the Press with David Gregory hosting and Christie as a guest. It was actually seeing Christie why I stopped to watch. I have to say, his candor on there was not bad at all. Gregory brought up the public/parochial school clip and inquired about it. Oh boy, I thought. And actually I enjoyed his reply to it for the most part. He viewed the initial question about where he sends his kids to school as that of a private decision a father makes for his kids. And I can honestly say I respected that type of honesty. I still don't think the woman asking him was pointed in her inquiry about where he sends his kids, but to see how he feels that his proposed cuts won't affect his kids the way it will most other kids. I believe, as the governor and a public official, he could have been a little less gruff in his response to her, but I also respect how he viewed it as his private choice for his family and WHY he sends his kids to that school is off limits, as it should be.
Christie does come off as a ''take it or leave it'' guy. To be honest, I think he is correct yesterday when he said we need more honesty in public service even if it ruffles some feathers, in so many words.
|
|
|
Post by Clipper on Jun 27, 2011 12:12:01 GMT -5
It is the kind of in your face honesty that I might subscribe to in a candidate. Herman Cain is an example of a bright man that is not always politically correct in his view or statements, but he is honest and open and transparent with his honest opinions and ideas.
We might be reaching a point in my opinion when we need to put some of the political correctness aside, and elect someone who has their faults and lets them show, rather than someone whose false image is created by campaign managers and handlers, only to find that their agenda and intent is nothing whatsoever in line with what they had you believe during the run up to the elections.
Might be time for a candidate that has faults, and for us to accept his faults in the interest of pursuing his positive attributes. HONESTY being the most important thing and the most absent in late years in politics.
Might be time to simply overlook some personality defects, and to look for business sense and common sense. We probably should make it a qualifying point though that we don't want someone getting laid in the oval office or flashing their penis on the internet. There has to be SOME moral parameters that need to be adhered to. lol
|
|
|
Post by clarencebunsen on Jun 27, 2011 12:57:20 GMT -5
In the '60s there were 2 candidates I supported enthusiastically, Barry Goldwater & Eugene McCarthy. Some questioned how I could support two people with such widely divergent views, but in both I found men who were honest and straightforward in their beliefs and who refused to tone down those beliefs to suit the audience of the day.
I would rather be governed by an honest man with whom I have some disagreements than a scoundrel who professes to agree with me today and with someone else tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by firstamendment on Jun 27, 2011 13:23:55 GMT -5
F**k political correctness. Tell me the truth, not what I want to hear.
|
|
|
Post by Swimmy on Jun 27, 2011 13:26:57 GMT -5
Holiday trees are CHRISTMAS TREES!
|
|