re: The idea anyone is entitled to a "livable wage" is Ludacris

quote:

---

You're right...please explain the difference.


EXACTLY...just what I wrote....

---

Yes, I mistakenly typed mean when I meant median. You caught me. You win a prize. Now give me the median.

quote:

---

Whuuutttt???? LOL...that is funny as hell. I am glad you know me so well....not the type of person I claim to be.


What kind of person am I, all seeing, all knowing sage?

---

The kind of person that defends "living wages" even if they claim not to be

quote:

---

Yes, I mistakenly typed mean when I meant median. You caught me. You win a prize. Now give me the median.

---

I you are interested in the median I am confident you can calculate it yourself.

quote:

---

I you are interested in the median I am confident you can calculate it yourself.

---

Unsurprising deflection is unsurprising.

quote:

---

Please, please explain how skills, education or drive has ANYTHING at all to do with the fact that every person in this country has a minimal cost of living? I won't hang up and listen because I know you know better unless you are dumber than a sack of rocks..

---

I give every applicant a 20 question written test. Basic math, science, and reading comprehension. More than half can't get a passing score.
Some people are hungry to learn and WANT to make a career in a trade. Some just want a paycheck.
I have an employee that I mentioned earlier. Got into the trade at 18 with no construction experience, progressed, and has already passed the first portion of his Master's test at 25. Single, no kids, drives a nice truck, and is building a house. He'll probably start his own company by the time he's 30.
I have another employee that is 28, married, two kids, one vehicle between him and his wife, lives in a one bedroom apartment. Fourth year apprentice but still constantly fricking up, dragging his feet to get things done, terrible at communication. You can look him dead in the eye and tell him how to do something, and he'll do it wrong. Then I still have to pay him while he fixes it.
Who is worth more but who has the higher cost of living? Should I be paying the 28 year old more simply because he needs a bigger place to live, another vehicle, and has kids to take care of? You'll say, "Well, if you knew how to run a business, he wouldn't be working for you anymore." Okay, that doesn't change his circumstances, does it? He'll get a job somewhere else, then you'll accuse his new employer of being a "low wage employer!!!!!! Scum of the earth!!!! We wouldn't have hungry children if it wasnt for low lifes like you!!!!!" Because that's your business model. Nope, there's a place for him in my company. He isn't foreman material. He hasn't done anything egregious to deserve termination, either. He needs somebody to be paired up with to make sure his work is correct. That's what you call a helper. And he will continue to make helper wages.
Your question now, which I am replying to, is not what you were saying in that post. You originally claimed the REAL problem is that employers are simply too cheap to pay them what they need. You are disingenuously misrepresenting what you first said by asking how those are separate issues. Your full quote:

quote:

---

The problem has NOTHING to do with skills, education, drive. It is merely an economic issue. IF your business relies on unskilled, low life, no drive, no educated people those people have a minimal cost of living in order to produce whatever it is they produce for your business and your customers. You and your customers SHOULD be fully expected by the rest of us to foot those costs yourself. You should be ashamed to come to us, hat in hand, and ask us to help a brother out. Instead, you, the low wage employer (not you, a generic low wage employer), enjoy our largesse.

---

Their skills, education, and drive directly impact their own ability to meet their minimal cost of living, which is their responsibility, not mine. So, I just addressed each of the areas and explained to you how you could not have been more wrong with that statement.

quote:

---

Are you really not seeing what’s problematic about this? You’re divorcing person A’s compensation from the value of what person A

---

The value is not in the action, its in being a willing person. The person paying the other person validates that by paying them...they could very well sweep themselves, they could not sweep at all or they could vacuum. The person paying knows there is value, somehow, in the mere fact that the other person is a person. The paying person has probably concluded that paying the other person is economically advantageous and allows them to make more money than the sweeping costs...and it requires a person...no special skill or knowledge, just a willing person.

quote:

---

The person paying knows there is value, somehow, in the mere fact that the other person is a person

---

Your work is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Some jobs do not carry the value of this mythical living wage. The option for the lazy worker that does not have more than minimum wage value will be to keep working at the current rates, or have hours cut/be downsized when companies are forced to pay them the mythical living wage.

quote:

---

More ad hom bullshite instead of an answer.

---

Its 35.8 by the way...

quote:

---

Wages are paid to human beings and human beings do not have a market price

---

I think this is the problem.

If I’m understanding you correctly, your view of employment is closer to a form of slavery where an employer pays to possess an employee. If that’s accurate, I think I actually do see where you’re coming from.

I’d counter that when an employer pays an employee, they’re not paying to get the employee, they’re paying to get what the employee can do for them. Your employer doesn’t own you and is therefore not obligated to “maintain” you. They are simply obligated to pay whatever agreed-upon or market based wage that is commensurate to what you actually do.

What you do is where your “business value” from. The fact that you exist is where your value as a person comes from. They are not the same.

TL;DR version: Just read what RaginCajunz above mine