| |
 SabrinaM Proud Member of THE MOB PeaNut 5,735 August 2000 Posts: 24,764 Layouts: 2
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 12:52:28 AM
My college-educated husband who was laid off from his career job after 15+ years now works at a grocery store and every day he's approached by people we know casually who are interested in getting hired there. Of course, they usually throw in some barb like it's beneath them or their last resort.
DH and I were in the same position. He's underemployed and working at a job that doesn't require an education of any type. He didn't want to work at a "job" for the rest of his life. He wanted/needed a career to be able to provide the standard of living we want. He regrouped and went back to school for another career path. He was a programmer/BS in IT until the tech market crashed. He's since gone back to school for an MBA in Finance. |
***********
Sabrina
Recession: When your neighbor loses his job
Depression: When you lose yours
Recovery: When Obama loses his
| |
|
|
 look4angel StuckOnPeas PeaNut 49,444 September 2002 Posts: 2,744 Layouts: 181 Loc: Tn
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 12:53:15 AM
You do realize that they didn't just wake up one day 28 years old flipping a burger? They chose that path. Again, college or a trade profession isn't given to the lucky few.
Have you read through this whole thread? Because we have already discussed that trade schools have almost vanished, and there are always going to be some individuals who though no fault of their own could not pass a college course?
It doesn't matter how many of these people go out and get a college education, there is ALWAYS going to be someone working for below poverty wages at McDonald's until McDonald's raises it's wages. Until then "YOU" the tax payer are already funding those families through food stamps, healthcare, and housing.
So we are back to "you" or McDonald's, who do you want to fund these families?
I think someone out busting their ass deserves a wage they can live on, without drawing benefits from the government. While the company they work for rakes in 130% profit margins, in the middle of a recession. |
|
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 12:55:16 AM
peapermint: The answer to your question is 2.2% have a bachelor's or higher and are working at federal minimum wage or below. See Table 6 for 2011. Bureau of Labor Statistics | |
|
 BruceFan PeaAddict PeaNut 486,210 October 2010 Posts: 1,255 Layouts: 0 Loc: SE Michigan
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 12:56:32 AM
If others want the same grants let them give the same service. Of course, the ones who "demand" the most and complain the most are usually the ones unwilling to actually "give" something in return for what they're demanding.
There are plenty of people who for health reasons are not permitted to join the military. I have epilepsy; I'm one of them. I know--I tried. Such people do not have access to programs like the GI bill, and it's not a matter of "unwillingness to serve." It's disingenuous to pretend otherwise. |
~Julia~
"You're confusing a war on religion with not getting what you want." --Jon Stewart
| |
|
|
 peapermint Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 9,321 January 2001 Posts: 8,597 Layouts: 0 Loc: all up in your business
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 12:57:40 AM
Thanks for the stats. |
|
|
 mirabelleswalker My president has 6-pack abs. PeaNut 175,521 November 2004 Posts: 10,943 Layouts: 14 Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 12:59:23 AM
There's only one CEO per corporation. The notion that everyone is upwardly mobile is naive. Many low-wage workers will be low-wage workers for life, no matter hard they work. You know that.
That's exactly the type of mentality that keeps someone a low-wage worker. "I'll never be anything more than I am so why work any harder?" Just because Bob Jones is the CEO of XYZ corp that doesn't mean that he's preventing someone else from being successful. I can guarantee that there are a LOT of people that make more than we do. They're not preventing us from being wealthy. Only we can change that.
I'm not saying it's the low-wage workers mentality that they can't get ahead. I'm saying from the outside looking in, if there are 74 million hourly workers it is highly likely that a large percentage of them will remain in similar positions.
I believe a lot of them ARE working. VERY HARD.
I am not going to judge someone who is working full-time at McDonald's because the truth is, in many respects, she does work harder than I do. He or she has stress that I don't have, one of them being that I don't have to figure out how to survive on minimum wage. |
|
|
 look4angel StuckOnPeas PeaNut 49,444 September 2002 Posts: 2,744 Layouts: 181 Loc: Tn
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:02:09 AM
Anyway, I think if the low-paying jobs would give a full 40-hour week and good health insurance it wouldn't be such an issue. Then they would have a better chance at having the time or money to get ahead via other avenues (additional education, second job, less medical debt, etc.)
The thing about the high number of Wal-Mart workers who have to be on public assistance (including medical) just makes me sick.
This is SO TRUE! Most people I know working these jobs want to support themselves, and would give anything to be off all assistance, but when low wage jobs are all that are available, then they have little or no choice, if they want a roof over their head and food for their children. |
|
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:02:34 AM
there are 74 million hourly workers
That is not the number of hourly workers making federal minimum wage or below. Of that 74M; 3.8 million are at or below federal minimum wage. That is 5.2% of hourly workers. | |
|
 mirabelleswalker My president has 6-pack abs. PeaNut 175,521 November 2004 Posts: 10,943 Layouts: 14 Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:06:47 AM
there are 74 million hourly workers
That is not the number of hourly workers making federal minimum wage or below. Of that 74M; 3.8 million are at or below federal minimum wage. That is 5.2% of hourly workers.
Yes. I said 74 million hourly workers--not 74 million low wage workers. I said hourly specifically because even if they are making above minimum, they often are not working full-time and/or benefitted. |
|
|
 *Shannah* Haven't you heard about the word? PeaNut 242,768 January 2006 Posts: 6,008 Layouts: 2 Loc: Looking at the purple mountain majesties
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:12:56 AM
regarding GI Bill, I know when I was in (granted, I joined in 1997) we had to PAY into the program, it was $100 a month for 12 months. and that hurt as an Airman Basic making $900 a month, until we were promoted to Airman and make $1100 a month. AND, if you are discharged before 3 years, you don't qualify for the bill. Again, this was back when I was in, and I was medically discharged at 2 years, 11 months and 22 days. I'm not sure how the program has changed over the years since neither myself nor my dh qualified for it. and the amount of money you get from the GI Bill is NOT that much. | |
|
 Mrs_Tyler Sorting Laundry PeaNut 197,836 March 2005 Posts: 24,079 Layouts: 246 Loc: Enjoying the humid continental climate zone.
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:13:06 AM
There are plenty of people who for health reasons are not permitted to join the military. I have epilepsy; I'm one of them. I know--I tried. Such people do not have access to programs like the GI bill, and it's not a matter of "unwillingness to serve." It's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.
There are reasons why I didn't get a full ride to college for Football- I can't play football. And even though I was a top honors student in my class and was also all-state in choir, I didn't get offered a full academic or even a small music scholarship. I figured out other ways to get that education anyway. Nobody is guaranteed a free education by simply breathing. The point is that some people could absolutely enlist and take advantage of the GI bill and choose not to because they don't feel they can make the kind of sacrifice it takes to serve- I'm one of them. So I found other ways to attend the best college for my field in my area and worked two jobs while being a full time student so I could make it happen. | |
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:15:23 AM
60.58% are working 40 hours or more. Table 9. | |
|
 mirabelleswalker My president has 6-pack abs. PeaNut 175,521 November 2004 Posts: 10,943 Layouts: 14 Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:22:18 AM
60.58% are working 40 hours or more. Table 9.
I just looked at your charts.
Those stats are from 2006. That is before the crash. I believe those figures are grossly inaccurate. |
|
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:26:11 AM
Table 9. Employed wage and salary workers paid hourly rates with earnings at or below the prevailing Federal minimum wage by usual hours worked on primary job, 2011 annual averages | |
|
 mirabelleswalker My president has 6-pack abs. PeaNut 175,521 November 2004 Posts: 10,943 Layouts: 14 Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:41:05 AM
Table 9. Employed wage and salary workers paid hourly rates with earnings at or below the prevailing Federal minimum wage by usual hours worked on primary job, 2011 annual averages
I found the 2011 charts.
You're still looking at 30 million people not working full-time, and many of them on government subsidies.
It goes back to the question of whether you want companies to pay fair wages or you, the taxpayer, to make up the difference. Before you launch into the they-could-work-three-jobs line, remember that the risk for a significant health crisis is probably double or triple someone working one AND many are un- or under-insured.
There are significant social and financial costs of not providing living wages. |
|
|
 look4angel StuckOnPeas PeaNut 49,444 September 2002 Posts: 2,744 Layouts: 181 Loc: Tn
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:44:05 AM
While I believe some people who are working part time chose too, I'd say the majority of them would rather have full time employment, with benefits, so that they could get off of government aid if at all possible. I don't think anyone working, chooses to be part of the "working poor".
|
|
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:47:39 AM
You're still looking at 30 million people not working full-time, and many of them on government subsidies.
That is true but that 30 million are hourly workers but that number is not the number of those hourly workers who are making federal minimum wage or below. | |
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:50:39 AM
It goes back to the question of whether you want companies to pay fair wages or you, the taxpayer, to make up the difference.
I answered that question but will add that I do not believe companies are paying unfairly as in the case that has been used numerous times here..McDonalds.
| |
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 1:52:54 AM
One statistic I would like to see would be of the 5.2% of hourly workers who make at or below the federal minimum wage; how many are part of a 2 income household? The assumption here tends to be that they are the sole supporter. | |
|
 look4angel StuckOnPeas PeaNut 49,444 September 2002 Posts: 2,744 Layouts: 181 Loc: Tn
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 2:02:20 AM
One statistic I would like to see would be of the 5.2% of hourly workers who make at or below the federal minimum wage; how many are part of a 2 income household? The assumption here tends to be that they are the sole supporter.
Should it make a difference if they are a sole supporter or not? Don't they deserve a living wage, regardless? So what if they have a husband, or a roommate, if they as a family still fall under the poverty level, then the tax payer is still subsidizing their income.
That 5.2 sounds little but doesn't it end up being 3.8 million people?
That is a lot of people who are barely surviving, and still working. It's shameful in a country like ours. |
|
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 2:06:04 AM
So what if they have a husband, or a roommate, if they as a family still fall under the poverty level, then the tax payer is still subsidizing their income.
Well actually not all would then fall under the federal poverty level. And that number could be very difficult to figure out. Would probably have to come from the IRS and they are not as current with their statistics as the Bureau of Labor. | |
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 2:09:35 AM
What I find shameful is the people who are not working and often doing better than the group we have been discussing by living off the system. Way too late for me to research that one. | |
|
 mirabelleswalker My president has 6-pack abs. PeaNut 175,521 November 2004 Posts: 10,943 Layouts: 14 Loc: Here today, gone to Morocco.
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 2:20:29 AM
What I find shameful is the people who are not working and often doing better than the group we have been discussing by living off the system.
I actually find it more shameful that people work 2 or 3 jobs and still have to get public assistance and don't have healthcare. I am much more concerned about them than the people who aren't doing anything. I can't imagine anything more demoralizing than the financial treadmill they are on and the tightrope they are walking every single day.
"Nickel and Dimed" by Barbara Ehrenreich or "The Working Poor: On Not Getting By in America" by David Shipler are both highly readable and eye-opening books on this topic. |
|
|
 MochasMom Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 146,383 May 2004 Posts: 5,670 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 2:27:54 AM
I actually find it more shameful that people work 2 or 3 jobs and still have to get public assistance and don't have healthcare. I am much more concerned about them than the people who aren't doing anything. I can't imagine anything more demoralizing than the financial treadmill they are on and the tightrope they are walking every single day.
I am of the belief that if the people sitting home on their butts had their lifelines pulled and were required to do something proactive to support themselves; the people of this country would be much more able and willing to help the others. The whole concept of that demographic group not having healthcare is another topic in of itself. I have had the opportunity to research state health care plans and "don't have healthcare" is a very debateable topic. And with that I unfortunately need to get to sleep. | |
|
 jodster70 To the right, To the right PeaNut 51,257 October 2002 Posts: 5,567 Layouts: 28 Loc: Usually NSBR, an un"pea"dictable place :)
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 2:33:16 AM
How many of those who are sneering at these workers are wives who subsist in part or in full on their husbands incomes?
1. I would never sneer at anyone, especially those who are struggling to make ends meet. Like I said, some people that I'm close to live paycheck to paycheck, and my heart goes out to them.
2. Yes, I am a SAHM. I grew up in a relatively poor household. Even though they owned their own business, after paying all the related expenses my parents never had much left over. I paid my own way through college, with occasional help from my parents for books. I worked as a teacher for 10 years before I became a SAHM, a decision that my husband and I made together.
3. If I needed to, I could find a job tomorrow. There is a shortage in my teaching area, so I've never had a problem finding a job. I hope I don't have to go back to the classroom, because quite frankly, I find it too stressful. I am trying to decide what I want to do for a second career.
4. I'm not required to have a job to be able to have an opinion on this or any other topic. Long before my husband and I met, I supported myself and held down a job. I'm not the one sneering at anyone. If anything, the tone of the question I quoted implies that you're sneering at ME. |
**Jody**
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
Patrick Henry | |
|
|
 look4angel StuckOnPeas PeaNut 49,444 September 2002 Posts: 2,744 Layouts: 181 Loc: Tn
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 2:42:18 AM
I actually find it more shameful that people work 2 or 3 jobs and still have to get public assistance and don't have healthcare. I am much more concerned about them than the people who aren't doing anything. I can't imagine anything more demoralizing than the financial treadmill they are on and the tightrope they are walking every single day.
"Nickel and Dimed" by Barbara Ehrenreich or "The Working Poor: On Not Getting By in America" by David Shipler are both highly readable and eye-opening books on this topic.
ITA with the above statement and I will be looking for those books.
|
|
|
 scrappylicious All we are saying is give PEAS a chance PeaNut 116,311 November 2003 Posts: 6,717 Layouts: 150 Loc: Wellington Florida
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 7:01:19 AM
I never understood why anyone thinks it's OK to take advantage of another persons pain or thinks that the poor are just lazy.
I do not think that someone should pay more so I can pay less.
|
|
|
 not2peased Ancient Ancestor of Pea PeaNut 260,865 May 2006 Posts: 12,879 Layouts: 0 Loc: Northeast
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 7:42:25 AM
Instead of some of the foolish tax breaks we give some corporations I'd like to see tax breaks that are more in line with behaviors we want to promote.
tax breaks for companies that provide benefits and a living wage to their workers? I'm all for it
and for the record, this liberal does not think that forcing companies to pay more (although I do support moderate increases in federal minimum wage)is the route to go, nor do I think paying people based on family size makes any sense whatsoever
compensation drives behavior--that's the model I like to use. |
-Kerry
Let the refining and improving of your own life keep you so busy that you have little time to criticize others.
| |
|
|
 lynlam Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine? PeaNut 46,248 August 2002 Posts: 6,377 Layouts: 41 Loc: Ohio
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 8:24:43 AM
Just getting back on...haven't read the entire thread yet.
First of all, still trying to wrap my head around the stunning lack of knowledge so many have about basic economics and markets, and the terrible effect that unwarranted government intrusion by do-gooders has had on them.
Oh Lynlam, you're such a silly girl, "I" am not making these people protest for higher incomes, "THEY" are doing it themselves, because "THEY" can't afford to live off the money they are being paid, by companies who are raking in huge profits.
Do you have any idea at all what happens to the "profits" that these large companies make? Do you have any idea how they became such large companies to begin with? Do you think McDonalds just has a warehouse full of cash somewhere that they are just collecting for the hell of it? No. They have to pay dividends to their investors. Do you understand what investors and dividends are? Do you understand that without investors willing to risk their money, then McDonalds would never have been able to grow into the huge entity it is, that employes 400,000 or more people WORLDWIDE. So the investors expect a return on their investments. McDonalds pays them for allowing McDonalds to use their money to grow and run their business.
Do you also understand that, in the case of Fast food specifically, that almost all McDonalds are also independently owned franchises? So it is up to the OWNER of that store to control their labor costs and expenses according to McDonalds guidelines. These franchise owners are not paid by McDonalds, they earn their living from the profits that their stores make after expenses. To that note, a McDonalds in Times Square will probably have to pay much higher wages than a McDonalds in inner-city chicago.
McDonald's profits increased by 130% this year in the middle of this recession, they CAN afford to pay their employees a decent wage, but they chose not to. So they really shouldn't be shocked when their employee's are revolting because of those wages.
And just why do you think their profits when up in the middle of a recession? Because their food is relatively cheap, and people can afford it. If we implement your ideas, the food will no longer be cheap, despite the fact that their workers make more $, and the people who DON'T work for them, whose salaries were NOT artifically increased, will no longer eat there. So these workers will lose big time in the end.
So lets just say, it is far, far far more complicated than just looking at their "profit margains" and saying they should be paying all their employees a "living wage".
ANd yes, I am of the opinion that these workers who are so upset about their wages should just shut the hell up and be glad they have a job. If they aren't happy with their wages, they are free to leave. Start their own business or find somewhere else to work. THAT is simple.
You, of all people who is constantly screaming that the government should get people off of assistance, should be "mad as hell" at McDonald's for paying their employee's such a low wage that they still qualify for "YOUR" tax dollars, in the form of food stamps, housing, and healthcare..
No, I am not "mad as hell" at McDonalds. I understand the balance that businesses of all sizes have to juggle to stay in business. You know, maybe YOU should be "mad as hell" at the government for imposing regulations on businesses like McDonalds that cost said business many many millions of dollars each year in order to comply. I am very much sure that McDonalds would much rather take those millions and millions that they essentially have to light a match to, and invest it back into their business and their employees.
Do you know that the Small Business Admin estimates that complying with Government regulations costs small firm 1.7 TRILLION dollars a year? That's SMALL businesses. I don't think McDonalds and WalMart etc are even factored into that. Now you tell me, dear Look4Angel, exactly how anyone is supposed to succeed and hire and pay better wages when the GOVERNMENT is taking so much of their profits?
YOU can't have it both ways. Either start championing smaller government and less regulation or don't, and watch more and more people get screwed and end up on government dole. Because YOUR way does not work. Never has, never will.
Raising the minimum wage is NOT the only cause of inflation, if that was true, why are we experiencing inflation during the years that minimum wages have not been raised?
Quantatative Easing. Printing money. Borrowing from China. Out of control spending by governments at all levels. Welfare. Foodstamps. Subsidized student loans.
In short, everything the government does to "Help" us ends up costing us more in the long run. That's a fact.
how are ALL these people in minimum wage jobs supposed to AFFORD a higher education? if they can't even afford home and food, how can they afford college?
Once upon a time, in a far away place, before government got their hands into the student loan business, ANYONE could afford to get a higher education if they chose to. Even just 20 years ago when I was at OSU, my tuition was under $800 a quarter and my working class parents could afford to pay it. I worked full time at hotel front desks making just above min wage, and afforded an apartment with roomates, my books and my food and entertainment. Yes, parents had bought me a small used car, and they would help me out if I needed it, like when I had big car repairs or such. The point is, I did it. But you are right, it is nearly impossible now, precisely because the government got involved and the universities saw there was a huge profit to be made because of it. So now it is over $10,000 per year - three semesters - to go to OSU. I went for $2400 a year approx. That, is crazy. |

"We demand entire freedom of action and then expect the government in some miraculous way to save us from the consequences of our own acts... Self-government means self-reliance." Calvin Coolidge
Lynlam, the second-tier Pea, paid (except it appears she is not) political shill. | |
|
|
 NativeNewYorker black eyed pea with soul! PeaNut 15,878 May 2001 Posts: 24,965 Layouts: 70 Loc: LI, NY
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 8:30:04 AM
how are ALL these people in minimum wage jobs supposed to AFFORD a higher education? if they can't even afford home and food, how can they afford college? it's not like there is ALL this free money lying around to send these people to school. it's ridiculous.
Agreed. It's scary how some have no clue. Since Sandy, there are thousands of kids at my son's college whose financial aid is still in the "processing stage". These kids were promised aid, haven't seen it and are being kept from registering for the next semester. They are being asked to pay in full before they can register! If they had the money to begin with there would be no need for them to receive financial aid!
I make more than minimum wage but to receive my Masters and receive a higher salary I would have to work free for four months (student teaching). Sandy repairs sucked up my savings and I also had to get an emergency loan. I don't know how people on minimum wage do it. |
|
|
 myboysnme one of those "entitled" peas PeaNut 69,081 February 2003 Posts: 6,737 Layouts: 1
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 8:30:06 AM
Right out of high school joined the military to qualify for the GI Bill.
Well good for him. And what did you do? I went into the military after high school also. My son was in ROTC and wanted to do the same until he was hit broadside and suffered a back injury. Guess what? No military for him.
There are a lot of stupid people on this thread when it comes to the harsh realities for others in this country. I know we have a lot of peas who hold down jobs, but it would be interesting to find out how many are living off someone else's income yet only? |
My choice is to not take it personally - people have opinions. Particularly people here.-Peabay 12/29/11
I know this is assuming, but I'm really starting to think you are one of those "entitled" peas - Dalayney 4/2/12
profile pic courtesy of GreenEyedLady Designs at Scrap ARt Studio.
| |
|
|
 lynlam Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine? PeaNut 46,248 August 2002 Posts: 6,377 Layouts: 41 Loc: Ohio
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 8:44:43 AM
READ THIS ARTICLE - What is poverty?
Pull Quote:
It is possible that most poor households could be well housed and have many modern conveniences but still face chronic food shortages and undernutrition. Poor families might have microwaves but a limited and sporadic supply of food to put in the microwave. Government surveys show that this is not the case for the overwhelming majority of poor families.
On average, the poor are well nourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children. In most cases, it is well above recommended norms. Poor children actually consume more meat than higher-income children consume, and their protein intake averages 100 percent above recommended levels. In fact, most poor children are super-nourished and grow up to be, on average, one inch taller and 10 pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.[24]
However, even though the poor, in general, have an ample food supply, some do suffer from temporary food shortages. For example, a poor household with an adequate long-term food supply might need temporarily to cut back meals, eat cheap food, or go without if cash and food stamps run out at the end of the month.
Still, government data show that most poor households do not suffer even from temporary food shortages. As Chart 7 shows, 92.5 percent of poor households assert that they always had “enough food to eat†during the previous four months, although 26 percent of these did not always have the foods that they would have preferred. Some 6 percent of poor households state that they “sometimes†did not have enough food, and 1.5 percent say they “often†did not have enough food.[25]
The bottom line is that, although a small portion of poor households report temporary food shortages, the overwhelming majority of poor households report that they consistently have enough food to eat.
I don't deny there are kids that go hungry in every community, but often it could be said that it is due to the poor choices their parents make and not the amount of wages that they earn.
Something doesn't quite equate here - the poor are all starving according to the media and government advocates, yet the number one health concern facing the poor of America? Obesity.
And most poor households have air conditioning,cable, color TVs and Very possibly a game system too.
"Making ends meet" is all relative. Many who are on government assistance while working at McDonalds would probably refuse to cut their cable or give up their cell phones or sell their Xboxes if it meant they could get OFF the government dole.
|

"We demand entire freedom of action and then expect the government in some miraculous way to save us from the consequences of our own acts... Self-government means self-reliance." Calvin Coolidge
Lynlam, the second-tier Pea, paid (except it appears she is not) political shill. | |
|
|
 SabrinaM Proud Member of THE MOB PeaNut 5,735 August 2000 Posts: 24,764 Layouts: 2
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 8:46:06 AM
My son was in ROTC and wanted to do the same until he was hit broadside and suffered a back injury. Guess what? No military for him.
Ok... I'm sorry to hear that. So he's supposed to just chuck it all and get a job at McD's and hope the government takes care of him the rest of his life? I'm not sure what you want me to say. Find another way. People do it every day in this country.
My husband broke his back in 2 places, his wrist and various other bones in his body pulling a stupid stunt in HS (jumping off the top bleachers landing on his back.) Even if he wasn't able to get into the Navy right out of HS-- he'd have found another way. In fact, the GI Bill paid for very little of his college. We owe quite a bit in school loans but we're quite certain that the quality of education he's received and the field he's chosen will bring a good return on our loan. |
***********
Sabrina
Recession: When your neighbor loses his job
Depression: When you lose yours
Recovery: When Obama loses his
| |
|
|
 I-95 It's all just nonsense anyway! PeaNut 97,456 July 2003 Posts: 19,551 Layouts: 0 Loc: California, NY & Orlando
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 8:53:32 AM
This statement is BEYOND reprehensible. This man was paid a pittance to take bullets for a living, and because part of his compensation package is delayed and in the form of paying for his education later if he survives, you have the nerve to call it a HANDOUT?! By your definition, every government employee is getting a handout and government assistance because their paycheck is stamped US Treasury. Get over yourself.
I'm not opposed to the GI bill paying for a service member's college education, but the idea that everyone in the military is 'Taking a bullet' for living is not even close to correct. 91% of military positions are non-combat.
My DH went through Duke and M.I.T on full ride Navy scholarships, and served in the Navy to 'pay' it back. He now has all the benefits available to former members of the military.....but he never got within a 1000 miles of taking a bullet for his country.
I'm surprised the military isn't overrun with volunteers in these tough economic times. DH came from a family that could never have afforded M.I.T, or Duke, but the military paid his way and then gave him fantastic job training while he paid back his obligation....and allowed him to buy his first home using the GI Bill. We are most grateful to the military for that, eternally grateful actually, but the idea that he put his life on the line to get those benefits...just ain't the case. | |
|
 PerfectCircles In a world of spheres PeaNut 84,430 May 2003 Posts: 6,327 Layouts: 29
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 8:56:13 AM
I'm a public school teacher in a rural low socioeconomic area. I interact often with parents. In some cases my eighth grade students are better readers than their parents. We have no English language learners in our school. We have no first or second generation immigrants that I'm aware of. We have a large population of families who have a good work ethic (typically farmers and factory workers or their offspring), strong family and religious values, and lower academic intelligence. These people have common sense. They have a desire to be successful. They barely make it out of high school. They could not make it through college and many might not be able to handle trade school. In addition, they have families to support. It is difficult to find second or third shift day care, much less to be able to afford it. Could they choose not to have children? Sure. But that isn't a reality. And to argue it is saying that a person has to be of a certain academic intelligence to be allowed to raise a family in this country.
There are a lot of assumptions about the workers in our country. There are many, many areas like mine - no bus or taxi service, too spread out to walk to work, limited job opportunities, and even the closest fast food restaurant is in the next town.
A lot of people rely on construction jobs, which are seasonal here. And they fall back on plowing to get them through the winter. We live in a lake effect snow belt, so this is great in a good season. But this year its December 2 and we have had one snowfall of less than an inch.
The reality is that fast food and minimum wage jobs are the best that a portion of our population can hope for. But those people are often overlooked because its easier to assume that everyone is capable of continuing their education beyond high school.
Our IEPs for students starting at age 14 are now required to focus on postsecondary goals, whether its education, training, or employment. I wish all students had the luxury of their teachers being federally required to set and monitor goals to help them work towards achievable success. | |
|
 Fraidyscrapper Serious Interlocutor PeaNut 38,100 May 2002 Posts: 12,480 Layouts: 0 Loc: Jersey Strong
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 9:03:06 AM
I-95, what are you talking about? It isn't like the man chose dis deployments. The navy deployed him where he was the most use to them. He could have done six months in Newport, six months in Pearl Harbor, then a year in the Gulf.
|
| "The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country." - Robert F. Kennedy | |
|
|
 clee321 It is always easier to edit than it is to create PeaNut 161,211 August 2004 Posts: 9,351 Layouts: 10 Loc: Land of Mold and Pollen
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 9:13:17 AM
Factory work is not comparable to min wage jobs
In our town GM gave hourly workers 10-14k in bonuses in 2012. That is after overtime, regular pay ($12+ to start), and benefits
Another much smaller factory starts workers at $17+ per hour and has bonuses and benefits
A medium sized factory in town starts at $12 and has benefits as well..
So seeing factory work listed as though it isn't paying enough bugs me.
May. Not be the work you love but pay and benefits and bonus enough to provide a living |
|
|
 I-95 It's all just nonsense anyway! PeaNut 97,456 July 2003 Posts: 19,551 Layouts: 0 Loc: California, NY & Orlando
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 9:17:12 AM
I-95, what are you talking about? It isn't like the man chose dis deployments. The navy deployed him where he was the most use to them. He could have done six months in Newport, six months in Pearl Harbor, then a year in the Gulf.
Actually, he pretty much did choose his deployments. After he graduated with a pretty specific specialty, there weren't that many places the Navy could have put him, and utilize the education they had paid for. He wasn't in the military during the Gulf war so he got to sail around the Pacific when he was required to do sea duty.
It still doesn't negate the fact that 91% of all military positions are non-combat.
| |
|
 ilovecookies PeaAddict PeaNut 506,197 April 2011 Posts: 1,997 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 9:36:40 AM
Work ethic-- a thing of the past in a lot of cases. I also know of several people who think that hard work is "beneath them."
Oh, this is so true. And even worse, I know of several people who just walked away from their bills-or even worse-their mortgages-and claim that they aren't lazy freeloaders! |
|
|
 ~Lauren~ Original Pea #1803 PeaNut 246,606 January 2006 Posts: 29,619 Layouts: 16 Loc: right here...even if some don't like it. ;)
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 9:44:07 AM
Oblio, I don't agree with your points but if you managed to make them without insulting others while doing so, I bet people would be willing to give them a lot more thought.
As far as women being supported by their husbands, so what? It is a private agreement between two private citizens. It requires nothing and demands nothing of anyone else. How is this anything like insisting that the government or a private enterprise pay you or support you financially? |
Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him better take a closer look at the American Indian - Henry Ford | |
|
|
 Jillsie Pea BucketHead PeaNut 226,757 October 2005 Posts: 860 Layouts: 0 Loc: SouthPark
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 9:53:56 AM
As far as women being supported by their husbands, so what? It is a private agreement between two private citizens. It requires nothing and demands nothing of anyone else. How is this anything like insisting that the government or a private enterprise pay you or support you financially?
I agree with this. | |
|
 stittsygirl I AM SHER LOCKED PeaNut 9,640 January 2001 Posts: 8,113 Layouts: 131 Loc: Deep in the heart of...
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 9:56:07 AM
I'm surprised the military isn't overrun with volunteers in these tough economic times. DH came from a family that could never have afforded M.I.T, or Duke, but the military paid his way and then gave him fantastic job training while he paid back his obligation....and allowed him to buy his first home using the GI Bill. We are most grateful to the military for that, eternally grateful actually, but the idea that he put his life on the line to get those benefits...just ain't the case.
The military is currently drawing down. They are letting go many highly qualified personnel, including my own husband, for the least of reasons. They can afford to be particularly picky about who they let in right now, so it's not going to be easy for anyone to just "sign on the dotted line" and join up. Of course, this is part of the usual cycle, and in a few years they'll be trying to fill quotas again and won't be as picky. Fortunately for us, my husband has the years to draw retirement pay, although it won't cover the needs of our family, and we are currently looking for jobs.
My husband must be part of the 9% who have served in combat zones, because he's done so twice, both in Iraq and Afghanistan. I've never heard that statistic before.
|
Kristen, lucky mom and proud retired Army wife!
| |
|
|
 lynlam Don'tcha wish your girlfriend had spurs like mine? PeaNut 46,248 August 2002 Posts: 6,377 Layouts: 41 Loc: Ohio
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 9:59:07 AM
I wish all students had the luxury of their teachers being federally required to set and monitor goals to help them work towards achievable success.
So, let me ask you...you think its a good thing to have the federal government in far off DC set federally mandated requirements in a "One size fits all" kind of way, for all students across the nation? Or do you think your local school district, in conjunction with it's parents and local employers and community colleges could better identify the strenghts and weaknesses of your student population and work to better prepare them for the realities of their own, local situations?
I think federally mandated anything is bad news. The fact is, there ARE people, as you said, that really wont' ever be anything more than unskilled, minimum wage earners. And you know what? our economy does need those people do to those jobs. BUT...that does not mean that those jobs should pay as much as a job with more responsibility, requirements, education and training.
So the questions remains, what should we do with these people? Well, for one, eliminate the minimum wage. In many areas where the market does not justify wages that high, the minimum wage actually depresses employment and keeps other wages lower than they might have been. Addititonally, the minimum wage historically, has been advocated for by unions who knew that minorities and younger workers would gladly work for much lower wages than older white workers, therefore to protect the jobs of their white members, unions fought for minimum wage laws that priced minorities and young people out of the picture. Dont' believe it? Research it. South African white unions specifically used this tactic very successfully.
If businesses were allowed to hire and pay people based upon their worth and value added to the end product, it would be a win win for everyone. More employment, better wages, better products. Competition is a GOOD thing. It improves everything in the long run.
NOTHING will solve everything. There will always be some who "cant make it". Always. There is no way to avoid it. But the absolute irrefutable fact is that our poor in America are still among the wealthiest people in the world. That is no accident. That is capitalism. That is "trickle down", despite those of you who do not believe it exists or works. That is the free market working, not because of governmnent, but INSPITE of it. Imagine what could happen if we truly unleashed it?
The price of freedom is that there will be inequalities. The only way to make everything equal is to revert back to a system of slavery. Economic slavery is just as insidious as chains. And that is the system that aparently many of you who continue to vote for equality and security and "Social justice" want.
Let me give you a quote from Frederick Douglas, former slave and revered, self educated, amazing man, on the nature of slavery"
"It's first aim is to destroy all sense of high moral and religious responsibility. It reduces man to a machine and cuts him off from his Maker. It hides, from him, the laws of God, and leaves him to grope his way from time to eternity in the dark. And it leaves him under the arbitrary and despotic control of frail, depraved, and sinful men."
Under the arbitrary and despotic control of frail, depraved, and sinful men. Indeed.
Why do you all think that the men we elect and allow to impose their will upon us are less greedy, evil and despotic than the CEO of Walmart or McDonalds?
|

"We demand entire freedom of action and then expect the government in some miraculous way to save us from the consequences of our own acts... Self-government means self-reliance." Calvin Coolidge
Lynlam, the second-tier Pea, paid (except it appears she is not) political shill. | |
|
|
 obliolait BucketHead PeaNut 550,788 April 2012 Posts: 856 Layouts: 0
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 10:01:41 AM
the notion that government shouldn't regulate businesses is idiotic ideology that is irrational. we've already seen the damage of deregulation during the bush years. | |
|
 smilesnpeacesigns PeaFixture PeaNut 341,236 October 2007 Posts: 3,414 Layouts: 1
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 10:07:38 AM
that poor soul as examples you may know. Maybe if people start to realize that education, work ethic and yes self sacrifice and personal responsibility are what it takes; they will find it within themselves to better themselves rather than expecting others to take care of them.
Read my previous posts.
There are no factory jobs anymore, those are the people who are working at McyD's now, we can thank Clinton for that and I'm a democrat.
As for people in the military those guys/girls deserve what ever the government gives them and more.
This thread is so full of people who just have no clue, and frankly are just as prejudice as Squillen. When you just assume something about someone anyone that makes you just as racist as the redneck who still believes in separation.
Man this just screws up the admiration I had for many of you.
|
| Even with the snark, trolls and spelling police you are a great group of ladies! | |
|
|
 desertpea StuckOnPeas PeaNut 359,474 January 2008 Posts: 2,243 Layouts: 41 Loc: Moving!
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 10:13:42 AM
Krispy Kreme is about to reopen in our town, and several of my friends are going to apply. They're college-educated and in their late '30s or early '40s.
My college-educated husband who was laid off from his career job after 15+ years now works at a grocery store and every day he's approached by people we know casually who are interested in getting hired there. Of course, they usually throw in some barb like it's beneath them or their last resort.
It is posts like this that make me absolutely pissed off at what was allowed and actually encouraged by our government to willfully destroy the economy of this country. These people are supposed to be in the prime of their careers, yet it got stolen from them.
This is insanity, and we're all contributing to it. | |
|
 NativeNewYorker black eyed pea with soul! PeaNut 15,878 May 2001 Posts: 24,965 Layouts: 70 Loc: LI, NY
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 10:27:14 AM
And most poor households have air conditioning,cable, color TVs and Very possibly a game system too.
I haven't seen a black and white tv since I was a kid and I'm 43. I looked on ebay and saw some hand held black and whites. The others were expensive and listed as antique. Didn't see any on Amazon. If you don't have basic cable around here you have no tv reception.
Young children's parents are often asked if there are computers at home. It's almost an expectation now. They are free in the library but when you're working three jobs it makes it hard for your children to get there. If a child gets a game system for their birthday or Xmas, so what?! I'm not going to thumb my nose at a child because of their parent's choices. |
|
|
 BuckeyeSandy Old Dogs are Best! PeaNut 92,987 June 2003 Posts: 22,367 Layouts: 364 Loc: With my dogs
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 10:35:21 AM
Just a historical note.
It was not all that long ago jobs only paid for hours worked. Period. There were no benefits as we know them today.
Things like employer provided medical insurance, we're done to hire better qualified employees. Employees with skills and knowledge were valued and paid more to remain.
Now, current day: we have a mess because of the multitude of laws and regulations that govern businesses of all types.
As to illegals, while living in the Southwest met many more people from various European countries that were in the USA illegally, than someone with family on both sides of the border, or from Central America.
|
Sandy
Every MOM is a working mom!
"Retired" after 22 years of an Air Force Career
REMEMBER this Veterans Day
To quote Wayne Gretzky, "You miss 100% of the shots you never take."
Aesculus | |
|
|
 Judie in Oz PEAing Upside Down PeaNut 12,503 March 2001 Posts: 7,220 Layouts: 44 Loc: Down Under
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 10:36:51 AM
Just read the whole thread. I had no idea there were so many snobs here.
Judie | |
|
 BethAnneM Hermetically sealed for your protection PeaNut 95,504 July 2003 Posts: 7,408 Layouts: 0 Loc: Cali Baby
 | Posted: 12/2/2012 10:43:56 AM
Work ethic-- a thing of the past in a lot of cases. I also know of several people who think that hard work is "beneath them."
Oh, this is so true. And even worse, I know of several people who just walked away from their bills-or even worse-their mortgages-and claim that they aren't lazy freeloaders!
Yeah, how some so high and mighty seem to have that "it's okay for me to do this but the rest of you are nasty freeloaders if you do it" mind set.
And with that, I bite my tongue. |
|
|