The workforce, is this happening everywhere?

Franko

Yes clearly something has gone wrong. I left school having completed year 10 at the end of 1971, just under 16 years of age. I started an apprenticeship as a carpenter and joiner on $27 a week. Work was plentiful, and I worked a lot of overtime so I could purchase my first motorcycle before I got my learners permit at 16 years and 9 months. I had also saved a lot of money and continued to save. By 1976 I had 2 motorcycles, the second being a Dunstall Norton, as well as a car. In 1978 I purchased a block of land 10 minutes south of Sydney (in Helensburgh) for $12,650, and still had a small bank balance with which I started to build. I was married in late 1981 by which time I had almost completed my house and still did not have a mortgage. So at 25 I owned and lived in a 4 bedroom 2 bathroom house. That is not possible today, mostly because land value has gone up much more in proportion to wages, but also building costs have been pushed up by government with regards to site safety, and regulatory fees and insurances. Just to get a building approval now takes months and costs $10s of thousands of dollars. Generally the working man has gone backward. But also today young people are not prepared to put in the hard work and extra hours in order to get ahead.

David
 
Good points Franko and thought provoking!

But one aspect that’s missed out in your story is what’s the definition of needed costs.

You mention the basics like car, insurance, rent.

But these days the list of what is deemed needed is MUCH more. £1000 mobile phones, I pads, home IT, much more exotic holidays, much more eating out, etc.

I believe we lose site of this sometimes. Yes it’s true that the average working man probably has no more money left over each month than his father or grandfather did, but generally speaking they have a lot more ‘stuff’ to show for it.

Which, of course, is another matter entirely !
 
As someone involved in labor studies for 40 years, where we are didn't happen overnight. In the never-ending quest for more profit from the same value produced, corporations cut where it was easiest; wages and benefits. Pensions were sacked by corporate raiders and buy-out artists, and 401Ks substituted. The main difference; you lose your ass in a pension and someone should go to jail. Lose your ass in a 401K and start looking for another ass. As wages and benefits stagnated, corporate compensation soared. Stock markets moved steadily upward, giving 401K owners a false sense of security, so pensions fell completely by the wayside. Currently, the stock market is going through an inevitable corrective tank job and 401K owners are nervous and watching their retirement funds dwindle. Guess who was the beneficiary of the bull market?

Cheap labor via legal and illegal immigration and the lax policing of smaller companies led to the fall of job security-does anyone still have any? As many jobs disappeared or were imported to nations with cheap labor, small taxes and zero regulation, folks who had worked at the same place for years found themselves unemployed. Some found other work, usually at a lower wage and possibly zero benefits. At the same time fewer and fewer citizens had medical insurance, the cost of healthcare soared-again, lets make more money out of the same product. Now the pendulum swings the other way and the nurse shortage has led to better conditions and wages for medical personnel.
But for many, losing that good-paying, secure job and being tossed on the unemployment line has led to a reassesment. Employers are being forced by circumstance to raise wages to attract and keep employees. Starbucks employees are unionizing, fergawd'ssake. And unemployed folks, most of whom have working spouses, are sitting back, taking a closer look at the job market instead of jumping into the first available gig.

All the bs about Americans unwilling to work is just that; bs. Believe it or not, after a couple generations, people who get paid more for the same work than folks in lower-paid areas work harder and produce more. The people in the lower-wage areas end up becoming worth what they are paid. All enmployers have to do to get more employees is pay a decent wage for the work and have some sort of benefit structure so families can afford health care and can look forward to a dignified retirement instead of eating dog food in a home with no utilities. Of course, the pandemic has jumbled the situation by killing a million Americans, not all of whom were old and feeble, but you get the picture. So who's going to do all the crappy, low-wage, no benefit, no taxes or SS- paid jobs? Immigration, legal and otherwise, is under tremendous pressure to "Preserve jobs for Americans" but which Americans will be forced to take those jobs? Apparently not many, due to the cushion of unemployment insurance (like SS, a paid-for benefit, not an "entitlement", I hate that word) savings, side jobs for cash, and working spouses, are interested. Can you blame them?
 
Last edited:
franko said:
The point of my post is, if almost fifty years ago a seventeen year old kid can earn enough to buy his own used car, rent a one bedroom apartment and just plain out take care of himself on a part time job, what has gone wrong today that both parents need to work to barely make ends meet.
Click to expand...
As I said, my answers can somehow turn political because some people wear different glasses than me.

"You want the truth? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!" (not you, personally, @franko )

Our out-of-control government is OVER-TAXING us at every turn, and at ALL LEVELS right from neighborhood homeowners associations all the way up to Washington DC.

The fact that they over-tax us is only PART of the damage they are doing. Another large part is WHAT THEY DO WITH THE MONEY. Much of it goes to politician's lobbyists & donors, to feed their already bloated machines that are sucking the life out of the citizenry, UNLESS you are above the line where money is just a plaything.

SO, everyone selling anything, who intends to make a profit (and who doesn't EXCEPT the government), must cover their share of the increasing tax burden at every turn, thus raising the cost of those goods and services (including cars, apartments, food, gas, etc.).

How and why we (collectively, not you and me as individuals) LET the government and huge corporations continue to bloat themselves on our tax money is a mystery. You'd think that if everyone who has had enough would simply STOP PAYING TAXES, we could force the issue. However, that would invite other problems...
 
Danno said:
...unemployment insurance (like SS, a paid-for benefit, not an "entitlement", I hate that word)
Click to expand...
I don't hate the word "entitlement", I hate the way it is MISTAKENLY APPLIED to SOME of the money the government is GIVING AWAY to people that didn't earn it.

Social Security is NOT a "benefit" in any way other than the FACT that it is indeed an ENTITLEMENT - it's recipients (including me) PAID IN to the system that PROMISED them a return at a structured rate & time; thus we/they are ENTITLED to that money. Being that it is the GOVERNMENT that promised us this return, and the GOVERNMENT who must pay that return, it is the GOVERNMENT'S duty to pay out SS to ordinary taxpayers who worked many years paying into the system, before any other payments to 3rd world countries, "green" investors, Chinese bond holders, or anybody else.

Calling food stamps, EBT cards, housing, college tuition and the RAFT of corporate subsidies "entitlements" is what SICKENS ME TO THE CORE of my tired brain. But, I'll continue to challenge certain mistaken assertions, often using ALL CAPS, till I can no longer type.

IT'S REAL SIMPLE.
 
Danno said:
...due to the cushion of unemployment insurance (like SS, a paid-for benefit, not an "entitlement", I hate that word)
Click to expand...
Again, we PAID IN to Unemployment Insurance all of our working lives, we are ENTITLED, legally, to payments from that system, under the terms and conditions of it's application.

So, again, please analyze and re-focus your hatred - it should be toward the GOVERNMENT that is abusing the funds that we were FORCED to pay in all of our working lives.

The fact that the government will allow layabouts, drunks, illegals and any manner of sleaze to receive an absurd steady flow of OUR money, indefinitely, in order to buy votes, is where your hatred should be directed.

...and anyone asserting that the above is NOT happening, has a problem understanding the bloody obvious.
 
Last edited:
You should be sickened that the VAST majority of your tax dollar is spent blowing up poor people in foreign countries.

I have NO PROBLEM helping my fellow AMERICANS put food on their tables via social programs. It's not for me to determine if they DESERVE it or not.
 
You wouldn't notice a difference in your tax bill if all the "sleaze" were to be eliminated. I can guarantee you that.
 
grandpaul said:
Again, we PAID IN to Unemployment Insurance all of our working lives, we are ENTITLED, legally, to payments from that system, under the terms and conditions of it's application.

So, again, please analyze and re-focus your hatred - it should be toward the GOVERNMENT that is abusing the funds that we were FORCED to pay in all of our working lives.

The fact that the government will allow layabouts, drunks, illegals and any manner of sleaze to receive an absurd steady flow of OUR money, indefinitely, in order to buy votes, is where your hatred should be directed.
Click to expand...
SS is a ponzi scheme. If you are on SS and are older than 70 (or somewhere around there), you are probably getting paid more than you paid in, so you are on the Gov dole and part of the problem. Same goes for Medicare.

If you don't like it, tell the Gov to stop paying you any money over what you put in.
 
NPeteN said:
You should be sickened that the VAST majority of your tax dollar is spent blowing up poor people in foreign countries.

I have NO PROBLEM helping my fellow AMERICANS put food on their tables via social programs. It's not for me to determine if they DESERVE it or not.
Click to expand...
Generally US defense (or is it defence ;)) consumes half of all US federal expenditures.
 
NPeteN said:
You should be sickened that the VAST majority of your tax dollar is spent blowing up poor people in foreign countries.
Click to expand...
I AM sickened by it.

NPeteN said:
I have NO PROBLEM helping my fellow AMERICANS put food on their tables via social programs. It's not for me to determine if they DESERVE it or not.
Click to expand...
Fellow Americans, yes.

NON-CITIZENS, NO.
 
TomU said:
SS is a ponzi scheme. If you are on SS and are older than 70 (or somewhere around there), you are probably getting paid more than you paid in, so you are on the Gov dole and part of the problem. Same goes for Medicare.

If you don't like it, tell the Gov to stop paying you any money over what you put in.
Click to expand...
It was not intended to be a ponzi scheme, like it or not.

What it has become, due to MIS HANDLING of it, is another thing entirely. Once again, fault lies in those at the levers of power.

As to paying more than what I put in, THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN TO ME IN MY LIFETIME. Even if it did, it would be a PITTANCE compared to an ultra-conservative savings plan or any private retirement investment, so why should I NOT want a bit of interest on that investment? NEVER MIND, it's not going to happen. I paid in for OVER 50 YEARS, never once having a cushy job, and moat least 30 of those years with NO MEDICAL INSURANCE (yet another scam, made infinitely worse by the government worming it's way in). Likely I MIGHT get back 60-70% of what I paid in, if I live to be 90 (not likely at all, judged by the life span of most of the men in our family).
 
TomU said:
Generally US defense (or is it defence) consumes half of all US federal expenditures.
Click to expand...
Yep, quite lopsided, and I am not a proponent of that proportion. It is just the FASTEST way the government siphons off our life's blood. There is just too much money and power in the Military Industrial Complex to ever stop it now, barring a total collapse of the government, which I am not advocating...

Think of it - WHO takes over in the event of a government collapse?

YOU GUESSED IT! - The Military Industrial Complex. The IRS has no guns, the military has nuclear task forces, airborne bomber squadrons, and legions of "door-to-door" tax-collectors...

(this thread is getting spooky)
 
There are a lot of forces at work here. The biggest and the most obvious, to me, is the decline in population brought about by the aging Boomer population. Let's face it, these people worked, saved (for the most part) invested and are now retiring or dying out of the workforce. Companies used to depend on this pool of well trained and in some cases highly skilled individuals to fill the vacancies left by the boom/bust cycles. COVID only accelerated an already growing problem. Not only did COVID kill Boomers, it crippled many younger individuals. We have two really good techs at work that can no longer work due to lung issues. The Internet has changed the way commerce is performed from the B to B relationships to point of sale. It is a whole new world out there. And speaking of governments they are the slowest to recognize and the last to implement new technologies. Their policies and their fixes are based firmly in an economy that doesn't exist anymore. Eric Weinstein says that the myth of continued growth in the economy has driven our most basic institutions to play funny games to keep the illusion alive. A shrinking population and a service based rather than a manufacturing based economy adds credence to this. In short the old Post WWII world is passing away and is already gone. All that remains is to ride the dragon and see where we end up.
 
Since there seems to be no governor on political opinions here, I'll give mine.

Any argument for a minimum wage is an argument from ignorance of simple economics.
Minimum wages are demonstrably harmful to minorities and youth, who would willingly work for less.
A business has to be profitable to remain solvent. Duh. But any of those who are not operating a business and who espouse a minimum wage have no idea how many businesses are marginal and would simply close, or have closed, based on a minimum wage requirement. If you had any idea how many business owners take home less money than their employees, you'd be astonished and hopefully a bit ashamed. So, feeding into the 'minimum/living wage' argument is nothing more than an argument for larger, more profitable corporations; and it seems it's the same people who vigorously argue against exactly that corporate control of commerce. If you can't reconcile those two concepts, check your premises.
 
franko said:
In the fall of 74 a forge shop posted a help wanted ad on the board at my high school (it was a trade school for those that knew they were not collage bound). Machinist student wanted for part time work. I applied and got the job at sixteen years old. The work consisted of running die head threading machines, tracer lathes, multiple spindle drill presses, manual machining on lathes and work in the saw shop running cold cut and power hack saws. By state law. I forbidden to work in the forge area of the shop.
I started at $3 an hour working 5 hours after school and sometimes 5 hours on Saturday.
Four nickle raises in a years time. Health insurance included for part workers.
The situation at home wasn't good. I asked for permission to move out. He said you would never make it.
I had run the numbers before hand. We sat down ran the numbers. He asked question, I was ready. Rent, food, car insurance all that could be thought of. Keep in mind I had no intention of dropping out of school, I wanted an apprenticeship.
Money was left over after all cost were tallied. I was told no anyway.
The point of my post is, if almost fifty years ago a seventeen year old kid can earn enough to buy his own used car, rent a one bedroom apartment and just plain out take care of himself on a part time job, what has gone wrong today that both parents need to work to barely make ends meet.
Click to expand...
Let's see...
Local 1BR rent, $1700
Auto insurance, young; $150
Gas, $200
Food, $300
Utilities, $200
= $30,600 net
x 1.3 for gross-taxes = $39,780
x 2080 hours/year = $19.13/hr
Doesn't sound like it's impossible to me, since the immigrant labor locally is getting ~$25/hr for yard maintenance. I live in a pretty high rent area, too. If you have a working roommate, your hourly is ~$10/hr which is bested locally by every waitstaff of every restaurant.

Back when my rent was $350/month, I lived with cockroaches, never moved my car and rode bicycle 20 miles a day to work and back, owned no TV nor cell phone. I worked the local marina fixing people's toilet problems in boats. I took a job at the local H-D dealership at $16/hr because I was certified- and they at that time paid the washer/porter $9/hr. That was 1993.
If your parents don't hate you, and you find a job close enough to home to walk or bike, subtract $1900/month. Maybe subtract the food and insurance, also. And utilities. Instead of playing PS3 in the basement, have a second job. Stop crying about 'Boomers' not giving you your inheritance before they're gone, or spending their own money on themselves.
See where this is going? When did it become rational and politically correct to *demand* that you be able to live at age 20 to a standard we old ones didn't get until well into our 40's? I bought my house in 2005 and paid it off in 2020. It isn't hard, it's called 'investment'.
This is all the absence of simple arithmetic coupled with a high time preference.
 
grandpaul said:
Again, we PAID IN to Unemployment Insurance all of our working lives, we are ENTITLED, legally, to payments from that system, under the terms and conditions of it's application.

So, again, please analyze and re-focus your hatred - it should be toward the GOVERNMENT that is abusing the funds that we were FORCED to pay in all of our working lives.

The fact that the government will allow layabouts, drunks, illegals and any manner of sleaze to receive an absurd steady flow of OUR money, indefinitely, in order to buy votes, is where your hatred should be directed.

...and anyone asserting that the above is NOT happening, has a problem understanding the bloody obvious.
Click to expand...
Please don't preach to me or anyone else about hatred. I remember the post where you spilled your philosophical guts and said that was all you were going to say about the matter. Your hatred of all those you think are getting over at the bottom does not even begin to shadow the hatred that should be felt for all the money-grubbing bastards at the top who have sucked all the air out of the economy for the last 40 years. Get over your hatred of illegals, pregnant single women, and the downtrodden who are only symptoms of the real problem, ignorant haters like yourself who aren't cognizant enough to see what's really going on.

You didn't pay jack shite into unemployment, it's paid for by employers. And they're charged according to who draws. Get your facts straight. And every money-grubbing politician in every state has played with Social Security Funds. Calling SS and Medicare Entitlements is just right-wing spin to make dumbasses think the poor are stealing all the tax revenue. It's like saying my bank account is an entitlement, BS. It's my money, I put it there and I'm not "entitled" to anything other than what's mine already.
 
Lack of civility is very unbecoming, and EXTREMELY unconvincing.

"hatred of pregnant single women"???? I don't think so, Tim...

My employers could have paid ME the money they were forced to pay in to unemployment ponzi, so YES, I paid it in (indirectly).

I don't "hate" illegals. I HATE our government giving them money for free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top