08-29-2007, 12:22 AM
That sounds a little inspecific. I know plenty of places where friends from elementary school are already buying their first homes... without a college education (at 22, 23, and 24). There are also plenty of places where you don't need to make tons of money to get by. Until recently my fresh out of college girlfriend was making more than her mom (who raised two kids and owns a home and property). Can you get by on $6/hr in NOVA? No - but well, that's a personal problem.
What do folks expect when they talk about the "injustices" of people making so little money (FYI - this is also a typical Union tactic used to raise wages for union members at the expense of everybody else and keep non union labor out of the market... cheated non union folks out of competition. How fair is that)? A lot of people don't realize that wages ARE productivity - so what do people expect? Should these low wage earners be compensated for productivtiy that they never acheived? Why should everybody else pay for people that aren't making what they're being handed? Consider the repurcussions - if you fill in the gap between wages earned and what it takes to "get by" (and btw, who decides what it takes? What's the line? Sounds pretty obnoxiously philosophical). People lose incentive to EARN the difference if they're just handed it. Don't believe me? Unemployment programs are a perfect example - programs that make it easy for unemployed workers to just collect a check always have more "clients" than those that place time limits on unemployment collections and force people to find jobs [I can give examples of this, but it's easier on everybody to take my word for it].
But really - justify GIVING people money that they aren't earning.
What do folks expect when they talk about the "injustices" of people making so little money (FYI - this is also a typical Union tactic used to raise wages for union members at the expense of everybody else and keep non union labor out of the market... cheated non union folks out of competition. How fair is that)? A lot of people don't realize that wages ARE productivity - so what do people expect? Should these low wage earners be compensated for productivtiy that they never acheived? Why should everybody else pay for people that aren't making what they're being handed? Consider the repurcussions - if you fill in the gap between wages earned and what it takes to "get by" (and btw, who decides what it takes? What's the line? Sounds pretty obnoxiously philosophical). People lose incentive to EARN the difference if they're just handed it. Don't believe me? Unemployment programs are a perfect example - programs that make it easy for unemployed workers to just collect a check always have more "clients" than those that place time limits on unemployment collections and force people to find jobs [I can give examples of this, but it's easier on everybody to take my word for it].
But really - justify GIVING people money that they aren't earning.
When it comes to Ryan Jenkins, the story ends with me putting him in the wall.
2009 Speed Triple | 2006 DR-Z400SM | 1999 CBR600F4 | 1998 Jeep Cherokee
-Ginger
2009 Speed Triple | 2006 DR-Z400SM | 1999 CBR600F4 | 1998 Jeep Cherokee
-Ginger