Harold and Susan Vordos wrote:

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Harold and Susan Vordos
says...

Harold, please inform me about exactly which jobs are providing
that elusive "unearned money." I've been searching for those
for years. All the stories I hear along these lines seem to indicate
that shortly after the trainee thinks he has one, he gets fired
out the door.

Jim

Not referring to just machinists, Jim. Workpeople in general. Do
you
feel a kid in high school, lacking skills of any kind, is worth over $7
hr
to serve burgers? I don't.

Do you think a UPS driver is worth $28 hr? I don't.

That's free market economics Harold. If they could pay less, they would.

Seems like UPS has decided that if they pay seven bucks an hour, they
get the druggie crowd who shows up at work whenever they feel like it.
Or if not, then they don't.

Short of imposing wage caps I don't think there's much you can do.

It is becoming self leveling, thanks to the vast majority of jobs being
exported to other countries. That's one of the *benefits* of unearned
wages. You do recall the closing of many manufacturing plants, I'm sure.
Your job goes south because it can be accomplished elsewhere for a more
reasonable price. Lucky for some folks, their job can't be exported, but
then corporations aren't yet finished coming up with creative ways to cut
costs, are they?


It doesn't matter what *you* personally think a living wage is. The
free market does that for the employer. Pay less, and your business
suffers because you either get the loyal idiots that some have complained
about, or the geniuses who all seem to have some sort of wing down over
one issue of another.

You bet UPS drivers are worth that much. But not because I say so.

Because UPS HAS to pay that much to run their business.

From that I gather you'd like me to believe that such a business seeks those
that will accept the highest of wages, secure in the knowledge that when you
spend enough money, you get the best employees? Why don't they start
paying a quarter million bucks a year, then they can attract people like
Shrub? Sorry, Jim, I don't buy it. Sounds more like union propaganda
than anything.

Unless workers come to terms with being paid a reasonable wage, things as we
know them will collapse, it's only a matter of when. When us common folks
that make little or no money (retired) can't afford to pay their wages, we
quit using their services. The well dries up. I already refuse to pay
for soft drinks at eating establishments. I'm not really interested in
buying a 15 cent drink for a paltry sum of $1.25 (or more). I drink water,
and my pocket and body are all the better for the decision. No, I don't
miss it, and I do it even if the soft drink is included in my order. I've
learned to like it. Interestingly, instead of adding a few cents to the
register for time spent by the server, they now get nothing. The beginning
of the well drying up.

The problem with paying a "living wage" regardless of qualifications is that
young people coming up that have no drive won't lift a finger to better
themselves, trusting gov to provide. Somehow we have to break that
cycle----to encourage young people to become self reliant. Paying them
what, to them, may appear to be a fairly large amount of money hourly isn't
helping. I can see a kid thinking "hey, if I don't get an education or
learn a trade, I'll be stuck in that damned $3/hr. job the rest of my life".
Maybe I'm wrong, but it worked for me. I don't know anyone that was any
lazier than I was as a kid, yet I had the drive to learn a trade. I knew
for sure I didn't want to wash dishes in a cafe for the rest of my life
(which is how I paid for my little 109 Craftsman lathe). No way you'd have
convinced me I should have gone to college, though. My hat's off to those
that have.

Harold

You seem to have no clue how the economy works. I don't claim to be an
expert, but the wages have always been self leveling in any given area
and are linked to inflation.

If you raise the minimum wage, this triggers inflation which raises the
cost of goods, raises other wages that are above the minimum and things
reach the same balance point as before where the same work will buy you
the same goods, only the dollar amounts have changed.

The wages for any particular job in any particular area are directly
linked to the number of people in that area that are able to do the job,
the cost of housing and goods in that area and the collective minimum
quality of life standards that the people who are able to do the job are
willing to live with.

If workers in an are collectively decide that cleaning toilets is a
lousy job and they aren't willing to do it unless it provides them with
a higher quality of life standard then the wages for toilet cleaning
will increase. Only when it is possible to import a steady stream of
cheap labor or export the job can the wages be held down. If a steady
supply of cheap labor can not be brought in then the wages will rise
since once you bring that cheap labor into the area it is only a matter
of time before they also demand better pay.

There is indeed a problem with work ethic in the US today, but it has
little to do with "unearned money". In any true free market economy,
wages will always be driven to a level that will sustain a reasonable
quality of life. When the free market economy in one area is linked to
economies in vastly different areas (ex. India) and to economies that
are not free markets (ex. China) then the system breaks down.

Pete C.