A comparison of us yearly earnings over 6 decades by age and sex

[Chum]

12 hours ago, The Nehor said:

A full-time job that does not pay a living wage has no right to exist. Taking a person’s full time labor and not giving them enough to live on is fundamentally wrong. The company trying to pay such a wage should be shut out of the market to make way for a company that can pay a living wage.

I'd refine to say it's unethical to pay shareholder dividends and exec bonuses while denying a living wage to the rank and file.

[Chum]

Sometime we should have a discussion about the Church's support of purchased ethics.  That is, Church members are bound to obey, honor, and sustain laws that are written by lobbyists and passed in response to major campaign donations.

In short, the 12th Article of Faith requires us obey, honor and sustain overt corruption.  I wish it didn't.

[poptart]

11 hours ago, Chum said:

Sometime we should have a discussion about the Church's support of purchased ethics.  That is, Church members are bound to obey, honor, and sustain laws that are written by lobbyists and passed in response to major campaign donations.

In short, the 12th Article of Faith requires us obey, honor and sustain overt corruption.  I wish it didn't.

Mind explaining that a bit more?

[poptart]

18 hours ago, Chum said:

Lenders are mandated to discharge federal student loans, after the borrower's death. Otherwise, they would absolutely file a claim against the estate - which lenders do, in the case of private student loans.

This is one reason why you see reddits on people going overseas to teach English and not come back.  I doubt my generation will see much of social Security or Medicare.  We were handed a raw deal, those of us not born to WASP privilege just won't see the benefits previous generations did.  Religion really doesn't function like it used to hence why there's a growing number of people who go abroad if they can.  As China grows I see them offering a nice counterpoint to the facta laws that make banking for us citizens abroad tricky unless they're savvy.  I do wonder how all this will work out as a lot of millenials have no estate to go after and not all of them had parents act as cosigners.   My guess is in the end it'll be the us taxpayer, especially families who get stuck with the tab.  As those of you with children know, you are at much more of a risk for these things as children can limit your mobility. 

 

[Chum]

1 hour ago, poptart said:

Mind explaining that a bit more?

I think it's fairly complete on it's own. Is there a part you want clarified?

Edited May 30, 2021 by Chum

[poptart]

11 minutes ago, Chum said:

I think it's fairly complete on it's own. Is there a part you like clarified?

The sustain overt corruption part.  Religious politics have always fascinated me.  How would Lobbiests have sway over lds faithful?  Is this where membership councils could possibly come on to keep the rank and file in line? 

[Chum]

2 hours ago, poptart said:

The sustain overt corruption part.  Religious politics have always fascinated me.  How would Lobbiests have sway over lds faithful?  Is this where membership councils could possibly come on to keep the rank and file in line? 

Okay so I'm not implying any direct connection between lobbyists and Church members.

My complaint stems from the 12th Article of Faith: “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.”  It's that last part about obeying, honoring and sustaining laws. My challenge is the obligation for me to obey, honor and sustain a corrupt law - one that exists entirely via acts of corruption.

One unambiguous type of corrupt law is one that was written by industry representatives and submitted / voted into law as a response to major campaign donations and other sorts of political graft. I am unhappy that I am obligated to obey, honor and sustain a product of corruption.

[poptart]

42 minutes ago, Chum said:

Okay so I'm not implying any direct connection between lobbyists and Church members.

My complaint stems from the 12th Article of Faith: “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.”  It's that last part about obeying, honoring and sustaining laws. My challenge is the obligation for me to obey, honor and sustain a corrupt law - one that exists entirely via acts of corruption.

One unambiguous type of corrupt law is one that was written by industry representatives and submitted / voted into law as a response to major campaign donations and other sorts of political graft. I am unhappy that I am obligated to obey, honor and sustain a product of corruption.

My Apologies, I misread,  

I don't see why there would be an issue disobeying an unjust law, at least that's how I read it.  You may appreciate this, I found it interesting.    

Aquinas on Justifying Civil Disobedience (lawteacher.net)

[Chum]

20 minutes ago, poptart said:

My Apologies, I misread,  

I don't see why there would be an issue disobeying an unjust law, at least that's how I read it.  You may appreciate this, I found it interesting.    

Aquinas on Justifying Civil Disobedience (lawteacher.net)

I dig StTA. My K-8 was named after him.

[longview]

On 5/29/2021 at 9:58 AM, The Nehor said:

A full-time job that does not pay a living wage has no right to exist. Taking a person’s full time labor and not giving them enough to live on is fundamentally wrong. The company trying to pay such a wage should be shut out of the market to make way for a company that can pay a living wage.

You remain oblivious to the needs of new workers and young people and those needing a temp job (while transitioning between jobs).  It cost businesses a lot more to train these people.

Businesses are required to pay matching taxes on each employee that the employees are paying on their salaries.  The overhead is tremendous.  It is fundamentally wrong to force businesses to operate in a very restricted  band between inflated expenses and what customers are willing to spend.  This is why we are seeing greater numbers of automated kiosks.

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, longview said:

You remain oblivious to the needs of new workers and young people and those needing a temp job (while transitioning between jobs).  It cost businesses a lot more to train these people.

Businesses are required to pay matching taxes on each employee that the employees are paying on their salaries.  The overhead is tremendous.  It is fundamentally wrong to force businesses to operate in a very restricted  band between inflated expenses and what customers are willing to spend.  This is why we are seeing greater numbers of automated kiosks.

I know far too many full time workers who have worked those "temp job" positions for years and barely survive. If only teenagers were working for money that doesn't support a basic lifestyle there would not be a problem. Do you really think they would complain in any case about getting paid more for those temp jobs?

It is fundamentally wrong for businesses to take a person's labor and not give them enough to live on. Those poor businesses you are concerned about that cannot do it need to die.

[longview]

7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I know far too many full time workers who have worked those "temp job" positions for years and barely survive. If only teenagers were working for money that doesn't support a basic lifestyle there would not be a problem. Do you really think they would complain in any case about getting paid more for those temp jobs?

It is fundamentally wrong for businesses to take a person's labor and not give them enough to live on. Those poor businesses you are concerned about that cannot do it need to die.

Yet you do not explain why the temp workers are stuck in those jobs.  Sure there are lots of reasons.  But this is a free country.  Maybe there are steps they need to take in order for them to find an option more to their liking.  It is not like a gun was put to their heads to keep them there.  If worse comes to worse, they can start a standalone side business.

I never cease to be amazed at stories of immigrants (legally documented and not content to go immediately on welfare).  Consider the Korean immigrants on the west coast.  Some of them will go way out into the country to buy produce "dirt" cheap (pun intended) and come back into the city to sell from street corners.  They start getting "traction" and save enough to buy a pickup truck which greatly multiplies their productivity.  Then they might find a grocer that is willing to rent a corner of the store where the immigrant can sell "locally grown fresh produce" thus having a stable location and greatly improve their living standards.  Then comes the magical day when they can afford to lease or own their own grocery store!  [It is truly saddening to read of the enmity between the inner city blacks against the immigrant store owners.  Why?  Because blacks are on the dole but immigrants are fiercely self reliant?]

Your last paragraph makes it sound like you believe it is a zero sum game, that the economic pie is a fixed size, that business start ups is a "cut and dried" process.  No, not by a long shot.  Many business fail each year.  There is a great deal of complexity and tremendous risks.  Lots of moving parts.  The biggest obstacle is government with its onerous regulations and fees and incredible burdens.  It is disgusting to read of many family farms being forced to "sell out" just because one of the principals passed away and the "inheritance" are to be taxed (and very heavily too).

Edited May 31, 2021 by longview