I don't think there's too many people trying to raise a family with a job at McDonalds. It's usually the second, or third job in a household. Everyone is calling for these drivers to earn so little, but let a bus full of workers crash, and burn and everyone will want to know why such poor drivers were hired.
There's not too many people trying to raise a family with a job at McDonalds because the pay is too low. But if the pay were to increase so you can, then you can forget about households that depends on a McDonald's job as a second or third income. And forget about teens getting any job experience during the summer or part time working for McDonald's. As the high turnover of those jobs there will no longer exist.
It is utter nonsense to think that if businesses don't pay a living wage then there would no longer be people willing to do these jobs. Many of the people that do these jobs aren't trying to raise a family on that income. It could be a second or third income in the household. Or it's part time while going to school and still living at home. Or a summer job for a teen. Or it's supplementing a SS income for someone that is retired. Or some one that needs the job experience while learning the skills to get a better paying job. The only time it becomes a problem with filling any of these jobs is if a union gets control, goes on strike and starts intimidating everyone that wants to work there, without joining the union.
I don't know about the earn so little. A SF Muni driver starts out at about $19.00 /hr and tops off at about $30/hr. (Under present contract.) And they are considered highly paid. Driving a bus through the city all day long and dealing with its fares (and traffic) has got to be 10X harder than driving a tech bus full of well behaved tech workers, through the city for maybe only a couple of hours each day. (I have never heard of any of these tech workers getting their iPhone stolen by another passenger on the bus.) So $20 to $25/hr seems about right for these tech bus drivers. Just because a lot of their passengers are making 6 figures doesn't mean they deserve more pay than a SF muni driver. Of course, these tech bus drivers won't get the overtime to boost their annual income, sometimes into the 6 figures, like SF muni drivers can. And there's no way that they going to come close to matching the benefits of a public employee. But no one is stopping them from applying for a SF Muni job. They will be more qualify than most that applies. And I'm sure there will be no problem with finding some one to fill their old job when they get one.
Above that, if your job is not paying you enough, go find another one. Last time I checked, truck drivers are being offered $100K+ salaries. That sounds like a step up from bus driver doesn't it?
Oh really? Could you share those $100K+ truck driver postings you always see with us?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN
I had a feeling I'd never see anything about those theoretical job postings.
Not theoretical at all. But you're not working for some one driving a truck, you have to be the owner of the truck and thus you're running a business by hauling cargo for people or businesses that needs to move stuff over a long distance. And it's not just a truck but a semi tractor. And it's not an 8 hour a day job where you go home afterwards. It mostly will involve you crossing State lines with your haul, over several days or a week and living in your truck after a day of driving. You're actually more of a business owner than a truck driver. But it's advertised as $100,000 a year driving a truck. And driving a bus 8 hours a day won't even come close to qualifying you to own your own semi tractor and make $100,000 a year. Just because you already have a CDL.
IMO the plates staying with the owner makes much more sense. It eliminates the license plate turn over period. In NY, you're handed your plates upon registration of the vehicle.
In the meantime you just have some tiny piece of paper taped up in the lower-right of the windshield that proves your car is legal. Oddly I've never pulled over so they could verify, but knock on wood as I have a new car delivered to me this coming Tuesday.
IMO the plates staying with the owner makes much more sense. It eliminates the license plate turn over period. In NY, you're handed your plates upon registration of the vehicle.
I agree. That seems to make the most sense, especially if one has to wait up to 6 months for plates with a new car. Although I guess I can feel like Steve Jobs during that time.
Regrettably, both you and the other fellow have been fed pro-union propaganda and have never really delved into the facts for yourself.
This is a lengthy article, but one that must be read thoroughly to gain all of the relevant facts. Sorry, but the unions as heroes and modern myths surrounding labor are complete fabrications:
And there it is, what I love most about AI. I have been fed pro-union propaganda? No I haven't, any more than I have been fed anti-union propaganda. How you can write that when we've never met is one of the joys of AI. There is balance in everything and the rabid anti-union standpoint is as risible as the rabid pro-union.
Yes it is a lengthy article, thank you for pointing that out to me otherwise having read all the way through it I would have missed that completely.
And, the Mises Institute? Please, they are hardly going to produce a balanced viewpoint now are they?
Balance, there are two sides to every story and some of the posts to this thread have yet to discover that.
And how much is this really going to help these drivers once they realize they are going to have to pay $4/hr in Union dues.
California as a whole, and the Bay Area especially need to look into why their cost of living is so high and fix that. You can't just keep giving raises to people so they make more money and expecting that to help. You need to fix the infrastructure and housing issues to bring those costs down to make those things more affordable.
Or people who can't make enough to live there need to realize it and move to a place where they can.
Finally, if $40,000 yr isn't enough for a family to live on THEN DON'T HAVE KIDS. Improve your skills and get a better paying job before you do.
This Republican notion that everyone can get an education, and make it is so wrong. Everyone can't be a doctor, a lawyer, a developer, or own a business. We need people to be policeman, fire fighters, garbage collectors, and bus drivers. Those people provide an essential service, and should earn a living wage.
SF is a small city that has been hit hard by gentrification. The new residents are willing to pay more in rent, and as are the businesses that cater to them. This causes long time residents, and businesses to get pushed out by their landlord. The higher cost of doing business gets passed on to the consumer. It's people that make the cost of living to sky rocket, so how do you suggest we remedy that?
First, the post you quoted doesn't say get an education. They aptly said "Improve your skills and get a better paying job". They also did not say (or imply) that only doctors, lawyers, or [software] developers are the only jobs that are better paying. You are correct however in saying everyone can't be one of those professions because they require a set of skills, an aptitude and competence for the tasks involved. As such, the supply pool for those labors is smaller and at the same time the demand for those skilled labors is high. Thus the value of the labor is higher.
In regards to needing police, fire fighters, garbage collectors, and bus drivers providing an "essential service"; that is irrelevant other than to say that the demand for those professions is less elastic. If the qualified individuals in the labor pool for police men & women decided that the wage they were earning was not worth the labor and risk incurred or does not equate to their value potential, and they were rational, they would leave that profession and enter another labor pool that was profitable for their labors. Thus if the wage for a police officer was too low, less people would be willing to work as a police officer and the quantity of available labor would be reduced. Assuming you are correct in noting the inelasticity of demand for these professions, the result would be that the wage would increase to such a wage that would increase the quantity of available labor to equal the quantity of labor demanded.
I would also argue that garbage collectors and bus drivers are not essential, rather they are a convenience. There are certainly many other options for transportation including the two feet (most of us) were born with. You could also take your garbage and or recyclables to the dump or recycling center yourself, however, that is not only inconvenient but also inefficient in denser populations. This doesn't mean that profession is essential, it exists because in higher density populations its more efficient than every person taking their waste to it's destination themselves and as such there is again a more inelastic demand for that service.
I'll leave you with a couple links to read from Mike Rowe. It bothers me when people like you make comments like yours that imply the only way to be successful is by going to college to major in biology, law, or software engineering and attribute that implication to a political party. While I don't always agree with Mr. Rowe, I do agree with his observations regarding American labor and would argue that he is fairly well qualified in this regard. As Mr. Rowe has pointed out, a wage gap is not the problem, our skills gap (and will gap) is.
First, the post you quoted doesn't say get an education. They aptly said "Improve your skills and get a better paying job". They also did not say (or imply) that only doctors, lawyers, or [software] developers are the only jobs that are better paying. You are correct however in saying everyone can't be one of those professions because they require a set of skills, an aptitude and competence for the tasks involved. As such, the supply pool for those labors is smaller and at the same time the demand for those skilled labors is high. Thus the value of the labor is higher.
In regards to needing police, fire fighters, garbage collectors, and bus drivers providing an "essential service"; that is irrelevant other than to say that the demand for those professions is less elastic. If the qualified individuals in the labor pool for police men & women decided that the wage they were earning was not worth the labor and risk incurred or does not equate to their value potential, and they were rational, they would leave that profession and enter another labor pool that was profitable for their labors. Thus if the wage for a police officer was too low, less people would be willing to work as a police officer and the quantity of available labor would be reduced. Assuming you are correct in noting the inelasticity of demand for these professions, the result would be that the wage would increase to such a wage that would increase the quantity of available labor to equal the quantity of labor demanded.
I would also argue that garbage collectors and bus drivers are not essential, rather they are a convenience. There are certainly many other options for transportation including the two feet (most of us) were born with. You could also take your garbage and or recyclables to the dump or recycling center yourself, however, that is not only inconvenient but also inefficient in denser populations. This doesn't mean that profession is essential, it exists because in higher density populations its more efficient than every person taking their waste to it's destination themselves and as such there is again a more inelastic demand for that service.
I'll leave you with a couple links to read from Mike Rowe. It bothers me when people like you make comments like yours that imply the only way to be successful is by going to college to major in biology, law, or software engineering and attribute that implication to a political party. While I don't always agree with Mr. Rowe, I do agree with his observations regarding American labor and would argue that he is fairly well qualified in this regard. As Mr. Rowe has pointed out, a wage gap is not the problem, our skills gap (and will gap) is.
You obviously missed my point, and Mike Rowe is totally out of touch with reality since he doesn't comprehend the meaning of 'work smart not hard'. Even if everyone had skill set, the aptitude and the competence to by a doctor, or lawyer, we all still cannot be doctors and lawyers. Everybody cannot be successful, in order to be a Chief there needs to be Indians.
These tech people have flooded an area, and have directly caused the cost of living to go up for everyone, and while tech workers with their higher salaries can afford it a long time resident has found his wages no longer goes as far as it used to, so that person should get a wage increase to reflect the cost of living increase.
And there it is, what I love most about AI. I have been fed pro-union propaganda? No I haven't, any more than I have been fed anti-union propaganda. How you can write that when we've never met is one of the joys of AI. There is balance in everything and the rabid anti-union standpoint is as risible as the rabid pro-union.
Yes it is a lengthy article, thank you for pointing that out to me otherwise having read all the way through it I would have missed that completely.
And, the Mises Institute? Please, they are hardly going to produce a balanced viewpoint now are they?
Balance, there are two sides to every story and some of the posts to this thread have yet to discover that.
Thanks for you reply.
It doesn't surprise me that you've skirted entirely the facts presented in the linked article. The author, Tom Woods, is a well known American economics historian and is well versed on these matters. You've chosen to sink to personal attacks instead of deal with the issues regarding the historical role of unions in America.
Nobody is "self-made."
As arrogant as Steve jobs could often be, I never heard of him claiming to be "self-made." I imagine he would have found The notion silly. Whenever he spoke of his success he cited the influence of others, from his parents, to his colleagues, to helpful stalwarts of silicon Valley. He pursued his vision, but he clearly appreciated all the help he got along the way.
You're not describing the Steve Jobs I'm familiar with. He seldom gave anyone credit (despite the public gushing over Jony Ive) and if someone were to insist otherwise I can almost guarantee he would've told them to go ---- themselves in no uncertain terms.
As arrogant as Steve jobs could often be, I never heard of him claiming to be "self-made." I imagine he would have found The notion silly. Whenever he spoke of his success he cited the influence of others, from his parents, to his colleagues, to helpful stalwarts of silicon Valley. He pursued his vision, but he clearly appreciated all the help he got along the way.
You're not describing the Steve Jobs I'm familiar with. He seldom gave anyone credit and if someone were to insist otherwise I can almost guarantee he would've told them to go ---- themselves in no uncertain terms.
You're not describing the Steve Jobs I'm familiar with.
The one I remember, at the big keynotes, regularly praised the whole Apple team that worked on a project.
You're not describing the Steve Jobs I'm familiar with.
The one I remember, at the big keynotes, regularly praised the whole Apple team that worked on a project.
I'll note I didn't know him personally, however there is no shortage of behind the scenes stories from people who personally knew him. Naturally, I was referring to the behind the scenes stories. Also, none should interpret these as condemnations of Jobs. He was who he was and he was unapologetic about that.
It doesn't surprise me that you've skirted entirely the facts presented in the linked article. The author, Tom Woods, is a well known American economics historian and is well versed on these matters. You've chosen to sink to personal attacks instead of deal with the issues regarding the historical role of unions in America.
I haven't skirted anything or sunk to personal attacks. There are two sides to every story and balance is everything. Mises as a free market advocate will hardly publish balanced views. I am an advocate of free markets. Thank you again for your reply.
Turns out Apple is indeed making a car. And a ship. And an airplane:
[quote]ahrzeuge; Apparate zur Beförderung auf dem Lande, in der Luft oder auf dem Wasser; elektronische Hardwarekomponenten für Kraftfahrzeuge, Eisenbahnwaggons und Lokomotiven, Schiffe und Flugzeuge; Diebstahlsicherungen; Diebstahlwarngeräte für Fahrzeuge; Fahrräder; Golfkarren; Rollstühle; Luftpumpen; Motorräder; Aftermarket-Ersatzteile (after-market parts) und -Zubehör für die vorgenannten Waren.[/quote]
Awesome! The folks who work for these places are (by and large) always pushing for wage equality and support politicians who are bought by the unions. It will be good that they experience some of the pain. Quality of service will not improve with the Teamsters.
Unions did goon in the past, but now they're huge parasites sucking up paychecks. Spending people's money on politicians. So greedy, they want more and more and more until they drive a business out of businesses or out of this country like so many others. These are bus drivers. It's a non skill job. I mean come on. I know how to drive. I've driven some very large Motor homes which is even harder. Less windows to see out of. I think they already get paid to much. If that's what they want, we'll they can go and price themselves right out of the market. Going Union is a bad move these days. This is California, so what's another lost business. See how things are in a couple years if they're still around.
Unions did goon in the past, but now they're huge parasites sucking up paychecks. Spending people's money on politicians. So greedy, they want more and more and more until they drive a business out of businesses or out of this country like so many others. These are bus drivers. It's a non skill job. I mean come on. I know how to drive. I've driven some very large Motor homes which is even harder. Less windows to see out of. I think they already get paid to much. If that's what they want, we'll they can go and price themselves right out of the market. Going Union is a bad move these days. This is California, so what's another lost business. See how things are in a couple years if they're still around.
Of course since greedy executives never put a company out of business.
Comments
I don't think there's too many people trying to raise a family with a job at McDonalds. It's usually the second, or third job in a household. Everyone is calling for these drivers to earn so little, but let a bus full of workers crash, and burn and everyone will want to know why such poor drivers were hired.
There's not too many people trying to raise a family with a job at McDonalds because the pay is too low. But if the pay were to increase so you can, then you can forget about households that depends on a McDonald's job as a second or third income. And forget about teens getting any job experience during the summer or part time working for McDonald's. As the high turnover of those jobs there will no longer exist.
It is utter nonsense to think that if businesses don't pay a living wage then there would no longer be people willing to do these jobs. Many of the people that do these jobs aren't trying to raise a family on that income. It could be a second or third income in the household. Or it's part time while going to school and still living at home. Or a summer job for a teen. Or it's supplementing a SS income for someone that is retired. Or some one that needs the job experience while learning the skills to get a better paying job. The only time it becomes a problem with filling any of these jobs is if a union gets control, goes on strike and starts intimidating everyone that wants to work there, without joining the union.
I don't know about the earn so little. A SF Muni driver starts out at about $19.00 /hr and tops off at about $30/hr. (Under present contract.) And they are considered highly paid. Driving a bus through the city all day long and dealing with its fares (and traffic) has got to be 10X harder than driving a tech bus full of well behaved tech workers, through the city for maybe only a couple of hours each day. (I have never heard of any of these tech workers getting their iPhone stolen by another passenger on the bus.) So $20 to $25/hr seems about right for these tech bus drivers. Just because a lot of their passengers are making 6 figures doesn't mean they deserve more pay than a SF muni driver. Of course, these tech bus drivers won't get the overtime to boost their annual income, sometimes into the 6 figures, like SF muni drivers can. And there's no way that they going to come close to matching the benefits of a public employee. But no one is stopping them from applying for a SF Muni job. They will be more qualify than most that applies. And I'm sure there will be no problem with finding some one to fill their old job when they get one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN
Quote:
Above that, if your job is not paying you enough, go find another one. Last time I checked, truck drivers are being offered $100K+ salaries. That sounds like a step up from bus driver doesn't it?
Oh really? Could you share those $100K+ truck driver postings you always see with us?
Quote:
I had a feeling I'd never see anything about those theoretical job postings.
Not theoretical at all. But you're not working for some one driving a truck, you have to be the owner of the truck and thus you're running a business by hauling cargo for people or businesses that needs to move stuff over a long distance. And it's not just a truck but a semi tractor. And it's not an 8 hour a day job where you go home afterwards. It mostly will involve you crossing State lines with your haul, over several days or a week and living in your truck after a day of driving. You're actually more of a business owner than a truck driver. But it's advertised as $100,000 a year driving a truck. And driving a bus 8 hours a day won't even come close to qualifying you to own your own semi tractor and make $100,000 a year. Just because you already have a CDL.
IMO the plates staying with the owner makes much more sense. It eliminates the license plate turn over period. In NY, you're handed your plates upon registration of the vehicle.
I got your new plates right here.
Based on my experience there a high number of McDonald's employees that are struggling to raise a family.
I agree. That seems to make the most sense, especially if one has to wait up to 6 months for plates with a new car. Although I guess I can feel like Steve Jobs during that time.
Regrettably, both you and the other fellow have been fed pro-union propaganda and have never really delved into the facts for yourself.
This is a lengthy article, but one that must be read thoroughly to gain all of the relevant facts. Sorry, but the unions as heroes and modern myths surrounding labor are complete fabrications:
http://mises.org/library/forgotten-facts-american-labor-history
And there it is, what I love most about AI. I have been fed pro-union propaganda? No I haven't, any more than I have been fed anti-union propaganda. How you can write that when we've never met is one of the joys of AI. There is balance in everything and the rabid anti-union standpoint is as risible as the rabid pro-union.
Yes it is a lengthy article, thank you for pointing that out to me otherwise having read all the way through it I would have missed that completely.
And, the Mises Institute? Please, they are hardly going to produce a balanced viewpoint now are they?
Balance, there are two sides to every story and some of the posts to this thread have yet to discover that.
Thanks for you reply.
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Quote:
And how much is this really going to help these drivers once they realize they are going to have to pay $4/hr in Union dues.
California as a whole, and the Bay Area especially need to look into why their cost of living is so high and fix that. You can't just keep giving raises to people so they make more money and expecting that to help. You need to fix the infrastructure and housing issues to bring those costs down to make those things more affordable.
Or people who can't make enough to live there need to realize it and move to a place where they can.
Finally, if $40,000 yr isn't enough for a family to live on THEN DON'T HAVE KIDS. Improve your skills and get a better paying job before you do.
SF is a small city that has been hit hard by gentrification. The new residents are willing to pay more in rent, and as are the businesses that cater to them. This causes long time residents, and businesses to get pushed out by their landlord. The higher cost of doing business gets passed on to the consumer. It's people that make the cost of living to sky rocket, so how do you suggest we remedy that?
First, the post you quoted doesn't say get an education. They aptly said "Improve your skills and get a better paying job". They also did not say (or imply) that only doctors, lawyers, or [software] developers are the only jobs that are better paying. You are correct however in saying everyone can't be one of those professions because they require a set of skills, an aptitude and competence for the tasks involved. As such, the supply pool for those labors is smaller and at the same time the demand for those skilled labors is high. Thus the value of the labor is higher.
In regards to needing police, fire fighters, garbage collectors, and bus drivers providing an "essential service"; that is irrelevant other than to say that the demand for those professions is less elastic. If the qualified individuals in the labor pool for police men & women decided that the wage they were earning was not worth the labor and risk incurred or does not equate to their value potential, and they were rational, they would leave that profession and enter another labor pool that was profitable for their labors. Thus if the wage for a police officer was too low, less people would be willing to work as a police officer and the quantity of available labor would be reduced. Assuming you are correct in noting the inelasticity of demand for these professions, the result would be that the wage would increase to such a wage that would increase the quantity of available labor to equal the quantity of labor demanded.
I would also argue that garbage collectors and bus drivers are not essential, rather they are a convenience. There are certainly many other options for transportation including the two feet (most of us) were born with. You could also take your garbage and or recyclables to the dump or recycling center yourself, however, that is not only inconvenient but also inefficient in denser populations. This doesn't mean that profession is essential, it exists because in higher density populations its more efficient than every person taking their waste to it's destination themselves and as such there is again a more inelastic demand for that service.
I'll leave you with a couple links to read from Mike Rowe. It bothers me when people like you make comments like yours that imply the only way to be successful is by going to college to major in biology, law, or software engineering and attribute that implication to a political party. While I don't always agree with Mr. Rowe, I do agree with his observations regarding American labor and would argue that he is fairly well qualified in this regard. As Mr. Rowe has pointed out, a wage gap is not the problem, our skills gap (and will gap) is.
Mike Rowe on Minimum Wage
Mike Rowe on Requiring a College Degree for Elected Officials
Mike Rowe on Hard Work
and finally
Mike Rowe's Testimony before House Committee on Natural Resources
-PopinFRESH
You obviously missed my point, and Mike Rowe is totally out of touch with reality since he doesn't comprehend the meaning of 'work smart not hard'. Even if everyone had skill set, the aptitude and the competence to by a doctor, or lawyer, we all still cannot be doctors and lawyers. Everybody cannot be successful, in order to be a Chief there needs to be Indians.
These tech people have flooded an area, and have directly caused the cost of living to go up for everyone, and while tech workers with their higher salaries can afford it a long time resident has found his wages no longer goes as far as it used to, so that person should get a wage increase to reflect the cost of living increase.
It doesn't surprise me that you've skirted entirely the facts presented in the linked article. The author, Tom Woods, is a well known American economics historian and is well versed on these matters. You've chosen to sink to personal attacks instead of deal with the issues regarding the historical role of unions in America.
You're not describing the Steve Jobs I'm familiar with. He seldom gave anyone credit (despite the public gushing over Jony Ive) and if someone were to insist otherwise I can almost guarantee he would've told them to go ---- themselves in no uncertain terms.
Nobody is "self-made."
As arrogant as Steve jobs could often be, I never heard of him claiming to be "self-made." I imagine he would have found The notion silly. Whenever he spoke of his success he cited the influence of others, from his parents, to his colleagues, to helpful stalwarts of silicon Valley. He pursued his vision, but he clearly appreciated all the help he got along the way.
You're not describing the Steve Jobs I'm familiar with. He seldom gave anyone credit and if someone were to insist otherwise I can almost guarantee he would've told them to go ---- themselves in no uncertain terms.
You're not describing the Steve Jobs I'm familiar with.
The one I remember, at the big keynotes, regularly praised the whole Apple team that worked on a project.
I'll note I didn't know him personally, however there is no shortage of behind the scenes stories from people who personally knew him. Naturally, I was referring to the behind the scenes stories. Also, none should interpret these as condemnations of Jobs. He was who he was and he was unapologetic about that.
Is America a free country or not?
Freedom of speech, freedom to join a union.
I haven't skirted anything or sunk to personal attacks. There are two sides to every story and balance is everything. Mises as a free market advocate will hardly publish balanced views. I am an advocate of free markets. Thank you again for your reply.
Actually, it's freedom of association that is your constitutionally protected right and joining a union would be covered under that.
So say you.
Some of us remember life before Reagan. Unions made the middle class in the 20th century.
Unionbusting destroyed it in the 21st century. "New normal"? Every dog has its day.
Even the ones who "spent stressful months and years" in obedience school.
There's a fascinating series available from The History Channel on Netflix: "The Men Who Made America".
Check it out sometime, then report back regarding the entitlement granted by a mere college degree.
[quote]ahrzeuge; Apparate zur Beförderung auf dem Lande, in der Luft oder auf dem Wasser; elektronische Hardwarekomponenten für Kraftfahrzeuge, Eisenbahnwaggons und Lokomotiven, Schiffe und Flugzeuge; Diebstahlsicherungen; Diebstahlwarngeräte für Fahrzeuge; Fahrräder; Golfkarren; Rollstühle; Luftpumpen; Motorräder; Aftermarket-Ersatzteile (after-market parts) und -Zubehör für die vorgenannten Waren.[/quote]
http://apfelblog.ch/apple-marke-fahrzeuge/
According to their legal documents in Switzerland. Where's [@]Relic[/@]?
Unions did goon in the past, but now they're huge parasites sucking up paychecks. Spending people's money on politicians. So greedy, they want more and more and more until they drive a business out of businesses or out of this country like so many others. These are bus drivers. It's a non skill job. I mean come on. I know how to drive. I've driven some very large Motor homes which is even harder. Less windows to see out of. I think they already get paid to much. If that's what they want, we'll they can go and price themselves right out of the market. Going Union is a bad move these days. This is California, so what's another lost business. See how things are in a couple years if they're still around.
Of course since greedy executives never put a company out of business.