Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,040
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Sept 29, 2020 16:54:40 GMT -5
am I on the right thread? nothing about white collar or loan laden or anything......
|
|
sesfw
Junior Associate
Today is the first day of the rest of my life
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 15:45:17 GMT -5
Posts: 6,268
|
Post by sesfw on Sept 29, 2020 20:06:54 GMT -5
Rukh ........ as usual the topic got side tracked about 2 pages ago ...........
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Sept 30, 2020 12:03:14 GMT -5
So the subject of the lack of trade education in many high schools is a big reason why we have so many debt laden white collar folks.
We spent the last 40 years pushing everybody to go to college. Colleges lowered their standards to increase enrollment. And a college degree that used to mean someone was intelligent, well educated, and able to think innovatively now only means that a person possesses basic literacy.
Since Scotus has ruled that any test that has disparate impact is considered racist, and a disproportionately large number of people of color attend failing schools, companies have no choice but to require a college degree for the kind of low level clerical jobs that people used to do with an eighth grade education. These kind of jobs have never paid well enough to justify the cost of college. Some people may eventually work their way up the food chain, but it takes years, and they’ve already pissed away for years in college and want to start families
|
|
azucena
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 13:23:14 GMT -5
Posts: 5,202
|
Post by azucena on Sept 30, 2020 12:19:05 GMT -5
So the subject of the lack of trade education in many high schools is a big reason why we have so many debt laden white collar folks. We spent the last 40 years pushing everybody to go to college. Colleges lowered their standards to increase enrollment. And a college degree that used to mean someone was intelligent, well educated, and able to think innovatively now only means that a person possesses basic literacy. Since Scotus has ruled that any test that has disparate impact is considered racist, and a disproportionately large number of people of color attend failing schools, companies have no choice but to require a college degree for the kind of low level clerical jobs that people used to do with an eighth grade education. These kind of jobs have never paid well enough to justify the cost of college. Some people may eventually work their way up the food chain, but it takes years, and they’ve already pissed away for years in college and want to start families This comment strikes me as a cop out with a hint of racism. Companies could chose to interview candidates without a college degree and form their own impression.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Sept 30, 2020 12:22:03 GMT -5
There are a lot of expenses that are unavoidable and a high cost of living area, but for a lot of people, living in a high cost of living area really doesn’t make financial sense.
For example I have a very generic skill set that will get well paid work in most decently sized companies. If I moved to California I could easily get a 50% bump in pay. But my housing cost and commute time would triple, and since my time and energy are finite, the long commute would cause the grocery bill and childcare costs to go up. A 50% or even 100% bump in pay simply wouldn’t justify the increased cost of living. Now if my skill set was something that only a handful of companies use, living in a big city would really be the only sensible option.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Sept 30, 2020 14:09:14 GMT -5
So the subject of the lack of trade education in many high schools is a big reason why we have so many debt laden white collar folks. We spent the last 40 years pushing everybody to go to college. Colleges lowered their standards to increase enrollment. And a college degree that used to mean someone was intelligent, well educated, and able to think innovatively now only means that a person possesses basic literacy. Since Scotus has ruled that any test that has disparate impact is considered racist, and a disproportionately large number of people of color attend failing schools, companies have no choice but to require a college degree for the kind of low level clerical jobs that people used to do with an eighth grade education. These kind of jobs have never paid well enough to justify the cost of college. Some people may eventually work their way up the food chain, but it takes years, and they’ve already pissed away for years in college and want to start families This comment strikes me as a cop out with a hint of racism. Companies could chose to interview candidates without a college degree and form their own impression. If a company happens to be operating in an area with where there are a large number of people graduating high school without basic literacy, and a disproportionately large number of those people who went to failing schools happen to be people of color, both an interview and a test are going to result in a disproportionately large number of people of color being rejected. How do you propose a company avoid a discrimination lawsuit under those circumstances? Because, again, having a disproportionately large number of minority applicants being rejected will result in loosing a discrimination lawsuit and a lot of bad press. It isn’t the company’s fault that the schools and society at large failed these children. And the fact that merely daring to mention that a disproportionately large number of minority kids go to failing schools results in accusations of racism is exactly the reason why no company would want to deal with this. Requiring unnecessary credentialing is easier and less risky.
|
|
imawino
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 22:58:16 GMT -5
Posts: 5,359
|
Post by imawino on Sept 30, 2020 14:15:47 GMT -5
This comment strikes me as a cop out with a hint of racism. Companies could chose to interview candidates without a college degree and form their own impression. If a company happens to be operating in an area with where there are a large number of people graduating high school without basic literacy, and a disproportionately large number of those people who went to failing schools happen to be people of color, both an interview and a test are going to result in a disproportionately large number of people of color being rejected. How do you propose a company avoid a discrimination lawsuit under those circumstances? Because, again, having a disproportionately large number of minority applicants being rejected will result in loosing a discrimination lawsuit and a lot of bad press. It isn’t the company’s fault that the schools and society at large failed these children. And the fact that merely daring to mention that a disproportionately large number of minority kids go to failing schools results in accusations of racism is exactly the reason why no company would want to deal with this. Requiring unnecessary credentialing is easier and less risky. This is right-wing nonsense that has brainwashed people into being afraid of made up "liberal business-killing policies". If you reject an application based on the applicant not having "basic literacy" that is a perfectly acceptable reason and no one is going to lose a lawsuit over it. Utter horseshit. The claimant would have to prove that they were otherwise qualified but their application was rejected because they were black, or other protected class. The poor and illiterate are not out there paying for attorneys to file frivolous lawsuits on their behalf.
|
|
jerseygirl
Senior Member
Joined: May 13, 2018 7:43:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,774
|
Post by jerseygirl on Sept 30, 2020 15:19:31 GMT -5
If a company happens to be operating in an area with where there are a large number of people graduating high school without basic literacy, and a disproportionately large number of those people who went to failing schools happen to be people of color, both an interview and a test are going to result in a disproportionately large number of people of color being rejected. How do you propose a company avoid a discrimination lawsuit under those circumstances? Because, again, having a disproportionately large number of minority applicants being rejected will result in loosing a discrimination lawsuit and a lot of bad press. It isn’t the company’s fault that the schools and society at large failed these children. And the fact that merely daring to mention that a disproportionately large number of minority kids go to failing schools results in accusations of racism is exactly the reason why no company would want to deal with this. Requiring unnecessary credentialing is easier and less risky. This is right-wing nonsense that has brainwashed people into being afraid of made up "liberal business-killing policies". If you reject an application based on the applicant not having "basic literacy" that is a perfectly acceptable reason and no one is going to lose a lawsuit over it. Utter horseshit. The claimant would have to prove that they were otherwise qualified but their application was rejected because they were black, or other protected class. The poor and illiterate are not out there paying for attorneys to file frivolous lawsuits on their behalf. Nope as you said poor and illiterate not hiring lawyers. The government might step in, just like the government sued discrimination based on people’s family names (assuming racial identities without actual info) www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-auto-loan-discrimination-20180417-story.html%3f_amp=true
|
|
imawino
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 22:58:16 GMT -5
Posts: 5,359
|
Post by imawino on Sept 30, 2020 15:40:47 GMT -5
This is right-wing nonsense that has brainwashed people into being afraid of made up "liberal business-killing policies". If you reject an application based on the applicant not having "basic literacy" that is a perfectly acceptable reason and no one is going to lose a lawsuit over it. Utter horseshit. The claimant would have to prove that they were otherwise qualified but their application was rejected because they were black, or other protected class. The poor and illiterate are not out there paying for attorneys to file frivolous lawsuits on their behalf. Nope as you said poor and illiterate not hiring lawyers. The government might step in, just like the government sued discrimination based on people’s family names (assuming racial identities without actual info) www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-auto-loan-discrimination-20180417-story.html%3f_amp=trueThe government fined some lenders for engaging in actual discriminatory practices and you have extrapolated that into the government stepping in to "sue" companies if they don't hire people who are clearly not qualified for the jobs to which they applied? How?
|
|
jerseygirl
Senior Member
Joined: May 13, 2018 7:43:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,774
|
Post by jerseygirl on Sept 30, 2020 16:28:02 GMT -5
The government fined some lenders for engaging in actual discriminatory practices and you have extrapolated that into the government stepping in to "sue" companies if they don't hire people who are clearly not qualified for the jobs to which they applied? How? The word is ‘might’
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,242
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 30, 2020 16:30:32 GMT -5
This comment strikes me as a cop out with a hint of racism. Companies could chose to interview candidates without a college degree and form their own impression. If a company happens to be operating in an area with where there are a large number of people graduating high school without basic literacy, and a disproportionately large number of those people who went to failing schools happen to be people of color, both an interview and a test are going to result in a disproportionately large number of people of color being rejected. How do you propose a company avoid a discrimination lawsuit under those circumstances? Because, again, having a disproportionately large number of minority applicants being rejected will result in loosing a discrimination lawsuit and a lot of bad press. It isn’t the company’s fault that the schools and society at large failed these children. And the fact that merely daring to mention that a disproportionately large number of minority kids go to failing schools results in accusations of racism is exactly the reason why no company would want to deal with this. Requiring unnecessary credentialing is easier and less risky. I wasn't going to respond but then I remembered a funny thing. Study after study has been done that when you remove names from applications/resumes or have people blind interview suddenly all this "illiterate poorly educated minority" BS that you claim is rampant disappears. In fact women and minorities tend to get offered the job MORE OFTEN when all the interview can base the decision on is qualifications alone. So why do we think that is? If there is no name and the interviewer cannot see the applicant you cannot claim that it is because the business is terrified of being sued or trying to meet a quota. How can they be doing that if they can't tell if the applicant is black? Or is that all a vast liberal white ivory tower conspiracy just like environmentalism is? Oh and study after study has shown USING THE EXACT SAME RESUME that when names are changed to female or ethnic sounding suddenly they get rejected often for the BS that you just described. But if the name sounds like a standard Western male name offers go UP. EXACT SAME RESUME. Why do we think that is?
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Sept 30, 2020 16:34:59 GMT -5
If a company happens to be operating in an area with where there are a large number of people graduating high school without basic literacy, and a disproportionately large number of those people who went to failing schools happen to be people of color, both an interview and a test are going to result in a disproportionately large number of people of color being rejected. How do you propose a company avoid a discrimination lawsuit under those circumstances? Because, again, having a disproportionately large number of minority applicants being rejected will result in loosing a discrimination lawsuit and a lot of bad press. It isn’t the company’s fault that the schools and society at large failed these children. And the fact that merely daring to mention that a disproportionately large number of minority kids go to failing schools results in accusations of racism is exactly the reason why no company would want to deal with this. Requiring unnecessary credentialing is easier and less risky. I wasn't going to respond but then I remembered a funny thing. Study after study has been done that when you remove names from applications/resumes or have people blind interview suddenly all this "illiterate poorly educated minority" BS that you claim is rampant disappears. In fact women and minorities tend to get offered the job MORE OFTEN when all the interview can base the decision on is qualifications alone. So why do we think that is? If there is no name and the interviewer cannot see the applicant you cannot claim that it is because the business is terrified of being sued or trying to meet a quota. How can they be doing that if they can't tell if the applicant is black? Or is that all a vast liberal white ivory tower conspiracy just like environmentalism is? And it has been shown repeatedly in the science field that women are discriminated against, and when documents do not have names on them, they do better. But why argue facts when feelings supercede all
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,242
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 30, 2020 16:50:37 GMT -5
Well if we acknowledge it we have to face facts then the conclusion is white people and men in particular are not.automatically the smartest and most qualified in the room. Who exactly is being given an unfair advantage in our current system?
|
|
jerseygirl
Senior Member
Joined: May 13, 2018 7:43:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,774
|
Post by jerseygirl on Sept 30, 2020 16:54:29 GMT -5
Also in classical music. Now routinely musicians play behind a screen for auditions so gender and race aren’t observable
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 23:44:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2020 17:46:04 GMT -5
Back in the 1980s when there was still a lot of affirmative action in hiring/promoting, my (white) step-brother was passed over for a city park's department landscaping job by a Hispanic male with less experience.
My SB was 19 or 20 but had years of experience and the other man was a lot older but newer to the job.
My bother sued and won a multi-million dollar lawsuit for "reverse discrimination" from the city where we grew up.
My brother is a narcissistic prick, so there's that, but I still can't believe that he sued and that he won.
The award amount was sealed, but it's been mentioned in the family it was more than a million dollars by a factor of two or three...
He used that money to buy a giant house and equipment for his landscaping business. He then spent decades doing "cash-only" jobs in some of the wealthiest neighborhoods in the SF Bay Area using illegal Mexican labor.
He now installs massive, expensive swimming pools in the same wealthy neighborhoods.
I know he's been turned in to the IRS at least twice for tax evasion, but somehow he's still at it.
He once pulled out 100K in cash to show us how much money it was. My step-father mentioned to him keeping that much cash in your house is a great way to get your family killed. I don't think he really cared. It was more important to his ego to show it to people...
And, no, I don't have anything to do with him.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Sept 30, 2020 17:58:37 GMT -5
If a company happens to be operating in an area with where there are a large number of people graduating high school without basic literacy, and a disproportionately large number of those people who went to failing schools happen to be people of color, both an interview and a test are going to result in a disproportionately large number of people of color being rejected. How do you propose a company avoid a discrimination lawsuit under those circumstances? Because, again, having a disproportionately large number of minority applicants being rejected will result in loosing a discrimination lawsuit and a lot of bad press. It isn’t the company’s fault that the schools and society at large failed these children. And the fact that merely daring to mention that a disproportionately large number of minority kids go to failing schools results in accusations of racism is exactly the reason why no company would want to deal with this. Requiring unnecessary credentialing is easier and less risky. This is right-wing nonsense that has brainwashed people into being afraid of made up "liberal business-killing policies". If you reject an application based on the applicant not having "basic literacy" that is a perfectly acceptable reason and no one is going to lose a lawsuit over it. Utter horseshit. The claimant would have to prove that they were otherwise qualified but their application was rejected because they were black, or other protected class. The poor and illiterate are not out there paying for attorneys to file frivolous lawsuits on their behalf. Yep you’re right I looked it up. Disparate impact is not no longer set in stone thing. But losing a lawsuit is not the only consequence out there. They are plenty of hustlers that shakedown companies by threatening legal action and bad press on behalf of the poor and downtrodden. They often get paid off. And plenty of other people and companies, that we later found out did nothing wrong, end up getting their reputations trashed. There’s really no good reason to leave yourself open to false accusations if you have other options. And since there’s no shortage of people with bachelors degrees, companies have no reason to change.
|
|
jerseygirl
Senior Member
Joined: May 13, 2018 7:43:08 GMT -5
Posts: 4,774
|
Post by jerseygirl on Sept 30, 2020 18:16:07 GMT -5
This is right-wing nonsense that has brainwashed people into being afraid of made up "liberal business-killing policies". If you reject an application based on the applicant not having "basic literacy" that is a perfectly acceptable reason and no one is going to lose a lawsuit over it. Utter horseshit. The claimant would have to prove that they were otherwise qualified but their application was rejected because they were black, or other protected class. The poor and illiterate are not out there paying for attorneys to file frivolous lawsuits on their behalf. Yep you’re right I looked it up. Disparate impact is not no longer set in stone thing. But losing a lawsuit is not the only consequence out there. They are plenty of hustlers that shakedown companies by threatening legal action and bad press on behalf of the poor and downtrodden. They often get paid off. And plenty of other people and companies, that we later found out did nothing wrong, end up getting their reputations trashed. There’s really no good reason to leave yourself open to false accusations if you have other options. And since there’s no shortage of people with bachelors degrees, companies have no reason to change. Hustlers - Al Sharpton Jesse Jackson
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,242
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 30, 2020 18:18:29 GMT -5
They don't change not because they are sued. They don't change because in the long run paying a few settlements is better than tearing down a system that has massively benefited them for their entire lives.
Cause the funny thing is once the ability to discriminate goes away mediocre white men suddenly start losing out to better non white and non male candidates.
What's a few dollars compared to ensuring you stay on top of the world?
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Sept 30, 2020 18:20:46 GMT -5
If a company happens to be operating in an area with where there are a large number of people graduating high school without basic literacy, and a disproportionately large number of those people who went to failing schools happen to be people of color, both an interview and a test are going to result in a disproportionately large number of people of color being rejected. How do you propose a company avoid a discrimination lawsuit under those circumstances? Because, again, having a disproportionately large number of minority applicants being rejected will result in loosing a discrimination lawsuit and a lot of bad press. It isn’t the company’s fault that the schools and society at large failed these children. And the fact that merely daring to mention that a disproportionately large number of minority kids go to failing schools results in accusations of racism is exactly the reason why no company would want to deal with this. Requiring unnecessary credentialing is easier and less risky. I wasn't going to respond but then I remembered a funny thing. Study after study has been done that when you remove names from applications/resumes or have people blind interview suddenly all this "illiterate poorly educated minority" BS that you claim is rampant disappears. In fact women and minorities tend to get offered the job MORE OFTEN when all the interview can base the decision on is qualifications alone. So why do we think that is? If there is no name and the interviewer cannot see the applicant you cannot claim that it is because the business is terrified of being sued or trying to meet a quota. How can they be doing that if they can't tell if the applicant is black? Or is that all a vast liberal white ivory tower conspiracy just like environmentalism is? Oh and study after study has shown USING THE EXACT SAME RESUME that when names are changed to female or ethnic sounding suddenly they get rejected often for the BS that you just described. But if the name sounds like a standard Western male name offers go UP. EXACT SAME RESUME. Why do we think that is? I read in “what color is your parachute“ that some studies have found that flipping a coin gives better results than the interview process, which is more like dating than anything else. And it doesn’t surprise me that changing the names on a resume would produce wildly different results. But I wasn’t talking about interviews or resumes . I was talking about a multiple choice test for basic literacy. A bachelors degree is the minimum level of qualification that guarantees basic literacy. Requiring a bachelors degree for jobs that only require basic literacy is a lot less risky than administering a test, when you’re in a situation where a disproportionately large number of your minority job applicants aren’t going to pass the test. When is the last time you ever heard of a company being accused of discrimination for requiring all applicants for a specific job to have a bachelors degree? It’s also just way easier, which we all know is the primary reason companies do this.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,367
|
Post by Tiny on Sept 30, 2020 18:22:31 GMT -5
So the subject of the lack of trade education in many high schools is a big reason why we have so many debt laden white collar folks. We spent the last 40 years pushing everybody to go to college. Colleges lowered their standards to increase enrollment. And a college degree that used to mean someone was intelligent, well educated, and able to think innovatively now only means that a person possesses basic literacy. Since Scotus has ruled that any test that has disparate impact is considered racist, and a disproportionately large number of people of color attend failing schools, companies have no choice but to require a college degree for the kind of low level clerical jobs that people used to do with an eighth grade education. These kind of jobs have never paid well enough to justify the cost of college. Some people may eventually work their way up the food chain, but it takes years, and they’ve already pissed away for years in college and want to start families OK, that made me smile. No choice but to require a college degree! Ha!! That's funny. I totally know 8th graders who are proficient with Excel (they can write macros and generate pivot tables and link it all to a database they created!) Not to mention how skilled they are with Word (setting up mailing lists and whatnot). Yeah, no. I don't think "low level clerical jobs" can be done by the 8th graders of today. Our low level clerical jobs (accounting) involve being able to professionally communicate with people outside the office and to be able to manipulate and analyze data in a variety of formats and to be able use a wide variety of "software" from excel/word, to the ins and outs of our email system, our scanning/printing technology and have a gist of basic accounting concepts AS WELL as having been trained on the Accounting system we use. Every new employee spends a minimum of one day getting introduced to all the ins and outs of basic stuff around the office (phones, copiers, scanners, email, and then what to expect on the Desk Top of your pc, and then what ever applications might be applicable to your job.) Even the lowly mail room/document support clerks have to be professional and deal with an assortment of tech - from the "intake" system to the hand scanners and then what my employers rules/contract agreements apply to which shipper (Fedex, UPS, and local messenger services) so they can make decisions about how best to ship stuff to all the usual excel/word and whatever database and reporting system they use. And, those are probably some of the lowest paid jobs in the office.... And I've seen 25 years worth of AP and AR clerks come and go from the "entry level" tier of jobs (they are some of the users I support)... and it's only the ones who have had some Accounting experience (in some way) who's eyes do NOT spin in their heads for the first week or two of their employment.... it usually takes 3 or 4 monthly cycles for the "clerks" to get comfortable with what they are expected to do/accomplish. -- these clerks usually either move up into "Accountant" positions when they get their degree OR complete their CPA. Or if they don't have the Accounting degree/CPA they move into Billing positions or other jobs that interface with our clients. Or they move on to other jobs with other companies after a few years.
|
|
formerroomate99
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 12, 2011 13:33:12 GMT -5
Posts: 7,381
|
Post by formerroomate99 on Sept 30, 2020 18:28:51 GMT -5
They don't change not because they are sued. They don't change because in the long run paying a few settlements is better than tearing down a system that has massively benefited them for their entire lives. Cause the funny thing is once the ability to discriminate goes away mediocre white men suddenly start losing out to better non white and non male candidates. What's a few dollars compared to ensuring you stay on top of the world? Yep. I’ve worked for companies like that. They always seem to be the ones with ping-pong tables and snacks. The Really scary ones have meditation rooms.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,040
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on Sept 30, 2020 18:36:52 GMT -5
what jobs require nothing except basic literacy?
What are these jobs that people could do with an 8th grade diploma? Do they really still exist in the same form today? I really don't think so.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,367
|
Post by Tiny on Sept 30, 2020 18:50:26 GMT -5
what jobs require nothing except basic literacy? What are these jobs that people could do with an 8th grade diploma? Do they really still exist in the same form today? I really don't think so. Low paying ones. That have an income limit. I'm pretty sure a pool cleaning service guy or a house cleaning service woman will see a 'steady' even amount in income. They aren't gonna get 3% raises every year. They won't be able to take their skill set and knowledge and jump to another employer for a big increase in income. I think what a lot of people don't see is that just because someone lands a 30K a year "low paying" job and they manage to keep that job for years and years - they might not ever make much more than 30K per year. It doesn't help if they get a 3% raise every year - IF THE COST OF LIVING ALSO GOES UP. They don't EVER get ahead. Even if they live as frugally as possible and scrimp and save - they are always working and always having to scrimp and save and do with out. And yeah, I have always been working (sometimes insane amount of hours for my salaried job), and I have ALWAYS been saving and often scrimping (aka deciding if buying something is really worth it) but you know what? I've been able to scrimp and save my way to owning 3 properties (ok they are a shack, a hovel, and a house that looks great in October (for halloween).) and retirement savings and I can buy a brand new car and then drive it for 10 or 12 years and I can go on a vacation and I can buy new nice stuff. I don't have to worry about how I'm going to pay a bill. Because my income has gone up by leaps and bounds over the 30 years of my career. I kept my lifestyle the same and was able to SAVE more because I had MORE income. I was lucky I was able to get a "career" type job. There is NOT a career type job available for everyone.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 23:44:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2020 19:16:59 GMT -5
what jobs require nothing except basic literacy? What are these jobs that people could do with an 8th grade diploma? Do they really still exist in the same form today? I really don't think so. Low paying ones. That have an income limit. I'm pretty sure a pool cleaning service guy or a house cleaning service woman will see a 'steady' even amount in income. They aren't gonna get 3% raises every year. They won't be able to take their skill set and knowledge and jump to another employer for a big increase in income. I think what a lot of people don't see is that just because someone lands a 30K a year "low paying" job and they manage to keep that job for years and years - they might not ever make much more than 30K per year. It doesn't help if they get a 3% raise every year - IF THE COST OF LIVING ALSO GOES UP. They don't EVER get ahead. Even if they live as frugally as possible and scrimp and save - they are always working and always having to scrimp and save and do with out. And yeah, I have always been working (sometimes insane amount of hours for my salaried job), and I have ALWAYS been saving and often scrimping (aka deciding if buying something is really worth it) but you know what? I've been able to scrimp and save my way to owning 3 properties (ok they are a shack, a hovel, and a house that looks great in October (for halloween).) and retirement savings and I can buy a brand new car and then drive it for 10 or 12 years and I can go on a vacation and I can buy new nice stuff. I don't have to worry about how I'm going to pay a bill. Because my income has gone up by leaps and bounds over the 30 years of my career. I kept my lifestyle the same and was able to SAVE more because I had MORE income. I was lucky I was able to get a "career" type job. There is NOT a career type job available for everyone. So, as a society, what do we do with all the people for whom a "career" type job isn't an option for whatever reason? We have 1/2 the population below "average intelligence", lack of opportunities, lazy people, slightly disabled people who can't get disability, etc... who all need to find ways to thrive and not just continually scrape by. Right now, we seem to have some very high-paid, high-skill jobs and then not much for the rest of the working population. And, it's not like it used to be where a couple can ever buy a house or have anything nice in their lives on a single income in much of the country. And, we can't all live in the magical middle of nowhere with cheap housing and plentiful well-paying jobs. I'd also mention that the ability to buy a new car with a "good" interest rate loan is a HUGE boost to wealthier people's lives. When you are poor you constantly are paying to fix a POS or you get a loan that's a predatory interest rate that just buries you farther. I also think we discount the amount of stress that's involved in being low-income and working for predatory employers who believe they own your life in exchange for min wage and <32 hours a week. It's stressful not being able to pay for needs. It's stressful never buying wants. It's stressful adding up every.single.cent you spend in a store to ensure you have enough money to check out. It's stressful when the kids need things for school and you just don't have the money. And, all that stress lands people in the healthcare system or even on disability. I honestly don't know the answers. But, I'd love to see us do better as a society.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,403
|
Post by thyme4change on Oct 1, 2020 9:50:35 GMT -5
It is very expensive to be poor.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 23:44:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2020 12:19:57 GMT -5
It is very expensive to be poor. Yes. I always knew it was stressful, but I never really knew how different it would be to not have to stress out about money all.the.time. Now when I'm working on a project and need a tool or a part, I run to the store, buy it, and finish what I'm working on. Previously, I'd have to stop, figure out where I could get the money and hope whatever I bought was right on the first try, and often wait weeks to finish even the simplest of projects. I guess the good news is, in my case, I now have a lot of motivation to keep my savings account around and keep the stress to a minimum.
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,367
|
Post by Tiny on Oct 1, 2020 12:52:40 GMT -5
The government fined some lenders for engaging in actual discriminatory practices and you have extrapolated that into the government stepping in to "sue" companies if they don't hire people who are clearly not qualified for the jobs to which they applied? How? The word is ‘might’ Which generally doesn't happen. And you've just pointed out white privilege and racism in America and how it works. Don't hire the people you don't want because of the color of their skin (or their religion) or their funny name or because their address is isn't in one of the "right" areas and then yowl about how the government is forcing businesses to hire "less desirable" employees. It also lets employers treat qualified employees like shit because of the employees skin color or where they live or whatever else the employer doesnt like about them. Oddly enough the only "unqualified employees" I've witnessed get hired by an employer was due to nepotism or owing someone a favor. I've never witnessed an employer hire just any unqualified person off the street to "fulfill" a quota. I have witnessed employer hire qualified people they didn't like/didn't approve of - and then treat those qualified people like shit - in order to fulfill some demand by the parent company or what ever.. the employer got their money's worth from the employee...all the while not expecting much OR being assholes to those employees. I've never seen an employer carry dead weight for any length of time (unless it was nepotism/favor owed).
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,403
|
Post by thyme4change on Oct 1, 2020 13:08:34 GMT -5
We had an EEOC complaint. A person said she did not receive the promotion because she was older, and a younger, less qualified person did get the promotion.
She had to prove it, and we had to disprove it. She was summarily shut down due to lack of proof on her part vs decent proof on our part. She did not get a payout or a settlement. But we did have to gather up a bunch of stuff and statements, which took a fair bit of time.
At the time, I thought she thought she really deserved that promotion, even though she wasn't a top performer. Now I wonder if she had heard of these massive settlements people get to go away and thought she could get a piece of the pie. I have become much more cynical in the years that have gone by.
I did work at a company that had been sued for age discrimination and lost and did have to pay out. Apparently, they did several massive layoffs and primarily laid off people within 5 years of getting a pension. All of them were over 50 (or 55). The had to show systematic removal of older workers to prove age discrimination.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Oct 7, 2020 23:59:28 GMT -5
gs11rmb - yeah, even in normal times that seems excessive. If the car lease is that big a strain, why not just get rid of it completely or downgrade for real, to a cheap beater? I mean, I bought a brand new car last summer and it was not a cheap, base model one, and my car payment is about $400/month. Which is more than I want it to be. BUT, if I lost my job due to the pandemic, that would be the first thing to go. Like completely go. I'd sell it and be done with the whole thing. We could be a 1 car family if we had to. There are a lot of other bills/needs I could use my limited funds on other than a super expensive car! I'm guessing that there were penalties for getting out of the lease and maybe even charges for wear and tear and mileage. Many lease agreements have pretty limited mileage and charge through the nose if you go over. All of that would be folded into the lease payment on the new car, of course. True. The BIL leased a car on a contract that required that if the lease was terminated, the lessee was required to pay a termination penalty equal to all of the remaining payments on the lease. The termination penalty added up to more than $25K when he returned the car. The only way out of the lease without a massive penalty was bankruptcy.
|
|