There is a lot of truth in this statement, too bad the one who wrote it doesn't actually believe it.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
And apparently you don't live what you preach.
If - as you say - a person cannot live on $10 per hour, why is that all you're paying your employee?
I think what you should admit, at this point, is that you just stepped in a giant pile of it!
There is a lot of truth in this statement, too bad the one who wrote it doesn't actually believe it.It might also be worth pointing out that some people's work isn't worth anywhere near $10.00 per hour.
Please point out where I said that making $10 is not a living wage if you can.YOU are the one claiming $10 is not a living wage, but then turn around and admit that you're paying an employee $10 per hour.
And there's part of the issue.
I'm not saying this applies to you personally. But let's face it, lots of people are crying and moaning about not "living" because they don't have a $35,000 SUV sitting in the garage of a $350,000 house out in the suburbs. And those are people who will NEVER be "living" because even if they had the aforementioned things, it would be enough. They'd want a $50,000 Duramax Diesel Truck, alongside their new $40,000 SUV in the triple-care garage (because we need room to park our boat) of their $650,000 home.
Here's another newsflash: Both of my sons are living in the same house - along with 4 other guys. It's a 4-bedroom house, and the group of guys is renting it for $1500 per month. I think you can figure out that they're each paying less than $300 per month to rent the house - and that is in suburban Minneapolis, which is about as high-priced place to live as you'll find outside of NYC & LA.
For those who keep crying, "It can't be done!!!!" I'll continue to ask why there are people all over the country doing the EXACT things you're saying CANNOT be done!
I just bought a very nice house (3-bedroom split level) for $40,000. I bought it as an investment property. We close on the house in mid-May.
It's filthy, full of crap from the previous owner, needs every room cleaned, primed & painted, and some exterior work done. But these are all things that ANYBODY who has an ounce of ambition could do!
I know for a fact that, if I choose to do so, I can clean & fix this house and, when the market turns around, sell it for $120,000.
So you're question, "Where does one find a home for $65,000?" is irrelevant. It can be done. People are doing it all the time. Where, in YOUR city, can you find a home for $65,000? I have no idea, because I have no idea where you live. But I'll guarantee you I could find dozens of homes for that price.
There is no double standard, because I never claimed that $10 an hour was not a livable wage. Actually I posted that I know of somebody who does live on $10 an hour.Is it NOT rather a double standard to say a person cannot live on $10 per hour, when you are an employer paying an employee $10 per hour?
I'm sorry, but all of these, "It can't be done" arguments are simply not adding up.
No one is saying it can't be done, were are saying it can't be done easily and ther is a lot a lot of doing without.
For starters, if they lived where I live they would have to move. Far away. Or live in a group setting, not own a car (no $ for insurance or gas anyway), not have to depend on public transportation (where I live that isn't cheap either), hopefully work in the food industry so you can get free meals, hopefully have medical/dental insurance paid for by your employee (usually employees have to pay at least part of it however), tv/internet/phone service would be difficult, owning your home impossible, so hopefully you can rent a room where utilities are paid because there would be no $ for that either. Group settings with roommates pooling their resources would be the way to go.Ok. How can one exist on $10.00 per hr. with no financial help from anyone? What would they have to do?
What? You are going out to live on $10 an hour?I'm going to go do what far too many defeatists say absolutely cannot be done.
With all fairness the "employee" entered the agreement with the employer on their own. They made their own decision where to work and the wage and benefits by accepting the job.
They choose to live in the location they live. I can't see a reason why they can't get another roommate and get a better place if they desire.
And what is stopping them from getting together with their neighbors and making where they live even more "livable"? Like banning together and form some neighborhood watch of some kind?
I am not the one being extreme. YOU are the one who is claiming that while you can "survive" on $10 per hour, you cannot "live" on it.
All of which can be done by somebody who is working full-time, making $10 per hour - provided you don't have to be extravagant to live.
when the good parsons fictitious $10/hr homeowner starts paying for the kids that are going to drive down the taxes they pay, where will the income come from to supply the children with clothes, food, school supplies, etc.?
perhaps with his four homes, he is a bit out of touch with the guy working at walmart who can't afford his health insurance which is NOT supplied, or maybe he thinks providing insurance for a family is a luxury that the average worker does not deserve. if you are bringing home $400/week, and $500 goes to rent, $150 for car payment, $60 for car insurance, $200 for food, $200 for health insurance, $25 co-pays, $100 for gas, $30 for electric, $15 for water, $30 for telephone. do any of these seem outrageous? they seem next to impossible to me, but let's give our man the benefit of the doubt. he's a great shopper, never goes out, never needs new clothes, has no entertainment of any kind in his life, not tv, not newspapers, not movies, not music, nothing. never goes out, has no girlfriend, no computer costs. to take home his $400/week he is already working 50 hours to get the overtime to rise to this level. so he has $290 to save up his downpayment for the house, which when he gets it he will incur the additional expenses of taxes on the home, insurance on the home (he was living without renters insurance before because he couldn't afford to protect his belongings, but the mortgage people will force him to do it), pmi insurance until he has 20% equity in the home, and the cost of any and all repairs and upkeep to the home that had been the responsibility of the landlord when he was renting.
this is ridiculous.
this is a cut and paste. anyone want to respond?
Nope, my sons are not in college. But neither are they married. And why, pray tell, would you condemn 5 guys living in a 4-bedroom home as some sort of less-than-acceptable conditions?
I am pointing out YET ANOTHER FACT - and that is that there are people everywhere who are doing EXACTLY what y'all are claiming cannot be done!
"Doing without" what? Food, shelter & clothing?
My point - to be exact - was to prove you WRONG, when you were sarcastically asking where a house could be bought for $65,000.
I have no idea where you live, so I don't know about the availability of $65,000 homes in your city. But I'll bet my bottom dollar that they're there. Are they in an area where you want to live? Maybe not. But if you buy right, fix up your home & resell it, you can gain equity and move into progressively nicer homes. That is EXACTLY what my wife & I have done. And if WE can do it, ANYBODY can do it!
There are none trust me, I live in a suburb of NYC.
Nice Strawman you made.
You must just say these things to provoke a response. No one could honestly mean them. Do you think homeless people 100 years ago indentured themselves because they had other options? Do you think your average Chinese peasant has much realistic choice in whether they work long hours in inhumane conditions for a pittance? Given the choice between death and a chance, however small it may be, of not dying, people will always go for the latter. That's why Victorian and modern Far Eastern employers had/have their employees over a barrel.
There is this thing we call the "pennysaver" where I live and it is full of people looking for roommates and rooms to rent in all types of neighborhoods.Because their current roommate can't find another place? Because they can't afford to lose even a week's rent? There's plenty of reasons.
I don't know their hours. But if they were working your much more then a typical 40 hour work week as you imply here. At $10 an hour would be very livable at even a 50 or 60 hour work week.Probably, and this is just a guess, because most of them are working every hour God sends just to keep a roof over their heads? There's a reason why neighbourhood watches tend to exist more in middle class areas, and it's not because the poor are lazier.
this is very true. the fact that you "got by" on 10/hr in 1983 doesn't have any relevance to the discussion we are having today. that 10/hr would be like 25/hr today, so just stay on the sidelines. you just plain don't get it!Not in the Bay Area either. Where do you get the $$ to "fix up" the dump of a house you manage to buy (which you can't anyway because nobody will give you a mortgage)?
I think alot of people are mentally "stuck" in a time and place where THEY managed to do something. It's like my parents who refuse to go to the movies because they don't believe it should cost more than $3.50 to get in.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?