Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Joshua Riddle, Intern ·
Dec 12, 2010 at 6:30pm
Over at National Review, Veronique de Rugy has some troubling data regarding families' disposable incomes:
If this data is accurate, and people working hard to rise to the middle class have less disposable income than those on minimum wage, then why work? I must admit that from a college student’s perspective, dropping out and chilling on the nanny state’s dime is enticing. So, wise members of Ricochet, what on earth can we do to save this republic before the people paying the bills refuse to be unappreciated slaves and "go Galt"?
- Comment (22)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Here's a start.
Jul '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
I went Galt long ago.
In the early 90's, I was talking to a young woman who worked for me. Terrific person, very hard worker. Late 20's. She made about $50,000. Her husband, a chef, made about the same. Decent wages, but nothing fancy in Manhattan - where their state and local income taxes topped 12%.
She confided that she and her husband were dreaming of starting a family, but felt that they needed to save for years to come before that would be a responsible thing to do.
By chance, I had happened to see a newspaper story the day before that a single mother on welfare with two children received "assistance" amounting to $53,000 per year and that - in those pre-welfare-reform days - she could expect to do better than that with each child she produced.
So there you had it: two college graduates who played by the rules felt too poor to have a child, while a single woman who produced nothing but dependents felt fully entitled to produce more.
Jul '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
I was thinking about this recently: with all the talk about fiscal responsibility lately, I haven't heard a single Republican address the issue of most of these sorts of entitlements.
Apparently, there's nothing more sacred in America than indigent single motherhood.
Nov '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Perhaps give these numbers to Chris Christie and join the draft Chris Christie movement? Seems like one of the few guys around with the fortitude to face issues like this head on and speak his mind.
Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Jul '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Kenneth
Apparently, there's nothing more sacred in America than indigent single motherhood. · Dec 12 at 6:50pm
And apparently, there's no one more Free from responsibility than indigent single Fathers.
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
I guess now the question is whether or not it is possible to persuade the beneficiaries of the system to vote out the politicians that promise them entitlements? Are big government activists intentionally trying to create a dependent class to ensure their votes? Or, are they simply ignorant of basic economics?
May '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Or are they deliberately creating a system designed to bankrupt the government and then planning to take advantage of the ensuing chaos?
Nov '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
It is no exaggeration to say that the Single Mother (indigent or otherwise) is a Sacred Icon for liberals and progessives. She is positively exalted by the raddled hags in the feminist movement who insist that no woman needs a man or a husband.
Actually, I tend to agree. What woman needs a male provider when the government is willing to play Sugar Daddy for her?
Nov '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Their policies suggest that they are absolutely ignorant of basic economics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16CkS-k
outstripp
[A]re they deliberately creating a system designed to bankrupt the government and then planning to take advantage of the ensuing chaos?
Absolutely:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward%E2%80%93Piven_strategy
Absolutely. For Democrats, the magic number is "51." If they can turn fifty-one percent of the voting population into public workers or welfare recipients (both are wards of the State), America will turn irrevocably to the Left and become a socialist hell-hole forever. Short of bloody revolution, Tea Partiers and Republicans will be powerless to do anything about it.
So the answer to your questions is: All of the Above!
Edited on Dec 12, 2010 at 7:52pmJul '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
outstripp
Or are they deliberately creating a system designed to bankrupt the government and then planning to take advantage of the ensuing chaos? · Dec 12 at 7:31pm
Of course they are: it's the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Dec '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
I think the problem lies in the "goodness" of the Left's intentions. How can you explain to largely mis and/or under-educated, well-intentioned people...people who have been raised to believe in the supremacy of their emotions, and not objective truth/morality/etc....how do you explain to them that the things their professors and the media and Hollywood and all the other gatekeepers of information have preached as gospel for 40-50 years are, in fact, false?
It's near-impossible.
Then add on top of that the political component of people in power wanting to hold on to power (especially those on the Left).
It ultimately has to come back to truth. We have to start living our own individual lives asking the "What's right" instead of "What's popular" or "What feels good" questions. We have to raise our kids this way, which means going the extra mile outside of their classes (or sending them to like-minded private schools).
Poor education + morally bankrupt culture + political indoctrination for Leftist worldview at every level = much of America, 2010.
I guess the first question needs to be: do we want to save America?
I do!
Sep '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Kenneth: I was thinking about this recently: with all the talk about fiscal responsibility lately, I haven't heard a single Republican address the issue of most of these sorts of entitlements.
Apparently, there's nothing more sacred in America than indigent single motherhood. · Dec 12 at 6:50pm
This entitlement mentality is not only rampant with indigent single mothers, Kenneth, as I'm sure you know. (HR guy and all that entails).
Two friends of mine, both mid-50's, had health problems that caused them to lose their jobs. These were not major, life-threatening or severely debilitating problems. But, rather than try to change careers or find work that they could do, both sought disability. No other thought put into it than that. No other alternative considered. Shameful to me, normal to them.
Sep '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
I'd like to see how this chart compares with a comparable chart from some big-welfare country in Europe. Obviously, comparing their bennies directly to ours would be apples and oranges, but you could use Europe figures exclusively to create an all-Europe chart.
Also, do these low income people get all the bennies (listed in black below the first 3 lines), or only some of them depending on the situation or only if they apply for them, or what?
Aug '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
I though we just voted them out , unless I missed the message as "kick the can further down the road ", I think this new class of congress needs to start on the first day . Any hesitation must be countered, any appeasement quashed , and any compromise rejected . The model of compromise to move legislation has brought us here, so there 's no point in revisiting this thing. They've tried to make the giveaways the third rail and scare us from near. Heck with that ! What's wrong is wrong . We need to show the disparity between the public unions and the Govt workers with the rest of America. We need to foment class disquietude . We need to alinsky those folksnow , it's too easy not to . Everybody has a " DMV" anecdote, a TSA story ,a post office joke . These are the things we work while letting private sector Americado their best to resist .
Edited on Dec 13, 2010 at 12:41amMay '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Kenneth
Of course they are: it's the Cloward-Piven strategy. · Dec 12 at 8:24pm
Or the Craven-Dip-Low strategy.
Nov '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Jimmy Carter
Kenneth
Apparently, there's nothing more sacred in America than indigent single motherhood. · Dec 12 at 6:50pm
And apparently, there's no one more Free from responsibility than indigent single Fathers. · Dec 12 at 7:01pm
Jimmy, I think you've nailed it.
If you marry a woman, you're obligated to take care of your kids in principle, but the state will take over your responsibilities if you just decide you'd rather be a swingin' bachelor again. If you never marry the mother, it's even worse; you can walk away.
Both mother and father need to be held accountable for making state-dependent babies. Sorry to sound like a jerk, but making welfare babies should hurt.
When I was younger, I thought that the stigma associated with loose living was for old squares. Looks like there was a point to it after all.
Nov '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Lady Kurobara
Actually, I tend to agree. What woman needs a male provider when the government is willing to play Sugar Daddy for her? · Dec 12 at 7:32pm
It's true, and it's part of the larger pattern.
Whether it's food stamps and welfare or endless unemployment, if the state makes it easier and more lucrative to to on the dole, it's hard to blame people who take them up on it.
You have a wonderful prose style, by the way.
Aug '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
it's worth noting that a lot of the T+T comes out in the benefits. from the perspective of tallying up social allocation of resources that's fair enough but it's misleading from the perspective of motivation to get a job, which is the main reason we care about MTR.
1) most of the poor folks' take home total compensation is in health care. this is definitely expensive for society, but i'd much rather have $30,000 in cash (or reasonably fungible benefits like food stamps and section 8) than $15,000 cash and $15,000 in Medicaid. in fact, i'd so prefer it that i would much rather work for $30K with no benefits than be idle and have half my $30K devoted to Medicaid.
2) the $60,000 job doesn't offer any benefits. this seems atypical. if you think of it as 60K in total compensation then we're really talking something like $40,000 in cash and $20,000 in benefits which implies a lower tax burden and a higher take home total compensation.
Aug '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
ps, i see Tyler Cowen at MR had the same take i did
Sep '10
Re: Part-Time Minimum Wage Jobs vs. Full-Time $60,000 Yearly Incomes
Dear Joshua -