Sure made life less complicated, didn't it, Pepper?
Do you think this is a reasonable goal?
- Thread starter asp3
- Start date
- Status
It's not my goal to return to the good old days, but to hopefully improve the present & future.Sure made life less complicated, didn't it, Pepper?
Judycat
Well-known Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Yes food, clothing and shelter should be free for everyone. The other stuff should cost on a sliding scale according to your income. I have always believed this.
fuzzybuddy
SF VIP
- Location
- The Sticks, Northeast PA.
Whether you like it or not, your level of the "good" life depends on what you have to trade. If you have something someone else badly wants, you have an advantage. If you don't have much that people want, your slice of the pie is rather small. I believe there should be laws that regulate minimum wages, to ensure some justice in employment. But social laws do not alter the facts of supply and demand. Today, your brain rather than your muscles provides more of a living wage, than your muscles, which provide a minimum wage.
Murrmurr
SF VIP
- Location
- Sacramento, California
When the minimum wage goes up, workers lose hours. I've got grandkids whose hours were cut in half the last time minimum wage was bumped up. One of my granddaughters had to move back in with her parents when her employer wouldn't give her more than 15 hours/week, which also saved the employer from having to increase her benefits.
Knight
Well-known Member
And less manual labor needed now to produce stuff. For an employer it's cheaper to pay overtime during rush periods than support the cost of benefits to more employees.
Poor management of company resources tends to make companies go out of business.
Judycat
Well-known Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
We remain stagnant as a society because too many are not ready to give up antiquated ideologies concerning gain and reward. It will be interesting as technology continues to advance, with technology doing our work for us, to see if our species will be able to adapt to a new set of principles where there is value in a life that doesn't depend upon gain and reward.
Linnie
New Member
When I was starting out my family, in my early 20's, we bought a mobile home with cash. When I got pregnant, we bought a house that we could afford, and NOT the amount we were TOLD we could afford. We wanted to not be house poor. We lived there 15 years, paid child support for two kids, and I worked from home for 10 years (daycare) until my son was 10. The house was paid off, so we moved and bought a bigger house. What really got to me was we'd see new houses built in the city where our first house was, and two new SUV's in the driveway with a young 20ish couple living there. This happened a LOT. I always wondered, are their parents helping them? Or are they in debt up to their ears? We never carried credit cards then, and even now, we have one with cash rewards, pay off each month. We rent, (I remarried) and have been building a cabin, cash all the way, for a year. It's almost done. We paid cash for the 10 acres too. I also used to pay child support for my grand daughter, and once we put her mom through college, we started a college fund for Kensi, my grand daughter. My husband has been retired for over 20 years from the AF and I have 25 years into my job. We are not rich, but we do just fine. Neither one of us carried debt other than student loans. It can be done!!!
rkunsaw
Well-known Member
- Location
- Clarksville, Arkansas,USA
It would be easier if they only had to pay for themselves but we also have to provide for those who don't work to the level they are capable of.
I have a question when comparing different eras for those who did work back in the sixties and seventies . Wasn't there a higher income tax rate back then which left less disposal income ? I know it is hard to compare eras because so much more is involved when comparing eras but I am curious. I did Google the question but it's hard to find a definitive answer when comparing income levels from different eras.
Last edited:
Aneeda72
Well-known Member
The “bunch of kids” is penalty enough.
Aneeda72
Well-known Member
Some people have expensive cars and then lost their jobs. You can live in a car, so keeping whatever car you have is necessary. Or you can just pay your bills with none left over for food. It’s easy to be judgmental, but you don't know the circumstances.
I think in the city that I live in (Phoenix) the wild card to the equation you proposed is the cost of housing. Public transportation is available so while the person might not be able to afford a vehicle they can still get around and I believe Arizona provides healthcare for those who are working at minimum wage but are not offered health insurance from their employer. While housing here in Phoenix is not nearly as expensive as where you live @asp3 , it isn't cheap and that cost keeps going up even more as more people from the California area move to the Phoenix area.
Aunt Bea
SF VIP
- Location
- Near Mount Pilot
My stepfather had similar thoughts on comparing his depression income of $12.00/week for six ten-hour days.
He supported his wife and first daughter on that and said the secret was that there was not much to spend it on. They had a comfortable three-room apartment with an outhouse and tin tub for baths in the kitchen with water heated on the wood/coal range.
Today my life with no air conditioning, fifteen-year-old clothes, an older automobile, air TV, flea market furniture, Consumer Cellular, etc... would seem primitive to many young people but I'm fine with it.
It's interesting how over the years many of our wants have morphed into needs.
Jules
SF VIP
That’s the bottom line.
grahamg
Old codger
- Location
- South of Manchester, UK
You have made a reasonable case, (possibly echoing JFKs views I seem to remember?).
A brother in law of mine worked very hard, ran or started up seven businesses in his sixty years of life, and had all the ability to succeed in life, plus wonderful parents, most especially his mother who was very brave welcoming us all to her only sons funeral.
His life ended far too soon due to alcohol related heart problems, and he told me a few months before he died he had some most awful premonitions.
I mention all this just to show how those with all the chances in life, and abilities necessary to succeed can come unstuck, and here is an irony you couldn't make up, when he was in his prime, as a very energetic young man, he tried to ridicule my mother when speaking to my father, because she was very anti drink, and yet it was my mother who had to break the shocking news of his death to me.
In the past people took responsibility for themselves. If you weren't prepared to work for it, you didn't get it. These days there is too much nannying. Like many things, the welfare system has been stretched to include things it was never intended for.Marketing and shrewd advertising have melted away traditional values and encourage self gratifying consumption of goods and services.
If we all adhered to the lifestyle practices of the 1930s~40s we would have an economy stuck in the 30s-40s.
The upside to that is we would all own mint condition classic automobiles.
Aneeda72
Well-known Member
I think an air conditioner is a need. You don’t need a whole house air conditioner but certainly one in your bedroom especially with certain medical conditions. It does, I suppose, also depend on how hot it gets in your area.
Knight
Well-known Member
This might help when it comes to living wage.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/living-wage-50-states-170000972.html
Butterfly
SF VIP
- Location
- Albuquerque, New Mexico USA
OK, but what level/quality (or whatever word would be appropriate as a qualifier) of food, clothing and shelter should be free for everyone? I think perhaps therein lieth the devil which is in the details.
Knight
Well-known Member
Who pays for food, clothing and shelter ? Wealthy aren't dumb they have money to relocate just like.
High-net-worth individuals, however, fled France last year in greater numbers than any other country. An estimated 12,000 millionaires left France last year, versus 10,000 in 2015, a gain of 20%, even though economic growth accelerated in the fourth quarter of last year.Feb 28, 2017
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...fled France last,fourth quarter of last year.
Millionaires can't seem to flee this European country fast enough
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...fled France last,fourth quarter of last year.So the sliding scale paying federal & state income taxes to support free could very well dwindle down to those not paying tax on their Soc. Sec. income will be part of the sliding scale source for free food, clothing and shelter. On top of providing for that what do you think would happen to the social safety nets like EBT & others.
Judycat
Well-known Member
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Sigh. It requires you to be forward looking, leaving the gain and reward ideology behind.
- Status