This just in! 200 million job openings in STEM!

a reply to: pl3bscheese

I had two of my sons sharing a two bedroom apartment, both working hard, both getting overtimes quite a bit, and they were struggling, their rent was less than what we pay here. now, I have two sons living with me, one son holding his own in a job that pays well above the wage he was earning. that's three people living in a two bedroom trailer by the way. we've were trying for a while to find a four bedroom place that we could afford, that was when my one son was getting a nice living allotment for going to school from the vets, the other holding that good paying job, and the third well, working but the guy still owes him money for the work he did... we couldn't find anything.

I don't think we have ever had all three of these kids working steady at the same time, that's part of the problem in this economy. My husband has been the financial anchor for them.. He passed away, now there is no anchor. and one thing is for sure, if they are lving with their parents, or sharing a place with friends and strangers they are definately in no position to start families, buy houses, ect. it's one thing to say we need to reduce expectations, it's quite another to say that we should just bypass having children. What we have now is gonna cause some real, economic and social backlash.
And considering that it's mostly the same people who are telling us that we should pull up our bootstraps, work harder, longer hours, lower our expectations (hey, I am down to eating one decent meal every other day, should I go for every third day instead?), ect. that are griping about the single moms, the welfare, social security....well, I got to say...
if people can't afford to begin a family, they are not going to stop having sex....you will end up having more single moms not less. if they aren't going to earn enough to be able to have a roof over their head, food on their table, more than likely you are going to have more going out in the form of welfare. and if they aren't moving out of their parents home as a reasonable time, and mom and dad is helping them out well into their mid-twenties and thirties, they aren't going to building their nesteggs they way their parents had the opportunity to do...thus increasing the need for social security.

all in all we have x number of people in this country with a government that is hell bent on increasing that number drasticallly in hopes that it will force the wages down even more. each one of those people need a roof over their head, food on their tables, clothing, heat, ect. which costs money.... unless we are willing to let these people just do without, live on the street (hey they are making laws against feeding the homeless, laws against them sleeping in public places, ect so it seems to me, that most don't view that as an alternative) well, that money has to come from somewhere! so well, deep down inside how do you think these people should obtain that money, through paychecks from the companies that employ them, or from gov't assistance, compliments of taxpayers, who may never benefit from their work, or their existance for that matter?

Personally, I have eaten at a restaurant or fast food place since my husband died, and very seldom did we when he was alive, there's scores of restaurants and other businesses in this city we've never even ventured in...
those who visit these places and enjoy them have a vested interest in making sure that the employees are healthy, happy, and taken care of since the customer service they receive is dependent on those things. Me, I could give a crap!!! The upper management of these companies and CEO's also should have a vested interest in those employees, since well, their paycheck is dependent on the employees work performance. and they also in many cases have the ability to REDUCE THE COST OF LIVING and thus make higher wages less needed...

If someone wants to eat a McDonalds bad enough, they will be willing to pay a little more, if the upper management, ceo wants to keep getting their paycheck, they will be willing to let that check be reduced a little, find ways to cut expenses, maybe forgo expanding and building new restaurants in cities that already have more than enough restaurants to feed five times the population of the city! It shouldn't be up to the taxpayer to keep their employees happy and healthy enough to do their jobs day after day simply because the taxpayer doesn't want the blight that such poverty would cause!

either accept the proverty, let me and my kids go pitch a tent out in the semi wilderness somewhere and freely fish in the rivers, hunt in the forest, heck plant a small garden. let us drive on the roads without having to pay the insurance premiums, registrations, and property taxes. accept that we don't have a phone for you to call at all hours wanting us to come into work at a moment's notice when someone calls in sick. accept that we are sick and can't go get that danged doctor's note to prove it to you. accept that your neighbor might be raising some chickens in their back yard and you hear a rooster crowing early in the morning or their cow might come wandering in your yard from time to time. accept that we don't have the money to go out and buy a whole new wardrobe to suit your dress code. accept that we might wear the same clothes a few days in a row because we only have two sets of clothes. accept that our lawn mower broke down last year and there's no money to get it fixed or hire someone to mow it on a weekly basis. accept that we can't afford the electicity bill and been forced to rough it for a few months.

heck there are some areas in this country that can't even accept that a person doesn't have the money to repaint their houses every few years!!! it seems to me that it isn't the poor people who need to have their expectations reduced, their finances have convinced that of it. it's the danged society in general who is trying to get blood out of a rock, and force their expectations onto them!

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: pl3bscheese

I had two of my sons sharing a two bedroom apartment, both working hard, both getting overtimes quite a bit, and they were struggling, their rent was less than what we pay here.

Was it in New York? Two people sharing a two bedroom with a regular 40hr work week would suffice in my area. Overtime would mean they have party monies. Maybe they had expensive habits they kept from you? IDK.

[...] it's one thing to say we need to reduce expectations, it's quite another to say that we should just bypass having children.

Why? That's just wise. If you can't provide, don't have kids. I have no kids, the world has enough right now. It doesn't bother me.

What we have now is gonna cause some real, economic and social backlash.
And considering that it's mostly the same people who are telling us that we should pull up our bootstraps, work harder, longer hours, lower our expectations (hey, I am down to eating one decent meal every other day, should I go for every third day instead?), ect. that are griping about the single moms, the welfare, social security....well, I got to say...
if people can't afford to begin a family, they are not going to stop having sex....you will end up having more single moms not less. if they aren't going to earn enough to be able to have a roof over their head, food on their table, more than likely you are going to have more going out in the form of welfare. and if they aren't moving out of their parents home as a reasonable time, and mom and dad is helping them out well into their mid-twenties and thirties, they aren't going to building their nesteggs they way their parents had the opportunity to do...thus increasing the need for social security.

We don't reproduce enough in the states to stabilize our population, and rely on immigration to keep the economics of demography working well. I don't know what to say except people would do best to educate their selves and move to areas of better opportunity. There's plenty of opportunity in my area. I hear very few stories of people not adequately making it locally.

all in all we have x number of people in this country with a government that is hell bent on increasing that number drasticallly in hopes that it will force the wages down even more.

I don't comprehend this statement. You think the government wants people to reproduce like wild rabbits? What makes you think that?

each one of those people need a roof over their head, food on their tables, clothing, heat, ect. which costs money.... unless we are willing to let these people just do without, live on the street (hey they are making laws against feeding the homeless, laws against them sleeping in public places, ect so it seems to me, that most don't view that as an alternative) well, that money has to come from somewhere! so well, deep down inside how do you think these people should obtain that money, through paychecks from the companies that employ them, or from gov't assistance, compliments of taxpayers, who may never benefit from their work, or their existence for that matter?

Preferably by working and making sound economic decisions. Thrift stores are rather cheap. Cooking cuts costs down considerably. If they can't get it on their own, temporarily by community support before government. Churches help out sometimes.

Personally, I have eaten at a restaurant or fast food place since my husband died, and very seldom did we when he was alive, there's scores of restaurants and other businesses in this city we've never even ventured in...
those who visit these places and enjoy them have a vested interest in making sure that the employees are healthy, happy, and taken care of since the customer service they receive is dependent on those things. Me, I could give a crap!!! The upper management of these companies and CEO's also should have a vested interest in those employees, since well, their paycheck is dependent on the employees work performance. and they also in many cases have the ability to REDUCE THE COST OF LIVING and thus make higher wages less needed...

Wait did you mistype here? You were talking about your husband being the winner in the family, and since he left you NOW go eat out at FAST FOOD and restaurants? I have no sympathy for you here. I rarely eat out, make my own foods, and push these saved monies into my savings account. You can't complain and make poor decisions at the same time.

If someone wants to eat a McDonalds bad enough, they will be willing to pay a little more, if the upper management, ceo wants to keep getting their paycheck, they will be willing to let that check be reduced a little, find ways to cut expenses, maybe forgo expanding and building new restaurants in cities that already have more than enough restaurants to feed five times the population of the city! It shouldn't be up to the taxpayer to keep their employees happy and healthy enough to do their jobs day after day simply because the taxpayer doesn't want the blight that such poverty would cause!

I have no clue what you're on about here. I don't eat fast food, and don't concern myself with the politics of it. My vote (monies) go elsewhere.

either accept the proverty, let me and my kids go pitch a tent out in the semi wilderness somewhere and freely fish in the rivers, hunt in the forest, heck plant a small garden. let us drive on the roads without having to pay the insurance premiums, registrations, and property taxes. accept that we don't have a phone for you to call at all hours wanting us to come into work at a moment's notice when someone calls in sick. accept that we are sick and can't go get that danged doctor's note to prove it to you. accept that your neighbor might be raising some chickens in their back yard and you hear a rooster crowing early in the morning or their cow might come wandering in your yard from time to time. accept that we don't have the money to go out and buy a whole new wardrobe to suit your dress code. accept that we might wear the same clothes a few days in a row because we only have two sets of clothes. accept that our lawn mower broke down last year and there's no money to get it fixed or hire someone to mow it on a weekly basis. accept that we can't afford the electicity bill and been forced to rough it for a few months.

Accept that you're ignorant and whining? No thank you! Get a clue!

heck there are some areas in this country that can't even accept that a person doesn't have the money to repaint their houses every few years!!! it seems to me that it isn't the poor people who need to have their expectations reduced, their finances have convinced that of it. it's the danged society in general who is trying to get blood out of a rock, and force their expectations onto them!

If you can't read the terms of your living arrangements before making a purchase, then you will unexpectedly run into issues. That's nobodies problems but your own. I am aware of building codes and regulations in my area, and fully aware that HOA rules are wise to comply with, else get on the board to change. No clue why you're so for fighting things which make perfect freaking sense. Sheesh!

Don't expect me to further reply.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

I mistyped...

but still think that there's gonna be a backlash at some point in the future from this.