RiceLad15
Hall of Famer
Posts: 16,690
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 111
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
|
RE: Trump Administration
(12-05-2017 01:57 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (12-05-2017 01:05 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: (12-05-2017 12:30 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (12-05-2017 11:43 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: As I said Lad, the comparison of CEO salary to a 'normal' salary is a valid discussion topic. Problem it has no bearing or impact on a supply/demand/price issue for the labor market as a whole.
And the discussion of what you state as 'jobs being more complex' is actually a discussion of the progression over time of what a 'normal job' is -- that has changed from "high school diploma", to "college degree", to "practical knowledge college degree" (i.e. STEM or accounting) just from the mid 1950's.
What was considered a top level salary entree in the mid 70's (college degree) only just gets you in the door along with tens of millions of others at this point. So given that upward increase in supply of college degreed candidates, it really stands to common sense that that increase in supply will translate to downward salary pressure.
You mean there are lots of people with degrees working in Starbucks? How unfair. let's pass a law requiring them to get the same pay as all the other college grads. They must be compensated for their knowledge of Art History and Sociology.
I don't get your fixation on the most menial of jobs in a company - those don't always equate to the average employee because they're at the bottom rung.
But at some point, don't we want, as a society, to make sure that those who are willing to both educate themselves AND work a full time job, to make enough money to live a fruitful life? Since when did our definition of working an honest days work change from just that, to working an honest day's work in a non-service industry position? I actually DO support a law that makes sure they're paid a living wage, as minimum wage laws have not kept up, at all, with inflation.
Ironically, one of the main reasons those people went to school and got an Art History and Sociology degree, is because YOUR generation told them to, and told them that if they got a college degree that they would have a job waiting for them. It seems like nowadays all that Boomers want to do is ***** and moan about how awful my generation is, without taking a good hard look at the opportunities they themselves had, that fact that a good portion of my generation was raised by them, and that the rungs of the ladder up are being pulled up more and more each day (for example, they won't fricken retire and free up salaries for new employees).
We've now gone off of tax policy, but this sure is a fun tangent.
yeah, my generation effed up. don't make me carry the burden for this. In any case, it was your guys who did most of the effing.
The problem of course is that sold a college education as a key to a high paying job. ANY college education. Any major, any school. Then they made government loans available so people could pursue this dream. End result, lots of people with degrees but no skills and a load of debt.
But you want to guarantee a certain wage to all these unprepared people? How Marxist of you. In this capitalistic society, if they want the money, they need to learn a skill. Not just have money legislated into their pocket.
when I had my interview at Rice, the Dean asked me if education had an intrinsic value. IMO, it does, but we have sold the idea that it has a monetary value. Just the degree is supposed to set you for life.
I think the solution is to stop waving this pie in the sky in their faces, not reward it with higher minimum wages.
I encouraged my grandson to start on a plumbing career out of HS. Sorry if I messed up the 50,000,000 or so (just an estimate!!!!!!!!) who wasted their time on stupid degrees.
Wait, it's Marxist to want a minimum wage so that people who work a full time job can afford to live? I'm not talking about making sure that the janitors and the CEOs make the same, I'm talking about making sure that anyone who wants to work hard gets compensated in a way where they can live and prosper. Why do you want menial laborers to live in poverty, because that is what you're inherently arguing for?
The idea here is that, for those who want to work a full time job, that their employer pays them enough that they're above the floor, so that the government does not have to pick up the slack for them. I agree that if they want to be rich and wealthy they can't expect to do a menial job, but I'm talking about living above the poverty line, not living in a McMansion in Katy.
Previously, I was talking about the average worker in a company, which would include office workers and other white collar individuals, who have seen their pay stagnate as well. Those include people who received STEM degrees, who are contributing to society, but who are still not seeing wage growth in the way one would expect.
I do agree that we need to transition away from the Boomer logic of go to school to get a job - it obviously has not panned out. We need to be encouraging trade schools again and leveraging local colleges, like community colleges, more to help people understand if a college degree is the right choice for them. We're doing a good job of exposing kids to computer programming at a young age, which will help them cope with the changing world, but we also shouldn't avoid exposing them to some manual labor jobs that won't be disappearing (like mechanics).
And finally, how exactly could my generation, born in the early 80's to early 2000s have done the most effing? Our oldest members are now in their early 30s - what exactly could they have done to have caused so many problems?
|
|