Risks are equal for those who are poor (earning little money from their labor) and those who are rich (earning a lot of money for their labor), since most people spend to the level of their income - both of these people are essentially broke There are millions of people who are one check away from financial disaster at every income level. he difference though that I have been speaking of is between the broke and the wealthy (i.e. those who have passive income).
No, you missed the point. financial disaster to a rich man is having to live a bit less comfortably. To a poor man, it is potentially begging on the streets, and never being able to bounce back. That is the difference. It is not the same at all.
Yes, it is. The risk is greater than the reward.
You talk in the language of economics, but the logic is still fail. Just because you say the risk is greater than the reward, and use part of an economic law, does not mean the situation applies to the law. The risk is not greater than the reward. The risk is only having to cover a roomie for 2 or 3 months, max, until you find a new, one, while the rewards is paying perhaps as low as 1/3rd the rent you would have every month.
As far as Seattle, while it is an expensive city, I did manage to find inexpensive rentals on Craigslist. However, if one cannot manage to work and pay rent in that city, then perhaps relocation is in order, or simply work a second or third job. It is not an option for everyone, but options are there.
At min wage in Seattle, I assure you, you did not find a place for less than half of what a full time min-wage employee would make after taxes. Half your pay for housing is not inexpensive. It may be inexpensive to you.
Relocation? With what money? And once again, it is easier to relocate if there is family elsewhere... ...what if there is no family? What if your family is dead? What if you were a foster child? What if your parents raped you when you were 14 and you had to run away? I've met these people, and talked to them at length about their lives. I know you think everybody should be able to rise above such things... ...and for that, I wish it had happened to you. You would be singing a different tune. Perhaps in the next life you'll get to start out ugly, or hated, or raped, or beaten by an alcoholic, when you are young. Yeah, some people do rise above it all, but who are you to judge those who do not? Do not give me "everybody endures hardships in life"... ...because that is simply false. Some of the people here make me so sick with their assumptions about life and expectations of people to just rise up and beat the world with all the cards stacked against them. I thought my youth was pretty bad, until I met people who had truly fucked up lives and no chances and no lucky breaks. Then I realized I had it good. I, like most of you arrogant posters, wouldn't even be where I am today if it wasn't for family and people around me who cared, and could help me when I was down, and just knowing they were there just in case I did fall. Not everybody has that, and it is not exactly horrible to be poor... ...but it is horrible to be disrespected, and looked down upon, and blamed for situations people have no control over.
I mean, what is with the cold-heartedness? Do you think that makes you appear more logical? Do you think theoretical systems are good because they are systems? Do you not understand that all systems are human devices, and therefore flawed and "corrupt"? I see so many people proud of being cold-hearted, and taking it to lengths, just so they can claim that it is part of some "reality". The only reality is what we make. It doesn't mean you have to feed the homeless, but if you want to solve problems, maybe you should at least try to understand them first, before passing your judgements. I know it makes you feel good to think you are successful, therefore you are smart, and the poor are dumb, but it really isn't true, and it isn't flattering, either.
It is sick to watch the privileged pat themselves on the back, and assure themselves they are simply better people than the working poor, when they are nothing more than more privileged people.
We have a work ethic and skills deficit in this country, unlike we have ever seen before. Just look at the number of adult men working in low wage jobs like retail stores, etc. Are these men victims of the economy, or are they victims of their own decisions?
Economy. Thirty years ago they would be working in a high paying factory job. Those jobs don't exist anymore. A ton of people retiring from the workforce today will never be able to get back in, because previous generations are nothing like the current one when it comes to important work skills in the computer age. A high school degree was enough to get a job one could raise a family on. Try that in today's world. I know, there is still plumber, electrician, etc, those have always been around, what isn't around anymore is factory jobs for all of the rest of the high school only graduates. It has nothing to do with work ethic. Old people calling young people lazy is as old as the hills. Young people are always harder workers. They are young, fresh, physically stronger and heartier, and hornier and hungrier for money. It has always been that way, and there has always been an older generation trying to keep them down and take their labor from them on the cheap. Obamacare is just the newest layer of that.
It's the latter, since I think you would have to search far and wide to find a 42 year old man with a Masters degree in engineering and an investment portfolio working as a WalMart greeter.
I love how you people always bring up engineering. Yeah, its a great degree, and useful, and useful to humanity... ...it is also an incredibly difficult one to get. Your average person can not get one, no matter how driven they are. There are also people with MBA's, who learn nothing but how to be good parasites, skimming as much possible with as little effort as possible. And there is a whole spectrum in between. Look at the enormous bureaucracy, and tell me it isn't true.
So if you are stuck flipping burgers for 9 bucks an hour - don't blame your employer and walk out on the job.
Why not? Flipping burgers, making cars in a factory. It's all the same skill level. Burger flippers could get more, they just need to figure out how to take from the shareholders. There is surely a way, and if the shareholders "have to" pay what the burger flippers demand or go out of business, then that is the fair value of their labor. If the shareholders would rather go out of business, so be it. Go out of business... ..another burger joint will open. It will not be the end of the world. People will still want burgers.
