Income inequality

Archive From The 'Tank
Locked
User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Rawedge Rim »

Wosbald wrote:+JMJ+

Is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Right About the "Living Wage?" [Opinion]
Image


Image
Gerard van Honthorst (1592-1656), "Childhood of Christ"


"A just wage is the legitimate fruit of work. To refuse or withhold it can be a grave injustice." (CCC 2434)


Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can fairly be called a "socialist" for plenty of reasons; her desire to see people paid a living wage, however, is not one of them. Though she has been criticized by some Catholics for even using the term, it might surprise many of them to know that the Catholic Church has long argued that to be paid a living wage is a human right. In fact, the same popes who have condemned socialism as incompatible with Christianity have simultaneously maintained that employers have a moral duty to pay a living wage.

In 1891's Rerum Novarum, the first of what came to be known as the "Social Encyclicals" of the Church, Pope Leo XIII is very clear: "The preservation of life is the bounden duty of one and all, and to be wanting therein is a crime. It necessarily follows that each one has a natural right to procure what is required in order to live, and the poor can procure that in no other way than by what they can earn through their work." Lest this appear to modern American ears as an endorsement of socialism, note Leo's condemnation of this error: "Hence, it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind ... ."

Forty years later, in Quadragesimo Anno, Pope Pius XI concurred ...

In 1961's Mater et Magistra, Pope Saint John XXIII echoed Pius XI's belief ...

In 1991's Centesimus Annus, Pope Saint John Paul II blasted the evils of socialism, concluding that "the fundamental error of socialism is anthropological in nature." He also made the argument that "A workman's wages should be sufficient to enable him to support himself, his wife and his children."

The Magisterium could not be clearer: a man's right to a living wage originates in justice and is a natural extension of his right to life. If man has the right to life, he therefore has the right to those things necessary to sustain that life. That truth should be self-evident, but in modern times there has been an unfortunate rhetorical development which has obscured it. In America, the term "right to life," often refers merely to the unborn. This is not incorrect, but it is radically incomplete.

Rather than one narrow claim, the right to life entails what we might call "sub-rights," or natural, logical extensions of the most fundamental right. In Western law, the right to private property is seen not as a single right of possession, but as a bundle of rights, including the right to possess, the right to use, the right to dispose of the thing, and the right of exclusion. Similarly, the right to life is also a bundle. Beginning in the womb, this most fundamental right naturally entails the right to not be harmed unjustly, the right to private property, the right to food, the right to shelter, the right to live until natural death. It also contains the right to those materials necessary to properly sustain his life -- including a living wage.

Simply put, the right to life is the right to live. A living wage is a right because living is a right.

[...]

Let's return to Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, whose economic comments have been dismissed and/or laughed off as one big, uneducated rant. As a good socialist, she denies the legitimate rights of private property, and she supports unchecked abortion, which -- among other problematic positions she holds -- are absolutely indefensible, even disqualifying. But on the particular subject of demanding living wages, her comments could -- and should -- provide an opportunity for us Catholics to re-examine and remind others of official magisterial teaching. If we Catholics equate the living wage with socialism, we not only throw the baby out with the bathwater, but we set ourselves up as opponents of a chief tenet of Catholic social teaching.
Keep in mind the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. While it's meaning had to do with people getting into heaven regardless of when they converted, it still brings up the point
Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny? Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?
and of course my second point is "what is a living wage?"
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25374
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

On your last from dear ol wiki
A living wage is the minimum income necessary for a worker to meet their basic needs. Needs are defined to include food, housing, and other essential needs such as clothing. The goal of a living wage is to allow a worker to afford a basic but decent standard of living
So seems reasonable 🤔

In fact at the tippy top of Wosas article theres a specific Catholic definition 😉

As to your parable .. its kinda laughable imo 😂 as its meant metaphorically. And it uses archaic priorities, social hierarchies that no longer exist today and its agenda is subservience to deemed authority and the concepts of master and servants, in which the master could nominate what THEY deemed sufficient and the worker HAD to accord his expectations accordingly in accepting even just the crumbs from his festively laden table.

Perhaps you might like to rebut with yet another archaic metaphor not intended for literal interpretation 🤔

Many nations around the world base their minimum wage standards on what is calculated a living wage. Its not unusual to us down under as minimum wage is mandated for all categories of employment .. yup even wait staff in the hospitality must be paid according to the statutory minimum hourly rate specified. So no tipping here to supplement a miniscual wage.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

I know that I am only an assistant manager at Wal-Mart, but the company must pay me a living wage to cover the expenses for my family, including my wife (who cannot work for medical reasons) and our five children.

No, the idea of "living wages" isn't going to work. If you cannot pay your bills with the money you are currently making then 1) get a better job, 2) get a second job, or 3) both.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Rawedge Rim »

Skyweir wrote:On your last from dear ol wiki
A living wage is the minimum income necessary for a worker to meet their basic needs. Needs are defined to include food, housing, and other essential needs such as clothing. The goal of a living wage is to allow a worker to afford a basic but decent standard of living
So seems reasonable 🤔

In fact at the tippy top of Wosas article theres a specific Catholic definition 😉

As to your parable .. its kinda laughable imo 😂 as its meant metaphorically. And it uses archaic priorities, social hierarchies that no longer exist today and its agenda is subservience to deemed authority and the concepts of master and servants, in which the master could nominate what THEY deemed sufficient and the worker HAD to accord his expectations accordingly in accepting even just the crumbs from his festively laden table.

Perhaps you might like to rebut with yet another archaic metaphor not intended for literal interpretation 🤔

Many nations around the world base their minimum wage standards on what is calculated a living wage. Its not unusual to us down under as minimum wage is mandated for all categories of employment .. yup even wait staff in the hospitality must be paid according to the statutory minimum hourly rate specified. So no tipping here to supplement a miniscual wage.
What dimension did you come from? Archaic social hiarchies that no longer exist? There are literally billions of people who live under just such systems.

Back to the Parable; the wages there were about what the average day worker would recieve for working the fields. In the story, the owner went out in the morning and hired some folks to pick grapes. As the day progressed he decided that he needed some more workers so about midday he hired some more workers. Later on he decided that the work wasn't getting done fast enough and hired some more workers towards the end of the day. At the end of the day, he gathered the workers together and paid them off in reverse order of when they were hired. He paid the ones who worked the least hours one denari. He paid the ones he hired around mid-afternoon one denari. Well, the ones who were hired in the morning figured that since they put in so much more time and work than the others would get paid more. Instead the owner only paid them one denari. Being somewhat put out, they complained about that. The owner replied that he wasn't being unfair. He contracted with them that amount of pay, and all recieved what he had promised, and it wasn't thier place to change the rules of the contract.


Further, a living wage in New York City might be $35 an hr. while in Montgomery, Alabama $15 might be enough. So how do you mandate a living wage with such disparities in the cost of living?
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9281
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 13 times

Post by SoulBiter »

Unemployment is at 3.8%!!! That is the lowest its been in my adult life. Historically it was at 3.8% when I was 3 years old in 1966. LOL
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61746
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

Calculated as the actual number of people without employment? Or just people who are currently looking for work?

(Ours is like 27.5% - Pretty bad situation really.)

--A
User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Rawedge Rim »

SoulBiter wrote:Unemployment is at 3.8%!!! That is the lowest its been in my adult life. Historically it was at 3.8% when I was 3 years old in 1966. LOL
Keep in mind that part time is also included in that number, and a lot of people now have 2 part time jobs instead of one full time thanks to Obamacare.
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

Amazon and its subsidiaries, such as Whole Foods, moved to a voluntary $15 per hour minimum wage. The average full-time worker put in about 34.5 hours per week....

...but since then many of them have had their hours trimmed so that they are no longer "full time", which also means that Amazon does not have pay them any benefits. Net result: many of those workers are making less now that their minimum pay got raise.

If the minimum wage is raised then companies will find a way to cut expenses to compensate, and they won't trim executive pay or perks, I can assure you.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61746
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

But isn't this part of the problem? "We'll raise the minimum wage, look how good we are." "We'll cut hours & benefits, we have to keep profits up."

I don't know that there's an equitable answer. If profits aren't up, investors won't invest, companies will go under, people will lost their jobs.

But back to the age old question...how much is enough? Can investors live with a slightly smaller slice of the pie? And consumers with a slightly higher cost?

Personally I think we all should. But not everybody does obviously.

--A
User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Rawedge Rim »

The problem is what constitutes a "living wage". Is it the ability just to keep the rain off your head and rice on the table? Or does it mean the ability to raise a family of 5 and send them to college with just a bit of scrimping?

Where I'm at, you can probably get by on $15 an hour if you get 40 hrs weekly and live a very modest life (maybe one kid, used cars, low rent). In a major metropolitan area, that won't buy you a closet to store your shoes in.
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19636
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

I wonder what the people who live on a dollar a day think of us when we complain that you can't live on $15/hr. First World problems. No matter how much progress we make and how prosperous we become, somehow we still convince ourselves that we're destitute or getting screwed.

My girlfriend manages an accounting department. She says that her millennial employees don't think they should *have* to work 40 hours. If they can get their work done in 20, they should be able to go home and play video games. They actually make this argument to her. (One of them is a huge gamer, actually has played tournaments and shit ... so I'm not stereotyping.) She can't get it through their heads that they are just starting their careers, and she's trying to train them to improve their productivity, so they can take on more responsibility, so they can move up in the company, so they can make more money, etc. But they want to work 20 hours and play video games.

I'm a generally positive person, but this is the kind of shit that scares me about our future. I guess it's because I have a son who plays video games every waking moment, when not in school. (Yes, I used to get him out of the house, but I don't live with him anymore, so I have little power over that now.)
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23652
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

"Girlfriend"? I thought you and Ki were married. (I used to think you and Jazz Fusion were married.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19636
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

Divorce. It happens. Moving on.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Rawedge Rim »

Zarathustra wrote:I wonder what the people who live on a dollar a day think of us when we complain that you can't live on $15/hr. First World problems. No matter how much progress we make and how prosperous we become, somehow we still convince ourselves that we're destitute or getting screwed.

My girlfriend manages an accounting department. She says that her millennial employees don't think they should *have* to work 40 hours. If they can get their work done in 20, they should be able to go home and play video games. They actually make this argument to her. (One of them is a huge gamer, actually has played tournaments and shit ... so I'm not stereotyping.) She can't get it through their heads that they are just starting their careers, and she's trying to train them to improve their productivity, so they can take on more responsibility, so they can move up in the company, so they can make more money, etc. But they want to work 20 hours and play video games.

I'm a generally positive person, but this is the kind of shit that scares me about our future. I guess it's because I have a son who plays video games every waking moment, when not in school. (Yes, I used to get him out of the house, but I don't live with him anymore, so I have little power over that now.)
people who live on a dollar a day can buy a loaf of bread for a dime or so, while it costs me a couple of bucks for cheap ass white bread.
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Rawedge Rim »

Zarathustra wrote:I wonder what the people who live on a dollar a day think of us when we complain that you can't live on $15/hr. First World problems. No matter how much progress we make and how prosperous we become, somehow we still convince ourselves that we're destitute or getting screwed.

My girlfriend manages an accounting department. She says that her millennial employees don't think they should *have* to work 40 hours. If they can get their work done in 20, they should be able to go home and play video games. They actually make this argument to her. (One of them is a huge gamer, actually has played tournaments and shit ... so I'm not stereotyping.) She can't get it through their heads that they are just starting their careers, and she's trying to train them to improve their productivity, so they can take on more responsibility, so they can move up in the company, so they can make more money, etc. But they want to work 20 hours and play video games.

I'm a generally positive person, but this is the kind of shit that scares me about our future. I guess it's because I have a son who plays video games every waking moment, when not in school. (Yes, I used to get him out of the house, but I don't live with him anymore, so I have little power over that now.)
people who live on a dollar a day can buy a loaf of bread for a dime or so, while it costs me a couple of bucks for cheap ass white bread.
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19636
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

Rawedge Rim wrote:
Zarathustra wrote:I wonder what the people who live on a dollar a day think of us when we complain that you can't live on $15/hr. First World problems. No matter how much progress we make and how prosperous we become, somehow we still convince ourselves that we're destitute or getting screwed.

My girlfriend manages an accounting department. She says that her millennial employees don't think they should *have* to work 40 hours. If they can get their work done in 20, they should be able to go home and play video games. They actually make this argument to her. (One of them is a huge gamer, actually has played tournaments and shit ... so I'm not stereotyping.) She can't get it through their heads that they are just starting their careers, and she's trying to train them to improve their productivity, so they can take on more responsibility, so they can move up in the company, so they can make more money, etc. But they want to work 20 hours and play video games.

I'm a generally positive person, but this is the kind of shit that scares me about our future. I guess it's because I have a son who plays video games every waking moment, when not in school. (Yes, I used to get him out of the house, but I don't live with him anymore, so I have little power over that now.)
people who live on a dollar a day can buy a loaf of bread for a dime or so, while it costs me a couple of bucks for cheap ass white bread.
Even if what you say is true, do you spend 10% of your daily take home pay on a loaf of bread? No, more likely you spend less than a 10th of an hour on a loaf of bread. But 10 cents of a dollar represents significantly more time invested to buy that bread . . . if what you say is true.

But what you say isn't true:

The Democratic Republic of Congo is the poorest country on earth. Cost of living there is 36% higher than the U.S. A loaf of bread costs $1.73. So at a dollar a day, they have to work almost 2 days to have a loaf of bread. But GDP is actually $348 per capita, so they live on less than a dollar a day.

8O

I don't think we truly understand poverty in America.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

Zarathustra wrote:I don't think we truly understand poverty in America.
We don't. When Ms. Lebwohl was living in less-than-optimal conditions years ago--newly-divorced, two young children in elementary school, trying to go to school part-time and working part-time while receiving the paltry benefits for which she qualified--her living conditions still included electricity, hot/cold running water, indoor plumbing, and a mobile phone. Compared to how people live in many parts of the world that would be considered "luxury", even if it was an older trailer where the floor had been shored up to prevent the refrigerator from falling through it.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61746
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

Yeah, agreed Z. Loaf of bread here costs nearly $1. It's estimated that as many as 14 million people here go to bed hungry at night.

Y'all don't have poverty as a lot of the rest of the world knows it.

I'm not rich by any standards, but I still earn in the top 2% in my country.

--A
User avatar
Hashi Lebwohl
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19576
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm

Post by Hashi Lebwohl »

There have been a handful of Hollywood celebrities and other deep-pocketed people who have been caught in a scheme where they would funnel money to brand-name universities in exchange for getting easy access for their children.
the article here

the feds found a $25 million scam run by the William Singer-topped Key Worldwide Foundation. The money, collected by the nonprofit as "donations" from parents, allegedly funded illegal activity including hiring other individuals to write admission exams for potential students, paying officials to alter test scores, and bribing coaches so their children could gain admission as recruited athletes even if they had never played the sport. Singer and several coaches from top schools entered guilty pleas earlier Tuesday.
Everyone else has to work, scrape, and sometimes get lucky to obtain admission to brand-name schools. These people were just buying their way in. Typical.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25374
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

It is typical... and the unethical advantage of wealth over merit.

But having said that ... its all about the Benjamins isnt it? to coin a phrase 😉 If you have money you CAN bribe or buy your way into places.

We all want money to increase our purchase power. And the 1st world is as far removed from the actual realities of poverty as the majority of earth dwelling humans are from the moon.

But even within 1st world nations there are still people that are homeless, some living on the streets, with nothing. But there exists safety nets in the form of some benefits, shelters run by charitable organisations, etc.

Here those that completely isolate themselves from all socially provided safety nets are those with significant mental health issues.

NB Re Benjamin Franklins 😉 💰 💴 💵
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
Locked

Return to “Coercri”