Why Are Minimum Wage Jobs Advertised As A Career?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Because universities offer knowledge to people. It is your choice what knowledge you want to pay for. Universities are not solely training centers for marketable jobs. It is up to the consumer of said knowledge to decide for themselves what they want to pay for.

a reply to: Aazadan

And since the reasonable you seek would define the floor, it also defines the rest of the economy.

This is why minimum wage hikes never, ever address this problem. But no one ever learns and pretty soon the "new" minimum is once again inadequate.

The only other way to seek to address this is to switch to a complete command economy, but no one ever learns that lesson, either. It also fails and spectacularly as we see over and over.

a reply to: regor77

What shows? That I came from a somewhat lower starting point (comparatively speaking... I was "privileged" enough to be born in the USA) and improved my position in life?

Do you think someone performing a menial task should be afforded the luxuries of today?

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

Because universities offer knowledge to people. It is your choice what knowledge you want to pay for. Universities are not solely training centers for marketable jobs. It is up to the consumer of said knowledge to decide for themselves what they want to pay for.

There are a whole bunch of college grads that would disagree with you...

a reply to: Xtrozero

They are free to disagree with me, it doesn't mean they are right.

I don't willfully mislead anyone into higher education. Everyone is free to make poor, uninformed choices.

a reply to: Xtrozero

There are a lot of people who hope they will get jobs, but they don't do research into the job market or pick the wrong thing or don't understand what they can expect from the field they do get trained in.

The world always needs teachers, for exmaple, but you're going to be making a crap return on your investment. That's just the nature of the higher ed beast.

a reply to: Aazadan

The increasing quality of goods most certainly does improve purchasing power. Purchasing power is not solely based on wage increases, nor can you assume that inflation just erodes all of your purchase power. It is a bit more complex. A good example is TVs and other electronics. The quality increases exponentially while prices fall through the floor. There are very few TVs that only the rich can buy. I've seen "poor" folks with a HD TV in every room. Microwaves. Refrigerators. A lot of these items were only for the rich several decades ago, but not pretty much everyone can have one. A 1%er's iPhone is the same as Pookie's iPhone.

True, things like higher education have far outstripped inflation but that is almost solely the fault of big govt and student loans being given out like candy.

a reply to: TycoonBarnaby

I apologize, had you mixed up with another poster I replied to. Will redact post. However I stand by my other post directed at you.

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

They are free to disagree with me, it doesn't mean they are right.

I don't willfully mislead anyone into higher education. Everyone is free to make poor, uninformed choices.

The problem is they feel they need to be paid more since they feel they are worth more than what the job is worth. When we look at the 99%er movement someone along the way with each and everyone of them feed them some lies on how the world really works. There is a level of predatory acts against these people who make your "free to make poor, uninformed choices."

Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of them and I do rather well, but we have a generation of disillusioned kiddies that after the full force of the real world hits them in the face they are furthered feed propaganda that it is the rich that is holding them down from achieving and not their life choices...

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Aazadan

The increasing quality of goods most certainly does improve purchasing power. Purchasing power is not solely based on wage increases, nor can you assume that inflation just erodes all of your purchase power. It is a bit more complex. A good example is TVs and other electronics. The quality increases exponentially while prices fall through the floor. There are very few TVs that only the rich can buy. I've seen "poor" folks with a HD TV in every room. Microwaves. Refrigerators. A lot of these items were only for the rich several decades ago, but not pretty much everyone can have one. A 1%er's iPhone is the same as Pookie's iPhone.

True, things like higher education have far outstripped inflation but that is almost solely the fault of big govt and student loans being given out like candy.

You don't seem to understand the definition of purchasing power. The quality of the good is irrelevant because what is measured is always the average quality item. How many hours of work does it take to purchase a 4 year education? A gallon of gas? A house? What percent of your budget goes towards rent? food? entertainment? These are the factors to consider when talking about purchasing power.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xtrozero

There are a lot of people who hope they will get jobs, but they don't do research into the job market or pick the wrong thing or don't understand what they can expect from the field they do get trained in.

The world always needs teachers, for exmaple, but you're going to be making a crap return on your investment. That's just the nature of the higher ed beast.

I have met a lot of college students that have no clue to what job they will look for after graduation...lol

I use to say that nurses and teachers will always be needed, I retract teachers after I saw their pay continued to be reduced and then see 1000 hopefuls apply for 3 positions.

My secret to having a job that is always needed and will never go overseas...Get a job that needs a top secret clearance

a reply to: infinityorder

They have that mindset because they actually believe they are worth so very,very much more inherently. Ever see Snowpiercer? Predictable movie but this little speech sums up the thinking:

"Order is the barrier that holds back the flood of death. We must all of us on this train of life remain in our allotted station. We must each of us occupy our preordained particular position. Would you wear a shoe on your head? Of course you wouldn't wear a shoe on your head. A shoe doesn't belong on your head. A shoe belongs on your foot. A hat belongs on your head. I am a hat. You are a shoe. I belong on the head. You belong on the foot. Yes? So it is. In the beginning, order was proscribed by your ticket: First Class, Economy, and freeloaders like you. Eternal order is prescribed by the sacred engine: all things flow from the sacred engine, all things in their place, all passengers in their section, all water flowing. all heat rising, pays homage to the sacred engine, in its own particular preordained position. So it is. Now, as in the beginning, I belong to the front. You belong to the tail. When the foot seeks the place of the head, the sacred line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe."

Anyway, rising up requires people to actually work together. With the division that is being promoted amongst the masses: middle class vs poor, black vs. white, libs vs cons and so on and so forth, it is unlikely that anyone will try to stand together until it's actually too late.

originally posted by: regor77

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Toadmund

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Edumakated

What world are you living in the 1950's or 2015?

Theres no upward mobility anymore give me a break.

There is plenty of upward mobility for those that are willing to work hard. There is no upward mobility for the weak, lazy, and stupid. If you can't run with the big dogs, get off the porch. Those things you mentioned are what drive our economy. If as you say we just leave the cars, internet, cell phones and ownership of homes to those who make excellent pay then those same people would begin to lose their jobs because the economy would tank. It would affect everyone but the poor cuzz, really, they are used to it. Your argument is self defeating.

Some of us don't live to work, we work to live.

We should be able to live, why must we run with 'those' dogs.

ANY job should be a job that people can live off of, YOU are selling your labour, for your benefit.
Unfortunately it's not usually beneficial for you, but mostly for them.
Parasites of society, the banks, corporations etc. They suck our life blood and they want us to play THEIR game?!

(Insert bad word) THEM!

What do you mean by "live"? What do you require to live? Do you need the internet, a TV, a car, etc?
Poverty level in the US is still so far beyond just living, surely you are actually saying you require more than just living for doing something a machine could do instead of you.

If all the people who you say shouldnt be spending on other than necessary ie. internet, phones,cars and home ownership were to stop buying these extravagancies it would put the economy in a tail spin. These are the bread and butter of our economy now. If all quit buying them it would affect you greatly. The poor wouldnt notice since they are used to it. They would adapt much quicker than their "betters" who are really dependant on such things.

I see your viewpoint. I don't see it effecting me in the future (meaning my life span.) You probably don't know what I do (you might....) Some skills/knowledge will always be in high demand.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

They are free to disagree with me, it doesn't mean they are right.

I don't willfully mislead anyone into higher education. Everyone is free to make poor, uninformed choices.

The problem is they feel they need to be paid more since they feel they are worth more than what the job is worth. When we look at the 99%er movement someone along the way with each and everyone of them feed them some lies on how the world really works. There is a level of predatory acts against these people who make your "free to make poor, uninformed choices."

We definitely overproduce some degrees and underproduce others but it has been my experience that there is a lot of value in the more artistic degrees and that they don't get the respect they deserve. Art inspires the scientists and engineers to find new ways to do things, look at Star Trek how many modern day technologies has that series been the basis for? We could take historical examples too with the study of the human body, it was the artists and their thirst for anatomical knowledge that lead to much of our understanding of how the body works.

Many of the best classes I've had were my professional level art classes, art is all about creating your own logic system and then adhering to it in that piece. Being taught to do that is a skill that extends far beyond putting some lines on a paper and it has many applications.

Some of the other degrees like Women's Studies, I think we overproduce but at the same time they do cover topics that are important for us to address as a society and we're better off for having them. The degree that I find to be most overrated and most overproduced is the business degree.

I'm not sure how I feel about this actually. Thanks OP for the thread.

I worked full time from the time I was 15 and living away from home, in a variety of fast food -- eventually doing sets, crewleader, and so on. I began jr. college because it was easily affordable in southern coastal ca at the time, but unfortunately living expenses weren't, and I ended up with two FT jobs and school and when my body decided my disinterest in minor things like "sleep" was unacceptable, which happened around the same time my primary goals were kind of shattered (didn't want them anymore, realized it wasn't for me), I left that. I worked for about a year in the then-newly-revamped Conservation Corps in California (swinging axes and such) because my cousin talked me into the insane idea of taking a job with him that actually advertised as 'Hard work. Low pay. Miserable conditions.' Then I got an entry level p/t job doing a little bit of shipping, packaging, and got laid off and walked around the business section with my short resume (had no car) until someone hired me as asst. to the asst. shipper in a small marking devices mfg corp. The company grew over 400% each of two years and I formed a QA dept. that didn't exist, learned some basic dBase coding, and ended up managing three warehouses, developing a chemical division, running purchasing and 3 shifts and more because in small fast growing corps you do what must be done and you just figure it out; that's where growth opportunities are.

Eventually I went a different route and stepped back (no longer middle mgmt) and did mostly admin contract agency jobs and some independent work where I could find it. Eventually a word of mouth job came along as a temp help-small-biz-in-need which much of my work was, and that turned into a real job for about four years, and then I got married and had a kid. I worked temp when pregnant and taught myself html and graphic design while she was an infant and then got a job doing webwork at lockheed martin when she was about 2.5. This contract ended but eventually led to another decent webjob as a project manager/coder that eventually got me my current (good) corporate job when they bought it, though my position has changed many times in the 11 years I've been with the (ever-changing owners) company. Which is a typical big corp and I could be unemployed next week for no fault, the way they operate, which is terrifying given my age/health/location, ah well.

Now I have a daughter who is 18 years old. But she can't really take the same path, not just because she is not at all the driven personality I was, but because many of the most substantial and catalyst jobs I had, in today's world, you couldn't get them because you worked hard, or because you were at the company and clearly had the brains and obsessive work ethic for it. You'd need a college degree, years first of a few classes 'about' business for which you'd be indebted for insane amounts of money, assuming you could afford to live during those years to begin with. College has become just as much an issue of corporatism and control in our culture.

It's not impossible she could start at McD and continue forward, like I started in fast food (not there), but it's highly unlikely, especially given there is a certain personality profile for fast food managers (e.g. insane) which I had and she doesn't. But back in my era (I'm 49), that wasn't the only job or option. Today, aside from a similar corporate job but diff environment (like say, home depot or something, and I don't see many young people there compared to 20s or older), I'm not sure what young people (or any people without college) are supposed to do, given the jobs I see in the paper all seem doomed.

As for how much the corporate McD makes, remember that at the street level, there is an owner of a local franchise, and their profit is a whole lot less, it is in part the staggering volume of business that results in the top of the pyramid (corp HQ) having such an income. The people who are actually paying the employees out of their location's income may or may not be making a lot of money but it's usually not so exhorbitant as top-HQ dollars make it sound.

As for my kid, I can't afford much college but I'm trying to encourage her to some, she is not crazy enough to try and get loans to indebt herself for life and she isn't in any star scholar/sport situation. But, we know tons of people who have college degrees -- and they are working the same crappy admin/retail jobs, or seemingly 'better' jobs but that still pay crap like for the city, as everybody else, they just have enormous debt, so it seems pointless to her.

When college seems like an insane burden with an often pointless result, and not going to college can't get you there from here, what exactly is supposed to motivate young people in today's world?

Small to medium businesses, particularly those which reward competence, have always been the backbone of the country through which people could learn a ton (I consider the learning the big thing), and work their way up, into jobs that normally you'd have to have a degree for. As those get fewer and big corporations get more plentiful (which also reduces many job titles from doorways to tombstones, and drastically reduces the scope of duties/training, compared to a small corp with less legal hats in HR) it gets a lot less common for this path to be plausible for people just starting out.

McD and WM *is* a career for some people. And they do gear employment to that starry-eyed future. And this shouldn't be seen as an insult that people choose that. In the city I live in right now, when SWM came in, most similar biz went out, and so at this point, SWM is actually considered a decent job, not for its income but because for that income, you can at least have an environ slightly (just slightly) less insane than McD down the road, and the chance to maybe do something a little different a little later... and if you're starving due to the income, well, you'd be starving at every other local option that doesn't require a degree too.

The employment situation and the economic situation in the country are the issues, I believe; not so much the individual employers, who merely reflect the despair of the situation.

I think culture is also an issue. We should not be living so separately as we do. At this point of economy we should definitely be living more communally, so that costs for rent/food and the time for related chores can be distributed. This is a problem in a culture where personal character/responsibility/functionality seem less likely to breed reasonable roommates than say, in the 1950s or something.

RC

a reply to: SearchLightsInc

not only that what about all the fake colleges go to beckfield to further your career in janitorial services lol.

This post left me thoughtful when I saw it yesterday.

One of the things that my cultural upbringing has clashed with in France is that minimum wage jobs are considered career choices.

The first time I heard that, I had been sent to apply for a job in telemarketing, (I was obligated to go, though there was no question in my mind of taking such a job). It was repeatedly referred to as career. I laughed outloud. But then noticed all kinds of jobs referred to that way- cashiers at the grocery store had been there their whole life, the job of commis (kitchen aid) where I work, has people in it that consider it their career choice, have been doing it for 20 years, and expect they will retire from it eventually.

I have a hard time digesting this concept. Most of these jobs, I have had at one time or another when I was a teen or young adult. Yet here, it is hard for a young person to land one- they ask for experienced persons only, a degree of some sort, or certification.

They also have all sorts of benefits which make them jobs one can live with, assured by state laws and social security.
The people of this country are okay with that, they don't mind that they are paying taxes so that someone can stay in a "entry level" job for life. So whatever- I am an outsider, who am I to judge their choices? I can only observe and try to understand.


It seems that ambition is not impressed upon them as important for all to have. It is okay to be content with the minimum. A couple in which both work minimum wage can still afford to live and have a family. That is acceptable. The ambitious are free to climb and strive for more, but nobody feels it is obligatory. It is important that one be an active part of the society and have some sort of job, but after that, if you want to put more attention and energy into your personal life and family than to getting ahead financially, that is a socially accepted path.

My question was- well, how then do the younger people get their foot in the door? It seems that what this does is leave higher positions open to college graduates. Less emphasis is placed on practical experience. They will do temporary training periods in the lower positions, to get to know what it is about, but those are part of their education, not paid, and not for long.

It has been interesting for me to observe when a young person in school comes for a training stint. What happens is that they find themselves amongst people who will one day be their inferiors, but in that moment, are presented as having knowledge and skills that are special (not ones just anyone off the street can perform). There is an interesting sort of dialogue between them, in which the trainee is somewhat lost and screwing up, but the entourage is like, "Well, you can't be too hard on them, they are in school to be a manager, or director, you can't expect much of them. They are not professionals in this career, like us."

Having seen when those students get out and come to be hired as the superior, they retain a certain amount of respect and humility faced with their (officially) inferiors.

The end result is- the superiors know they cannot do as well the jobs their inferiors are doing, they NEED those people.
The inferiors know that the they cannot do the job of the superior, they do not project themselves in that place, and they know they need that person, where they are. Everyone has their speciality and role to play in this relationship of inter-dependence.

That is quite different from the way I saw things in the US anyway- where the minimum wage workers are seen as disposable and without much value. Where they better be up to all that is asked of them, or else there's a hundred more outside begging to take their place. Instead they are seen as a valuable source of experience and skill, that is worth holding on to and treating well, otherwise the boss man will be in deep caca.

I guess it is a more socialist system on a continuum. But I was surprised to see there are positive parts to it that I wouldn't have perceived right away. And frankly? Some people are not that bright, and are simply not made to be in positions which require more brain work. Why not have a place in the work field where their specific capabilities (and ability to be comfortable with the same thing for years and years- let's face it, not everyone can do that! I can't!) has some value??

To the OP

"Why Are Minimum Wage Jobs Advertised As A Career"?

Because some people are not capable of doing anything else, and / or, they don't choose, or aspire for anything better.

Flipping burgers in MacDonalds may (in some people's eyes) be a demeaning, underpaid and dehumanising way to work. For some people this is a job they can and want to do.

Regards

I think the over poverty trap is debt.

Most of the working poor I know have no idea how to manage debt.

My cousin as soon as she gets a credit card will max it out buying crap like designer cloths and fancy TV's, then cant pay it back ruins her credit rating then is stuck when a real emergency hits (IE car to get to work breaks down) and cant borrow the small amount to cover it. Then when credit rating improves just goes out gets more credit cards and blows them on stupid crap again, its self perpetuating cycle.

I think school should teach kids at a early age how to manage money and debt.

That is what my parents did with me. Guess what ? Im not living on minimal wage with unmanageable debt