A minimum-wage worker needs 2.5 full-time jobs to afford a one-bedroom apartment in most of the US

originally posted by: Assassin82

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Assassin82

www.washingtonpost.com...

Median household income, a good gauge of middle-class pay, peaked in 1999 under President Bill Clinton, according to census data. In the nearly two decades since then, households have seen their modest gains eaten away by inflation.

peaked in 99, things have gotten more expensive since then, only a little bit though

“Having a job is not enough to get ahead,” says Kasey Wiedrich, director of applied research at Prosperity Now, a nonprofit that advocates for low-income families. Prosperity Now recently released its annual scorecard, which found that “the data point to a widespread financial fragility in our nation.”

Half the jobs in America pay less than $18 an hour

I'm not sure if you pay for your own healthcare and rent and insurance and all that but $18 an hour won't get ya far, hell owning your own work vehicle for construction workers cost a damn pretty penny luckily a lot of them are union making closer to 20 an hour or 28 an hour (after enough time in)

most people aren't driving brand new cars unless your in texas or california the rest of america looks a lot different

Sorry, but when I look around I see people wearing clothes they can’t afford, driving cars they can’t afforf, going on vacation when they can’t afford it, eating out at restaurants, paying for cable and everything else they can’t afford. Then they hop on Facebook and say life sucks workin paycheck to paycheck. Bull! Cut the crap and you’ll get by. Get an education or find a better job to help ends meet. The weak will fall by the wayside and we have government programs to help them out, not help them get all the crap they don’t need.

But, like I said, the wealth is disastrously unbalanced and we can do better as a society. We shouldn’t kid ourselves that we have to have all these unnecessary luxuries to be considered well off.

You know who had a stay at home wife, a house of his own, and half a dozen kids? Yeah that's right the man working with a high school degree or rarely a bachelor, several decades ago. Not too technical, that can get. Yet there he was, without welfare keeping the family going.

The number of workers doubled, with women entering the workforce en masse. Devaluing the value of work at any area affected by said influx. Basically the jobs that still pay good are either physically demanding or intellectually demanding. All good and peachy if you've high iq or are a man with good testosterone lvls. But for many, such jobs are either highly uncomfortable or impossible to attain.

I mean Peterson says, iirc, that something on the order of tens of millions of americans are at or below 85 IQ. He also comments, iirc, the army found no amount of training can make them productive at any position, so it was made illegal to enlist them. Now the army has quite a wide variety of tasks, some not too different from those capitalist society requires.

If we take that to be true, then it is actually costing society more to employ such than not too. These individuals are more likely to breed too, making it so the average iq of the population drops over time, increasing the costs to society, the burden upon the rest of the population over time. Welfare without regulating reproduction is basically a time bomb.

a reply to: Xenogears

I mean Peterson says, iirc, that something on the order of tens of millions of americans are at or below 85 IQ.

Since the average IQ range starts at 85, it's probably higher than that. Half of all people are below average intelligence, after all.

Half are shorter than average too. Coincidence?

originally posted by: Assassin82
The OP isn’t wrong. The amount of wealth in this country keeps going to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population. It shouldn’t be that difficult for people to get by in life.

I'm not sure what that means... If you live pay check to pay check you have zero savings... if you reach the point you don't then you start to be apart of the those who build wealth. People worth billions will most likely continue to build, and people who do not continue to grow in life will not, but does that really affect us?

However, I don’t want to hear people complain who drive around in a $30K car, a $1K phone, a closet with more clothes that they don’t wear than clothes they do wear, internet, cable, and a refrigerator full of garbage that gets wasted anyway because they choose to eat out 4+ times per week and who go to bars or night clubs every weekend. I don’t pity those people one bit.

I have done a number of posts on this. When I was in my 20s back in the 80s my cost of living was way lower due to I didn't have all you explain above. I still had room mates until my 30s...

But, to the point, for the people who struggle while ignoring the luxuries, working hard in life, staying out of trouble and contributing to society...I feel for them and say something should be done to help them out.

I bought my first house at 43 years old, today I'm 58 and I live in 4700 sq ft house. My wife drives a late model Mercedes SUV and I care for two boys starting to attend college etc..life so far is good for them.

I think people today want all quickly... and it has never been that way...ever...

a reply to: Xtrozero

What good is a 4,700 sf house?

Oh, I see. You can keep your distance from two teenage boys. That's worth it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xenogears

I mean Peterson says, iirc, that something on the order of tens of millions of americans are at or below 85 IQ.

Since the average IQ range starts at 85, it's probably higher than that. Half of all people are below average intelligence, after all.

Half are shorter than average too. Coincidence?

Strange I thought the average was 100~, no? At 70 it is basically retardation.

a reply to: Xenogears

I think that IQ testing has a lot of inherent problems.
www.free-iqtest.net...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xenogears

I think that IQ testing has a lot of inherent problems.
www.free-iqtest.net...

You know there are proper iq tests and cheap internet ones right?

At the lower extremes there are consequences. People with mental retardation, need care, they have a disability. These people that say someone with say Down's syndrome could beat Einstein, that intelligence is a social construct, they're quite mistaken.

a reply to: Xenogears

I think all IQ tests have inherent problems.
I posted that link because it has a chart of the percentages.

that intelligence is a social construct,

I'm not aware of that claim. If I were I would disregard it because it is clearly erroneous.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xenogears

I think all IQ tests have inherent problems.
I posted that link because it has a chart of the percentages.

Yes, and there are real world consequences to a low IQ, just as there are real world consequences to a high IQ.

Those who have a trouble with any measure of intelligence, let alone the phenomena of intelligence, will face reality as we disentangle the genetics and workings of intelligence, and mathematically define it.

a reply to: Xenogears

The problem is with attempts to measure intelligence, not whether or not it varies between individuals.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xenogears

I mean Peterson says, iirc, that something on the order of tens of millions of americans are at or below 85 IQ.

Since the average IQ range starts at 85, it's probably higher than that. Half of all people are below average intelligence, after all.

Half are shorter than average too. Coincidence?

I'm at 86 so I'm kicking ass!!

I watched a Ted talk and the one profound point was that a person with low IQ 85 to 100 can do repetitive work and be successful, but something that a person with 110 to 120 IQ can gain understanding in 10 minutes could take a person with lower IQ a long time, or never.

Its like one person says calculus is not bad and another person is stuck at basic arithmetic.

originally posted by: Phage

The problem is with attempts to measure intelligence, not whether or not it varies between individuals.

Intelligence is funny, I know people that can do things at a exceptional level, but would rate low on a IQ test.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Differentiation is ok.
Integrals are just weird.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Yup. Defining intelligence is a big problem.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xenogears

I think all IQ tests have inherent problems.

How about the person that can play guitar and just hear a song and play it perfectly in minutes, how about the person that can do exceptional work in some trade craft but can not balance their checking account. There are talents that we can not graph but exceed 99.999999% of the population, how does one test that?

Every time I meet one of these I feel like an idiot next to them.

originally posted by: Phage

Integrals are just weird.

Trig was way worst than calculus...

originally posted by: Phage

What good is a 4,700 sf house?

Oh, I see. You can keep your distance from two teenage boys. That's worth it.

You are smart!!!! At least 105 IQ

My lower Level is a movie theater/over night room with its own bathroom. I can have 10 kids here and not know they are even in the house...lol

I had kids late in life so in 3 years with my youngest is in college I will down size to about 1200...

a reply to: Xtrozero

I gave up trying to do anything but play at guitar years ago.

I should at least restring it though.

But that's talent. I hate talent.

originally posted by: Xenogears

At the lower extremes there are consequences. People with mental retardation, need care, they have a disability. These people that say someone with say Down's syndrome could beat Einstein, that intelligence is a social construct, they're quite mistaken.

Watching a good Ted Talk, they suggest people can be very successful with 85 to 100 doing repetitive tasks. 100 to 115 are people who can be successful at multiple skills, 115 to 125 is your typical good manager/leader... 125+ are people who excel in engineering and other careers that use higher conceptual thinking.

Now saying that my sister's ex husband was extremely high IQ well into the Mensa level, but went no where in life, so there are other factors involved.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xtrozero

I gave up trying to do anything but play at guitar years ago.

I should at least restring it though.

But that's talent. I hate talent.

Whatever we disagree with we can agree 100% on this ...lol