Raising Min Wage

[s0me0nesmind1]

I tend to be pretty liberal yet this is one topic that I don't side with much of my liberal friends. I think partly because I've went to college and work in salaried pos 'itions. I never looked at my job at Office Depot or at Food Lion (Grocery Store) as a perm job or a job that you can seriously consider viable enough to buy a nice house, car, kids though college etc...

In my view Wage Jobs should be for those with no exp and really no resume that need something very entry level. There should be some understanding that this is temp or a stepping stone to move onto another area within the company (i.e. cashier -> head cashier -> supervisor -> Manager -> Store Manager) or until they get a degree. Why do people feel they should be able to do "all those things" (house, car etc) with a Walmart Cashier job? Then I feel companies seem to abuse the system, knowing they pay a very low wage that will be eventually subsidized with welfare or gov benefits. Just my thoughts, curious on what others thing.

And you would be spot on.

This notion of paying someone based on what they "need" is full of shit. Mostly because expecting to have a livable wage off of any and every job is absurd. Do you think 30 years ago when kids were delivering newspapers by bike that they were able to afford to live on their own? How about bagging groceries?

By today's definition liberals *ACTUALLY BELIEVE* you NEED the following:

1) Smartphone will full data package, unlimited minutes and text.
(I am on a month-to-month plan that costs < $100 for my family. It's also required for work and I bought my phone used and haven't felt the need to upgrade for the last 3 years)

2) Cable / Satellite TV - Extended package with ESPN
(I have no cable, only internet - and I minimize the cost of it. Also required for work)

3) Ability to be able to afford to go out and have fun - have drinks, get a nice ribeye at least once a week. Oh and a case of Bud Light every week at the grocery store
(We make meal plans for eating at home on a regular basis with the occasional night out)

4) A place to stay - but not just any roof over your head. When you're making $7.25 working a drive-thru you shouldn't have to share an apartment with 1-3 other people - no no no - at MINIMUM you are entitled to a 2-bedroom apartment so you have enough space to store all the junk that you buy
(I make upper-middle wages but live in a lower-middle house)

5) A new car every 5 years. The moment that car loan is paid off it's time to trade it in! Oh and it has to be new - none of that used shit either.
(I've had my '08 sedan since when I graduated from college - bought it used)

6) I gotta have the latest and greatest TV, 60" 4K with 3D. This 50" just isn't cutting it anymore!
(I have an old 37" plasma upstairs and another 37" LCD - both of which are 10+ years old by now)

All of these describe the lower class in the states. I've said it before, go down the poorest neighborhood you can think of. You will see a satellite dish on every single one of the homes.

Oh let's not forget...

7) I'm entitled to MY body and if I want kids I can have ALL the kids I WANT! Oh, and you gotta pay for them too
(I've been with my wife for ~5 years now, and extensively discussed plans for having kids at the correct time)

 

[MongGrel]

And you would be spot on.

This notion of paying someone based on what they "need" is full of shit. Mostly because expecting to have a livable wage off of any and every job is absurd. Do you think 30 years ago when kids were delivering newspapers by bike that they were able to afford to live on their own? How about bagging groceries?

By today's definition liberals *ACTUALLY BELIEVE* you NEED the following:

1) Smartphone will full data package, unlimited minutes and text.
(I am on a month-to-month plan that costs < $100 for my family. It's also required for work and I bought my phone used and haven't felt the need to upgrade for the last 3 years)

2) Cable / Satellite TV - Extended package with ESPN
(I have no cable, only internet - and I minimize the cost of it. Also required for work)

3) Ability to be able to afford to go out and have fun - have drinks, get a nice ribeye at least once a week. Oh and a case of Bud Light every week at the grocery store
(We make meal plans for eating at home on a regular basis with the occasional night out)

4) A place to stay - but not just any roof over your head. When you're making $7.25 working a drive-thru you shouldn't have to share an apartment with 1-3 other people - no no no - at MINIMUM you are entitled to a 2-bedroom apartment so you have enough space to store all the junk that you buy
(I make upper-middle wages but live in a lower-middle house)

5) A new car every 5 years. The moment that car loan is paid off it's time to trade it in! Oh and it has to be new - none of that used shit either.
(I've had my '08 sedan since when I graduated from college - bought it used)

6) I gotta have the latest and greatest TV, 60" 4K with 3D. This 50" just isn't cutting it anymore!
(I have an old 37" plasma upstairs and another 37" LCD - both of which are 10+ years old by now)

All of these describe the lower class in the states. I've said it before, go down the poorest neighborhood you can think of. You will see a satellite dish on every single one of the homes.

Wow.

Your pretty delusional.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Wow.

Your pretty delusional.

Feel free to counter then? I would be glad to debate any of those points. Plenty others have described the same message.



Here is one of the many that is saying the same message I am:

"Cost of living" and "enough to live on" is so subjective though.

You want to work at McDs? You can make that work for a "career" if you want. But your cost of living will need to be adjusted from what people think today. You won't likely be able to afford an xbox, or the large screen TV to play it on. Forget a car with insurance -- I suggest public transportation for you. Your clothing and food options would be more limited than somebody who has a college degree or a non-minimum wage job. Wife and kids probably out of the question, unless she is working too. It CAN be done, but you'd have to curtail what you can afford.

The problem is people want to work at McDs and think they are entitled to/deserve all the "extra" things in life. And it doesn't and can't work that way. People have worked shitty, low paying jobs for 100s of years and they survived. But they lived a different life than those with better paying jobs. Everyone buys into marketing and thinks they NEED everything they see. You don't. And you don't get it unless you work for/earn it.

 

[Maxima1]

The federal minimum wage should stay $7.25. This issue should go to local municipalities and states. $15/hour might work in Seattle but it won't work very well in rural Tennessee.

Plenty of states and cities have set their own minimum wage. There is absolutely

And you would be spot on.

This notion of paying someone based on what they "need" is full of shit. Mostly because expecting to have a livable wage off of any and every job is absurd. Do you think 30 years ago when kids were delivering newspapers by bike that they were able to afford to live on their own? How about bagging groceries?

By today's definition liberals *ACTUALLY BELIEVE* you NEED the following:

1) Smartphone will full data package, unlimited minutes and text.
(I am on a month-to-month plan that costs < $100 for my family. It's also required for work and I bought my phone used and haven't felt the need to upgrade for the last 3 years)

2) Cable / Satellite TV - Extended package with ESPN
(I have no cable, only internet - and I minimize the cost of it. Also required for work)

3) Ability to be able to afford to go out and have fun - have drinks, get a nice ribeye at least once a week. Oh and a case of Bud Light every week at the grocery store
(We make meal plans for eating at home on a regular basis with the occasional night out)

4) A place to stay - but not just any roof over your head. When you're making $7.25 working a drive-thru you shouldn't have to share an apartment with 1-3 other people - no no no - at MINIMUM you are entitled to a 2-bedroom apartment so you have enough space to store all the junk that you buy
(I make upper-middle wages but live in a lower-middle house)

5) A new car every 5 years. The moment that car loan is paid off it's time to trade it in! Oh and it has to be new - none of that used shit either.
(I've had my '08 sedan since when I graduated from college - bought it used)

6) I gotta have the latest and greatest TV, 60" 4K with 3D. This 50" just isn't cutting it anymore!
(I have an old 37" plasma upstairs and another 37" LCD - both of which are 10+ years old by now)

All of these describe the lower class in the states. I've said it before, go down the poorest neighborhood you can think of. You will see a satellite dish on every single one of the homes.

Oh let's not forget...

7) I'm entitled to MY body and if I want kids I can have ALL the kids I WANT! Oh, and you gotta pay for them too
(I've been with my wife for ~5 years now, and extensively discussed plans for having kids at the correct time)

no reason for the Federal government to be involved other than saying it is $7.25/hour.

I love how it always comes to that the bottom 47% should just live like paupers. Never mind that if everyone did this simultaneously, the economy would go down in the ******. A question for you is why should the bottom 47% settle for several times less in income and no bennies in comparson to jobs at the upper half which are actually cushy and less demanding? Even if pay was the same as the bottom half, I'd rather be a P.E. teacher. I'd rather be a librarian. I'd rather be a resource officer. Etc. Isn't that funny? There are also independent contractors doing the same exact work, yet getting substantially less. So you have no convincing argument. You gave them no reason to think that their compensation is fair.

 

[MongGrel]

Feel free to counter then? I would be glad to debate any of those points. Plenty others have described the same message.

No, waste of my time to be honest.

Who let steppinthrax back in the door to begin with

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I love how it always comes to that the bottom 47% should just live like paupers. Never mind that if everyone did this simultaneously, the economy would go down in the ******. A question for you is why should the bottom 47% settle for several times less in income and no bennies in comparson to jobs at the upper half which are actually cushy and less demanding? Even if pay was the same as the bottom half, I'd rather be a P.E. teacher. I'd rather be a librarian. I'd rather be a resource officer. Etc. Isn't that funny? There are also independent contractors doing the same exact work, yet getting substantially less. So you have no convincing argument. You gave them no reason to think that their compensation is fair.

The reason why we say that is because everyone that is above those levels were there themselves at some point . The difference is we got our shit together, we denied ourselves luxuries for our overall outcome benefit.

Do you think I enjoyed living with 3 others in an apartment during college? No, I would have much rather only had 1 at the most but I went through it because it was a heck of a lot cheaper month to month. Why do you feel like just because you have a job that you're entitled to your own apartment? Why not sharing one with others like most people here have done? That's because it's Bullshit, you're not above living with other people just because you hand people shitty food out a drive thru window for a living instead of going to school ( and plenty of the people I lived with in college worked while going to school as well)

 

[Maxima1]

The reason why we say that is because everyone that is above those levels were there themselves at some point . The difference is we got our shit together, we denied ourselves luxuries for our overall outcome benefit.

Dude, the median income in 2012 was only $26k. People can't even get full time work That means half is making as much or less than that. The economy can't give everyone good jobs. Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, it's ALREADY done via credential creep, differences in negotiating power (e.g. government vs. private sector), how big the educational pipeline is, etc.. As an example, there are more qualified applicants for RN programs, but they're denied a seat because not enough spending is done to accommodating them. That's why RNs start at $85K here. It's completely artificial. Btw. RNs is one of the few projected large job sections that have good pay. There's a lot more temp agencies and just-in-time work now. Meanwhile, the government can tax everyone even if they don't use a service and spread it out wide, while no one is forced to buy a burger at McDonalds.

because everyone that is above those levels were there themselves at some point .

lol For high school and college life for probably part-time, if that. Even enlisted in the military start at the 90th percentile of income in their age group, and if they're smart, they do dorm managing, pharm tech, tool crib, "data analysis" etc. for 20 yrs and retire at 38-40 with a $2 million pension and heavily subsidized health care. Private sector is **** in comparison.

Edit: Btw, where do you live? The cashiers, etc. I see are not teens and 20-somethings. I don't know where you get that idea that it's for people starting out. As is, there are more job seekers than job openings and the majority of the newly created jobs pay less than $20 an hour.

"Workers who earn less than $15 per hour are also older than you might expect: 46.3% of them are 35 or older."

Job seekers to job openings. Doesn't even count the discouraged workers who stopped looking. And many job openings posted aren't expected to be fulfilled because businesses can be picky i.e. aggregate demand is weak.

Do you think I enjoyed living with 3 others in an apartment during college? No, I would have much rather only had 1 at the most but I went through it because it was a heck of a lot cheaper month to month. Why do you feel like just because you have a job that you're entitled to your own apartment? Why not sharing one with others like most people here have done? That's because it's Bullshit, you're not above living with other people just because you hand people shitty food out a drive thru window for a living instead of going to school ( and plenty of the people I lived with in college worked while going to school as well)

Rent is a monopoly. The supply of land is fixed. Poor pay more for the same "house" in a lifetime, so they're using less resources in society even if they had an apartment to themselves. A rich country doesn't need to stop housing construction and cramp them all up like sardines. lmao.

 

[1prophet]

$15 minimum wage is just an attempt to close the gap between the value of labor today, and what it once was in the 1960s, early 1970s.
Those wages you want people to suffer through used to be "worth" a hell of a lot more.

As usual a feel good superficial fix, back in the 60's and 70's many could also move up the ladder through mostly hard work and education and not get stuck flipping burgers or selling fries for a career, that's the part that is not mentioned or explained away when in fact it is by design.

One other thing that is seldom mentioned, the people that started lower and worked their way up to 14, 15, 16 dollars an hour that have experience and time at the job, what do you do with them when they ask for a raise because now some newbie wet behind the ears employee is making the same or close to what those that put their time in are making.

 

[Mai72]

Raise it to $15 and everything in that area will increase. It has a dominoe effect.

Plus, I'd like to add that $15 is not much today. It's better than $8 but in the grand scheme of things it's not much. Hell, and I've said this before. $100k isn't much anymore. Add in food, rent/mortgage, car note, gas, clothes, day care, taxes, etc...

 

[MajinCry]

Inflation has steadily increased, devaluing your spending power. If the minimum wage hasn't increased at the same rate as inflation, it has been decreasing by the rate of inflation.

Ergo, the minimum wage should raise steadily each year. Otherwise, you're just slowly draining the poor even further.

 

[flexy]

The age old-argument:

In my view Wage Jobs should be for those with no exp and really no resume that need something very entry level.

No one gets a wage job to build a fortune or buy a Lamborghini.

A (min) wage job is exactly that, a job that pays min. wage, and it does this because such jobs usually don't require extended years of exp, or degrees or whatever. It should pay, well, the "minimum wage" that we can consider a job could pay. So far, nothing against this.

HOWEVER, the problem is that the amount of what a constitutes a min. wage has stagnated, while at the same time cost of living HAS GONE UP.
Means that this min wage, relatively seen to what things costs, has gotten less and less.

So you got paid, say, $6 at a min. wage job in the 80s or 90s...and now you're STILL getting paid $6, how would this even make sense?
No one wants to increase the min. wage as to turn these jobs into "attractive" stepping stones to build a house etc..but the min wage must reflect the current costs of things and keep in relation, NOT GETTING SMALLER yet requiring the same level of work.

Also..the argument that min wage jobs are only for a certain type of people, like students etc...I think this is loooong outdated and doesn't apply anymore. A lot of people today are working min. wage jobs not because it's their choice, and NO, it doesn't even necessarily mean that the one working a min. wage job has no education and no degree. Assuming this means you'd be entirely ignoring the current economy and the fact that in some locations there ARE simply no other jobs, regardless of your degree, experience or whatever.

When software developer jobs (just an example here) are wandering off to India...well this means that some software developer in the US *might* well find themselves flipping burgers at some point. And it happens ALL THE TIME.

 

[Exterous]

Dude, the median income in 2012 was only $26k.

Citation needed. BLS says you are very very wrong as they have 2012 Median income as $51,371

https://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acsbr12-02.pdf

Edit: Btw, where do you live? The cashiers, etc. I see are not teens and 20-somethings. I don't know where you get that idea that it's for people starting out. As is, there are more job seekers than job openings and the majority of the newly created jobs pay less than $20 an hour.

They make up more than 50% of winimum wage workers so you have a greater chance of seeing a teen\20-something than anyone else

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2012tbls.htm#1

There is also plenty of evidence that minimum wage workers are the second income earner for their household. Half of households with a minimum wage earner have incomes over 2x what the minimum wage earner could earn in a year. 33% of households with a minimum wage earner earn more than the median income

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/...arent-poor-but-theyre-not-quite-middle-class/
http://www.epi.org/blog/affected-president-obamas-proposed-minimum/

 

[Maxima1]

Citation needed. BLS says you are very very wrong as they have 2012 Median income as $51,371

https://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acsbr12-02.pdf

https://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acsbr12-02.pdf

That's household income. That's not individual.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...-workers-made-less-than-26-000-in-2010/247059

They make up more than 50% of winimum wage workers so you have a greater chance of seeing a teen\20-something than anyone else

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2012tbls.htm#1

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2012tbls.htm#1

There's a significant portion over 21 years old. That's pathetic, and you're citing a source only showing part of the issue. There's a lot of jobs above the federal minimum wage but still a very low wage with no benefits. There's something seriously wrong when an entry level job in the military gets you a starting engineer salary after only ~5 yrs and offers a $2 million pension after only doing 20 yrs of work with no college required, while schlubs in the private sector get $10-15 an hour with no benefits. Only about 20-25% of jobs in the US can be considered good i.e. meaning good base pay, pension, health benefits, etc.

 

[Homerboy]

Here is one of the many that is saying the same message I am:

Please don't lump me in with you. I'm actually quite liberal.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Please don't lump me in with you. I'm actually quite liberal.

Sorry, but you're portraying the EXACT same message I am, the only difference is you're doing so at a summarized level (with some matching details) while I mention specifics.

Just because you're liberal or conservative shouldn't close your mind to rational thought.

 

[vi edit]

Min wage is a trap argument. Exterous posted most of the data I was going to. But close to half of all min wage workers are 16-24. So this includes a broad sweep of high school and college age workers doing part time work. The tables do not go past age 25 in which there are a ton of retired people doing min wage jobs for a few hours a week as just something to do. Cashier, walmart greeter, lunch lady at a grade school, ect. They aren't factored into their own demographic.

Min wage is not meant to be a living wage. It's just a baseline number to keep things comparable across employers. As a teenage kid you don't have to worry about negotiating a rate. You just show up and work. All of the rage around the wage is manufactured drama. It affects a very small amount of the workforce and should not be used as a political wedge.

I understand that there are close to 1,000,000 people who work full time at minimum wage jobs and that by itself is not a small number, but in the grand scheme of things, that's about 1.5% of the total fulltime workforce. The next year that same person could be bumped up to assistant manager at the fast food or retail place they are working so it's a very liquid number.

 

[Erenhardt]

Rising min wage is good for economy. People that really need more money to live will spend the extra money for living which will drive the economy.

If they don't get that money, it will stay in the pockets of rich people, which are known to be stuffing their pocketses full.

Also, I have 4.37$ per hour. And the minimum will be 3,12$ next year.
Also, goods here have 23% tax (hello 500$ 400$MSRP PS4

Farmers here are afraid of new legislation which will open agri goods import from US.

It is about getting pain adequately to the work you do. Sadly, people always see their work as more valuable/productive/needed than the guy's next desk. Which is a reason why we have a race to the bottom. In capitalism wealth is power and the one paying have the last word. With the unemployment reaching more than 20% (in my country) you don't have fight for employees. Quite the opposite. And desperate people will get desperate jobs at desperate wages.

Sometimes rising min wage brings no effect. Often employer will find a loophole to have workforce at below the wage. The higher the minimum, the more common looping.

 

[Maxima1]

Min wage is a trap argument. Exterous posted most of the data I was going to. But close to half of all min wage workers are 16-24. So this includes a broad sweep of high school and college age workers doing part time work.

Many jobs are under $20. You sound ridiculous. It's disingenuous to just look at the current federal minimum wage.

The tables do not go past age 25 in which there are a ton of retired people doing min wage jobs for a few hours a week as just something to do. Cashier, walmart greeter, lunch lady at a grade school, ect. They aren't factored into their own demographic.

lol You can't get full SS until past early 60's. It's not because it's something for them to do. That's BS.

Min wage is not meant to be a living wage. It's just a baseline number to keep things comparable across employers. As a teenage kid you don't have to worry about negotiating a rate. You just show up and work. All of the rage around the wage is manufactured drama. It affects a very small amount of the workforce and should not be used as a political wedge.

Again, you're being ridiculous. A min hike to $15 or more if states or federal government raises it affects millions of workers.

 

[Exterous]

That's household income. That's not individual.

So specify that next time. Also a link to 2010 data is not a citation for a claim on 2012 data. Regardless its cherry picking data points given that 2015 has the second highest individual median income level in the last 25 years adjusting for inflation

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N

There's a significant portion over 21 years old. That's pathetic

I also don't think 21 is a good starting age point and most agree, hence the BLS 16-24 group. In addition I don't think the government should set a very high minimum wage given the vast disparity of cost of living across the US. I would prefer expensive locations to set higher wages like they are doing. Besides its not like people tend to stay at minimum wage forever.

Only about 20-25% of jobs in the US can be considered good i.e. meaning good base pay, pension, health benefits, etc.

Citation needed.

 

[Exterous]

Again, you're being ridiculous. A min hike to $15 or more if states or federal government raises it affects millions of workers.

Of course it would affect them. Positively or negatively is the question

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-did-little-for-workers-earnings-in-seattle/

Fortunately we have some good test cases to pay attention to. I think there is merit to raising it some but significant jumps don't appear to be beneficial at first glance

 

[purbeast0]

When software developer jobs (just an example here) are wandering off to India...well this means that some software developer in the US *might* well find themselves flipping burgers at some point. And it happens ALL THE TIME.

As a software developer myself, if you can't get a job in the industry, it means one of two things.

1. You really suck at your job and probably shouldn't be in the field anyways.
2. You think you are worth more than you are.

 

[Maxima1]

So specify that next time.

Why would you think I'm referring to household anyways?

Also a link to 2010 data is not a citation for a claim on 2012 data.

i didn't cherry pick. i just wasn't sure about the 30k, which still makes you look incredibly silly. Military enlisted total comp is ~100K for jobs like pharm tech, dorm managing, tool crib. etc.

Regardless its cherry picking data points given that 2015 has the second highest individual median income level in the last 25 years adjusting for inflation

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N

Again, I lol'd Police make a median of over 100k here. Correctional officer over 100k. Librarians over 80k. Not counting pension, etc. Yeah, so great!

I also don't think 21 is a good starting age point and most agree, hence the BLS 16-24 group. In addition I don't think the government should set a very high minimum wage given the vast disparity of cost of living across the US. I would prefer expensive locations to set higher wages like they are doing. Besides its not like people tend to stay at minimum wage forever.

I don't think $15 would hurt even the most piss-poor states. It would have to probably be more like $20 or so. Studies show that minimum wage isn't that detrimental to employment levels, and correct fiscal policy resolves any reduction.

Citation needed.

Easy to just explain. Some jobs can make more than the median, but it's **** because of no pension or because of the work conditions suck compared to other jobs e.g. truck driver. Any labor econ textbook will tell you government jobs have less demanding work and better work conditions generally in comparison to private sector jobs that have equivalent pay.

Fortunately we have some good test cases to pay attention to. I think there is merit to raising it some but significant jumps don't appear to be beneficial at first glance

How does that help YOUR case? It didn't help because the government programs get reduced.

Anyway, if you want to think raising minimum wage raises the unemployment level, then so would credential creep, etc.

"The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that the average active duty service member [enlisted, not officer] receives an Army benefits and pay compensation package worth $99,000. Noncash compensation represents almost 60 percent of this package. Noncash compensation includes health care, retirement pay, child care and free or subsidized food, housing and education. Coupled with regular cash compensation, this adds up to attractive military compensation for Soldiers."

This should destroy the economy, amirite?

 

[senseamp]

I love how sub $15 wage workers are the new Cadillac driving welfare queens because they have a cell phone plan.
It's interesting to watch American workers throw each other under the bus and then complain about income inequality and lack of opportunity.

 

[Maxima1]

I love how sub $15 wage workers are the new Cadillac driving welfare queens because they have a cell phone plan.
It's interesting to watch American workers throw each other under the bus and then complain about income inequality and lack of opportunity.

A lot of people think they should pay at least 15% in federal income tax, never mind that many states have a regressive taxation structure. And then obviously the complaint that food stamps, housing aid, EITC, Medicaid, and other things are welfare and therefore shouldn't be given because it wasn't given by their employer. Ironically, a lot of times this is from conservatives employed by the state or federal government. It's the same government that employs and pays them! The government is basically saying that the bottom workers are making too little.

 

[local]

I just wish people would start looking at other places if they want to earn actual money. Here in Texas, supposedly the land of cheap imported labor, we have a huge shortage of people in the construction industry. It has gotten to the point where we are going to High Schools and recruiting people straight from there paying them $13/hr or so to do entry level work in the field. Within 4 years someone who actually tries can easily be up into the mid $20s but the problem is the most just don't care to try. In 3 years I went from jobsite floor sweeper to project manager and to be honest it was pretty easy.

On the service tech side we are at the point where the easiest way to get new people is to try and poach them from our competitors and that is hard as hell. These are guys in their 20's that are making close to $100k once OT is included. But no one wants to go work on a roof or get dirty or something because it can take months to get one person hired there just aren't that many around anymore.

I have talked to people in just about every trade and they all say the same thing, it is almost impossible to get new plumbers, sheetmetal mechanics, HVAC technicians, electricians, etc. These can be really good jobs that have a large shortage of bodies in them right now. Just don't try to put up sheetrock, labor for that gets delivered by the truckload. The only thing we are looking for are people that are willing to learn and grow. If we wanted bottom rung people with no desire to move up we have temp services that deliver the local drunks for that.

So as to the point being discussed. People need to realize that maybe working at McDonalds or Wal-Mart aren't supposed to be careers. I worked at Wal-Mart changing oil and I worked at a gas station but then I decided I actually needed to do something that would pay for what I want and moved. Now I support a family of 5 on a single income, have a house, 3 cars and all that other crap people "need" all on just a GED. Don't expect your employer or the government to help save you get out there and do something about it yourself.

TL;DR
I can hire almost anyone who can climb a ladder and swing a hammer for near double min wage.
The vast majority of people reject this type of work.
I have little to no sympathy for the able bodied cashiers of the world whining about min wage.