Minimum wages, First Democrat assault on the economy.

[Tuomas]

what i hoped for was that some of the discussants would cite some documentation. a number of states and cities have adopted minimum wages and the effects have been studied. i don't believe in 'armchair economics' that prejudges the issues.

OK.. *gets out economics books he hoped he would never see again since college*
Byrns & Stone: "Induced Unemployment: Finally, some unemployment is induced by certain government policies. The minimum-wage law, for example, limits job opportunities for unskilled and inexperienced workers by overpicing their labor."

In another portion: "Why have labor unions long sought high minimum-wage laws even though union workers invariably recieve wages far above these wage floors? Misguided humanitarianism may play a rôle, but another reason is that wage floors limit the ability of unskilled workers to compete with skilled union workers. For example, if two unskilled workers willing to work for $3.00 hourly apiece can do the job of a $6.50 per hour skilled worker, a $3.35 minimum-wage eliminates their ability to compete." (Enfasis mine)

To quote page 599, "Minimum-wage laws, for example, may hurt far more workers than they help, with young workers and members of minorities being especially harmed."

A more complete essay on the negative effects of minimum-wage policies are discussed in Walter Williams' seminar, "Minimum Wage, Maximum Folley."

On the positive side we have... errr, lots of political discourse. Minimum wage remains a populist economic movement, whose real economic benefit remain in discussion. Most economists agree that there is a relations between wages and production, and that production cannot excede wages. The debate centres more on when exactly salaries excede production.

On a more concrete note, we have the "Noble" Experiment conducted by Allende and his Cronies in Chile. Visualising that raising the minimum wage would help the less-affluent members of Chilean society, Allende tripled the minimum-wage. The results were evident; less than six months later, inflation was an excess of 500% anually, there was food rationing in a time of record harvest and his ailing government ended in what the BBC has called, "the bloodiest coup in recient Latin American history." On the other hand, in 2001, Ricardo Lagos raised the minimum wage in 16% with the only resulting consecuence of a 10% increase in unemployment and a 5% jump in inflation. Clearly in the latter case, the country was able to absorb the change.

The labor market usually adjusts itself to the needs of workers and changes the real minimum wage. For example, currently in Chile -and in spite of Lagos' increase in minimum wage- only 5% of the workforce earns minimum wage. The remaining 95% earn well above that, and that number is constantly increasing. In real terms, the minimum wage is for entry-level workers while they are trained. After that, they recieve a higher salary, either through an offician increase or through bonuses.

 

[Tuomas]

Indeed. Just thought it was appropiate to present the problem form that perspective too. People often think of labor as a "soft" value - one that you can always adjust the price for. They don't see it from the supply-and-demand perspective it deserves.

But yes. We have a situation where workers can barely afford to work, and companies can barely afford to pay. Ladies and gentlemen, we've got ourselves a gridlock.

The way out? I don't think raising the minimum wage entirelty on the tab of the employer IS the solution. Because in the end, that will strike back at the bottom line of society anyway in terms of less employment. (Although I'm not sure that some companies couln't handle the slimmer margins) Maybe that needs to be funded by the guv'ment, partially. There are some pretty decent initiatives like that in play here in pinko commie Scandinavia that seems to be working.

Seem to be, because pinko Scandinavia makes up their own unemployement figures. Real unemployment in Sweden is over two digits, but try to get the government to admit that. And, if they don't recognize the problem, there is no way for them to solve it.

I propose a different solution; increase production. Anyone with any clue as to economics knows that the amount of money you have available for paying people -be they management or employees- depends directly on how much production you have. Total US industrial production and manufature has fallen fairly consistently for the last 25 years -independent of who was in the White House, or who "controlled" Congress. Cutting production costs through pro-active government policies will be much more effective in providing better quality of life the citizens than raising the minimum wage.

A very simple measure would be for the US to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, and severely reduce the cost of environmental regulation. US car manufacturers might actually turn a profit.

 

[Liar]

Seem to be, because pinko Scandinavia makes up their own unemployement figures. Real unemployment in Sweden is over two digits, but try to get the government to admit that. And, if they don't recognize the problem, there is no way for them to solve it.

April 2006
5.5% unemployed w Swedsh rose-colored-glasses count.
8.2% unemployed w the ILO defined, more reaslistic count. (number not used by the government, but by the opposition when pointing out what a shiatty job the government was doing on the unemployment issue)

The gap between those numbers consists pretty much of those guv'ment subsided employments.

Unless you count the numbers after the decimal point, what other ways to count employent do you use?

 

[Tuomas]

Didn't the opposition just win a couple of weeks ago? And I remember an interview with an economist that works for the UN discussing the ramifications of the election, and why people voted for them. Maybe I'm confusing it with Norway. Bleh, you all look alike to me

 

[R. Richard]

What the bloody hell are you talking about? Who said anything about memorizing poetry?

Wow, you sure have some warped issues with the idea of education when it's really all the same thing. Learning in school, or learning on the job, it's still the investent of time for a purpose. Learning the WRONG thing, regardless of where, will land you the burger flipping gig.

Let me use your own words to illustrate my point. "Learning in school, or learning on the job, it's still the investent of time for a purpose. Learning the WRONG thing, regardless of where, will land you the burger flipping gig." I done gots me the "college edge." When I done goed to college the double domes done told me that I hadda' study this here German language, gonna' do me a while lotta good on the job. With no choice, I studied German. I memorized enough crap to get me through. I was forced to spend 10% of my college edge memorizing German. Well, per my last German instructor, it really wasn't German, but "college German." Said instructor was German and he said that what I had been forced to memorize was useless without a long trip to Germany to ramp up to the real thing. Strangely enough, the places where I worked were defense perations. The US government will not let anyone translate German [or any other language, for that matter] unkess they are a native born speaker of said langauge. The reason behind the government policy can be seen in the translated-from-the-French story, "Cinderella." [It was actually a fur slipper.]

And you still didn't answer my question. How does the min-wage working-his-ass-off-to-afford-roof-and-food find time to invest in edu...oh, mea culpa, learning?

Well, each of us is forced, at the point of a police gun, into school as a child. If the child learns useful things, he/she/it doesn't have to be a min-wage worker. On the other hand, if the child spends a lot of school time in "personality development," he/she/it better be prepared to addresss the user interface of a burger flipper. I am not talking about strictly vocational training, but generally useful courses. If the student can read [with understanding] and write work related documents, the graduate does not need to flip burgers. If the student has a working knowledge of very simple mathematics, there are numerous opportunities to put that knowledge to work. On the other hand, if the student learns "high school Spanish," he/she/it is going to find that either the student doesn't speak Spanish or the Mexican people don't speak Spanish. [Ordering in Mexican restaurant doesn't damn count!] If the high school student memorizes poetry, he/she/it is going to find a non-existent maket for such "skills."

Trainee programs is time that the employer gives to the employee. It costs the employer money, but the payback is targeted education for the employee. No poetry in sight. And there's no poetry memorizing going down here at the university I'm attending either. I learn a particular skillset for a particular high-end job, that will give me a significally better paycheck in a year or so.

If you are attending a university that actually teaches job related skills, I am envious. I got to study German, philosophy [Zeno's Paradoxes are not paradoxes if you understand the mathematical concepts of infinite series and infinitesimals,] art appreciation [I called the police over the Leonardo daVinci painting "Two Vices,] and The Mathematical Foundations of Economics. [I wound up grading the last course, as they couldn't find anyone else with the math skills to do the job.] I wantes to learn as much math as I could, but I had to fight tooth and nail for every math course. It seems that the university wanted a broad education. I patiently explained, "I aint no broad," but to no avail.] I am an employer and I can't hire just-college-trained people who can do the work I need. I have tried to talk to the professors about the matter, but they are only interested in broad education. I rarely hire broads, but the ones I do hire are not university trained and they are all damn near as vicious as I am.

What was your point again?

My point is that focused learning leads to a decent job that pays a decent wage. Broad education leads to a job flipping burgers until the educated one manages to convince someone that the educated one can learn something useful.

When I graduated from college, I had job interviews. The people with whom I interviewed were interested in my math classes, my physics classes and my programming classes. I could answer their question in detail and I obviously understood the content of said classes. I got job offers for good paying, interesting work. The subject of my German, English, philosophy and art appreciation classes never came up. I suspect that the students who focused on education instead of useful learning wound up fliping burgers philosophically in more than one language!

As to a broad education. I spent my early years in the streets of the South Central. Most of the broads I dealt with had, regardless of their education, an uneducated "manager." [The manager was a Progressive Implementer of Modern Personnel - PIMP.] I don't know why the broads bothered to get an education, as they were born with what they were selling.

 

[R. Richard]

April 2006
5.5% unemployed w Swedsh rose-colored-glasses count.
8.2% unemployed w the ILO defined, more reaslistic count. (number not used by the government, but by the opposition when pointing out what a shiatty job the government was doing on the unemployment issue)

The gap between those numbers consists pretty much of those guv'ment subsided employments.

Unless you count the numbers after the decimal point, what other ways to count employent do you use?

Due to the lack of truly educated here in the US, we have a current unemployment rate of 4.4%. It would probably be higher, but we "unejjicated Americans" can't count so high. Well, there is another reason. If you get down much below 4.4% unemployment, it gets hard to hire workers for new businesses.

 

[amicus]

Lurking and Laughing!

ami

 

[SeaCat]

I was thinking of replying to this thread. Hell I had numbers and everything. Then I realized something.

The work I do is important, I take care of the family members of the people who are ever so willing to vote against wage increases. I am a proffesional and am at risk for so many thngs. I was ready to chew everyones asses about how hard my work is and how hard my life is. was ready to try and explain my position, then I realized something.

Until you have been there, until you have been pissed on, shit upon, cursed at and threatened with lawsuits then you have absolutely no clue.

I had much the same discussion with the C.E.O. of my hospital. From the vaunted heights of his position where he gets six figure raises he looked down upon me with a blank expression. He has no clue. He mouths the platitudes of making sacrifices to further oneself yet has never been there.

Have you been in the position of having maybe $50.00 dollars left over at the end of the month and being told that you can, if you scrimp and save, put yourself through school? I have, that's where I am now.

No I am not stupid of economics. I know what companies have to pay and why. I see where the money goes.

Come down here and spend a month or so in my shoes, in the shoes of those you despise and claim are to stupid to move up. Try our lifestyle for a bit then mouth your platitudes.

Cat

 

[Xelebes]

but tuo, in your country (chile? peru?) what does a loaf of bread cost. here, it's often 2 dollars.

A dollar twenty here. I feel sorry for you.

 

[Liar]

When I graduated from college, I had job interviews. The people with whom I interviewed were interested in my math classes, my physics classes and my programming classes. I could answer their question in detail and I obviously understood the content of said classes. I got job offers for good paying, interesting work. The subject of my German, English, philosophy and art appreciation classes never came up. I suspect that the students who focused on education instead of useful learning wound up fliping burgers philosophically in more than one language!

Um...your illustrating my point. learning the wrong thing is useless. Regarding your job situation, your philosophy class was a waste of time.

But what about the math, programming and physics? Wheren't those ejukation that you done gots yasself too?

Ah screw it, this is clealy just semantics, and differing experiences from the college world.

On the other hand, back when I was hiring programmers, German classes (or knowingt the language anyway) would have been a major advantage since we worked alot with zee germans. As would a course in general economics, and marketing, since that's the business end where their applications would be used, and also Swedish and rhetorics, so that they could communicate in an effective way with non-programmers about what the heck they were doing.

But then this was a semi small business, where people needed to understand the other parts of the machinerty pretty well. Different situation, different needs, I guess.

But yeah. College is Satan. Have it your way.

 

[Liar]

Due to the lack of truly educated here in the US, we have a current unemployment rate of 4.4%. It would probably be higher, but we "unejjicated Americans" can't count so high. Well, there is another reason. If you get down much below 4.4% unemployment, it gets hard to hire workers for new businesses.

RR, the difference in employent rate (By which criteria is this, by the way? Well, no matter, it IS lower in the US.) has very little to do with education. Check the thread title for one factor. A smaller and less flexible job market is another. Never said everything was all peachy here.

Otoh, those who have a 40h/week job in the low end of the pay scale, gets payed enough to live off it. They gan even save a little to buy time for learning stuff and improve their situation.

 

[Huckleman2000]

You won't be able to live on Pelosi's minimum wage either. All it will do is shove up the cost of fast food so that you will want to think twice about buying any.

Not true. Here in WA, the minimum wage is $7 and change, indexed to inflation I think.

McDonald's still has the Dollar Menu.

 

[Huckleman2000]

Lou Dobbs today:

We begin tonight with Christine Romans -- Christine.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, Congress has had no trouble at all raising its own pay by $30,000 over the past few years, a $30,000 raise, while keeping the minimum wage for everyone else stuck at only $5.15 an hour.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROMANS (voice-over): An hour of work at the minimum wage barely buys two gallons of gas. A full-time minimum- age job earns just over $10,000 a year, technically right on the poverty line.

REBECCA BLANK, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: We really want to send a message to workers that if you work, and if you work full time, you're going to make enough to support yourself and support, you know, your spouse and maybe a child or two. And, you know, at the current level of the minimum wage, that's just not possible.

ROMANS: But members of Congress who have consistently failed to raise the minimum wage, earn $165,200 a year, four times the average U.S. family. Twenty-nine states and the District of Columbia, though, have done what Congress won't.

HENRY AARON, BROOKINGS INST.: The states are acting because of a failure of leadership in Washington.

ROMANS: Six more states this week raising the minimum wage. Most ballot initiatives passing by at least a 2-1 margin.

Voters aren't buying the business lobby argument that a higher minimum wage is a job killer, that it raises the cost of doing business and could lead to inflation. Indeed, evidence mounts that a higher minimum wage does not hurt job or business growth.

The Fiscal Policy Institute found states with a higher minimum wage had faster job growth in retail and small business. Studies in Oregon and New Mexico found no ill effects from higher wages. The evidence so compelling, Nobel laureates and 650 other economists this month pledged their supports for a higher federal minimum wage.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROMANS: A remarkable list of people. And then, of also great concern to the middle class, is this growing income gap, something a top central banker warned about this week. San Francisco Fed president Janet Yellen called it a threat to our democracy -- Lou.

DOBBS: Imagine that. Something we've been warning about on this broadcast for five years. It's really nice to see Nobel laureates and 650 economists kind of awaken to the realities of what an economy is about. That is, it's about people.

 

[Huckleman2000]

From the Economic Policy Institute's latest briefing paper on the subject
http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/bp178

October 25, 2006 | EPI Briefing Paper #178

Minimum wage trends
Understanding past and contemporary research

by Liana Fox

There is a growing view among economists that the minimum wage offers substantial benefits to low-wage workers without negative effect. Although there are still dissenters, the best recent research has shown that the job loss reported in earlier analyses does not, in fact, occur when the minimum wage is increased. There is little question that the overall impact of a minimum wage is positive, as the following facts make clear:

* If the minimum wage were increased nationally to $7.25:
o 14.9 million workers would receive a raise,
o 80% of those affected are adults age 20 or over, and
o 7.3 million children would see their parents income rise.
* Families with affected workers rely on those workers for over half of their earnings.
* 46% of all families with affected workers rely solely on the earnings from those workers.
* Some minimum wage workers remain in low-wage jobs for substantial periods.
* The best recent research on the economic impact of the minimum wage shows positive effects without job loss.
* Even the research that suggests a negative labor market effect shows only a minimal impact that is more than offset by the higher wage levels.
* The states that have adopted higher-than-federal minimum wages have seen low-wage workers’ incomes rise with no negative side-effects.
* Over 650 economists, including five Nobel Prize winners and six past presidents of the American Economics Association, recently signed a statement stating that federal and state minimum wage increases “can significantly improve the lives of low-income workers and their families, without the adverse effects that critics have claimed” (EPI 2006).

 

[cloudy]

What you don’t and cannot take into consideration is that the working guy with a few bucks more each month will plunk it down for a new X-box system or video game and the gal will happily visit the Mall and purchase an $80.00 pair of designer jeans. They will still consume a poor diet of cold cereal, Mac & Cheese, Big Mac’s and Cola, so what have you really accomplished?

This is one of the most bigoted statements I've ever seen you make, and I've seen you make plenty.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Liar]

This is one of the most bigoted statements I've ever seen you make, and I've seen you make plenty.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Oh, they'll get to the x-box and the jeans.

If they have anything left after the...

- debt repayment
- health insurance
- home insurance
- shoes for their kids
- car repairs (if they had one)
- home repairs

...and other itsy bitsty little stuff like that that they couldn't afford before the raise.

 

[Pure]

thanks, huckleman

there are data out there.!

The minimum wage effect on youth employment in Canada,
http://economics.ca/2004/papers/0083.pdf

---

http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_viewpoints_raising_minimum_wage_2004
THIS TESTIMONY WAS GIVEN BEFORE THE U.S. HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE EMPOWERMENT AND GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS ON APRIL 29, 2004.
Minimum Wage and Its Effects on Small Business
By Jared Bernstein

Jared Bernstein is senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute in Washington, D.C.

A detailed look at retail employment during the first year after New York increased its
minimum wage in January of 2005 also showed no adverse effects:

• Retail employment in New York increased faster from 2004 to 2005 than overall
employment, while retail’s growth was slower than total employment growth in
neighboring states and in the U.S. as a whole; and

• The positive effects of the increased minimum wage on low-wage workers’ income
were not negated by reduced hours of work.

This analysis does not prove that increasing the minimum wage will boost employment growth over what it otherwise would have been. But it is clear that the prediction that an increase in the minimum wage will result in adverse employment outcomes has not been validated. In fact, this analysis suggests that small employers may benefit from a higher minimum wage because of positive effects on worker retention and productivity and savings on recruitment and training costs. It is clear that higher minimum wages have helped workers get a fairer wage while small businesses have continued to grow.

 

[R. Richard]

Um...your illustrating my point. learning the wrong thing is useless. Regarding your job situation, your philosophy class was a waste of time.

I pointed out that you yourself had said that learning the wrong thing was bad. However, it is not just a waste of time, it is a loss of opportunity to learn the right thing.

But what about the math, programming and physics? Wheren't those ejukation that you done gots yasself too?

Ah screw it, this is clealy just semantics, and differing experiences from the college world.

NO! The math, physics and programming were NOT education. Education is a sequence of lies that the student is forced to memorize. Math, physics and programming were learning where the results of the learning were tested by requiring the solution of problems in the area of the training.

On the other hand, back when I was hiring programmers, German classes (or knowingt the language anyway) would have been a major advantage since we worked alot with zee germans. As would a course in general economics, and marketing, since that's the business end where their applications would be used, and also Swedish and rhetorics, so that they could communicate in an effective way with non-programmers about what the heck they were doing.

You live in Sweden. Probably you do talk frequently with Germans. I live in the United Stated, we DON'T talk frequently with the Germans. I understand economics, borth micro and macro very well. I am able to sell, not just market products to high level customers. Unfortunately, the last two skills were always hated and feared by my supervisors, since I could do thing they were required to do/know and I could do them better than the supervisors. You say, "they could communicate in an effective way with non-programmers about what the heck they were doing." Let's just analyze your statement. A computer programmer, with no special training in interpersonal; communications, is to be required to communicate effectively with people who are EDUCATED in such communications. [In my country we are talking about English, psychology, philosophy, business.] Apparently, your vaunted education is not suffcient to allow such EDUCATED people to talk with a programmer. Tell me, what other classes of people are your EDUCATED people unable to communicate with?

But then this was a semi small business, where people needed to understand the other parts of the machinerty pretty well. Different situation, different needs, I guess.

But yeah. College is Satan. Have it your way.

I didn't have it my way. I was forced to take classes in each of high school and college that were not just a waste of my time, but were classes that prevented me from focusing my attention on the learning I really needed. The useless classes also cost me my college scholarship, so I was forced to divert more time from my studies to earn my way through college. The useless classes were not just useless, they were destructive!

Now comes the capper. You have admitted that college educated people who are trained in communication, can't communicate effectively with trained people. By extension, high school students who are educated in communications can't communicate effectively with people in the business world. In addition, the high school students who are spewed into the world do not have necessary job skills because they are educated in useless crap instead of learning necessary job skills.

You wonder why there are poor people? I think I just told you why there are poor people.

 

[R. Richard]

Of course raising the minimum wage will not cause the loss of jobs. Raising the cost of a thing will not decrease the demand for the thing. [Ummm, this is a rejection of the basic laws of economics. You need to contact your local university professors who teach economics and inform them that they are incompetent in the area in which they hold PhDs. Please don't mention to them that I told you.]

 

[Tuomas]

So, I was struck by how many people were quoting the EPI (Economic Policy Institute), and I decided to check it out. Of course, the best place to start is their "About" page, in which I find some choice bits:

"The Institute stresses real world analysis and a concern for the living standards of working people..."

"EPI was established in 1986 to broaden the discussion about economic policy to include the interests of low- and middle-income workers."

"EPI was the first — and remains the premier — organization to focus on the economic condition of low- and middle-income Americans and their families."

No wonder you guys like quoting them.

Seriously, though, fair is fair, and just because they are focusing on the "plight" of the lower-end of the economic spectrum does not mean that they are wrong. It does not mean, however, that they are right, either.

 

[R. Richard]

I came up from the bottom. I had to live in an abandoned building and shoplift the food I needed to live. If anyone had it harder than I did, please tell me the secrets that you used to survive among the wolves. TIA.

If any one of you thinks that increasing the cost of labor will not result in a loss of jobs, you fall into one of two categories. 1) You are a transcendental genius who can revise all that we know about economics. [Please PM me about your revisions to Black-Scholes, TIA!] 2) You are a fool.

Let me try to explain something to you that might actually do some good. When I was going to high school, we had a man come in from the county or state [I'm not sure which,] with a plan and a carrot. If the high school would agree to modify the way they taught English, the county/state would provide additional funding. The man then gave each student in the class an assigment to illustrate what the new English class would be like. We were directed to write directions as to how to use a common mechanical device. I wrote the required directions in about 15 minutes. Everyone else in the class was still working. I went on and wrote beyond the assignment, tell what to do if certain problems in operation of the device happened. When I finished all I could reasonably do, I handed my work in. The man read what I had done and returned my paper with an A grade, instead of my usual F grade. In a class of a couple of dozen students there were two A grades, one C grade and the rest F grades. The students in the class could write about their summer vacation, their dream for world peace, but describing a simple mechanical process was beyond their education. If you wonder why there are poor people, the need for employees who can write about their summer vacation or their dream for world peace is extremely limited. The need for people who can write about mechanical processes is high, as is the need for people who can read about mechanical processes.

You allow your children to go into an adult world from high school with almost none of the tools they need to succeed in said world. I cite lacks in ability to communicate about real things, not dreams. I cite a lack of understanding of basic economics [If you are living of credit cards at an APR of near 20%, go look in the mirror.] I cite the inability to read simple directions. [In the high school I attended most often, students could knowingly discuss Shakespeare's toilet training, solely from reading a few of his plays. However, the same students couldn't tell you how to get your car started.]

Do you want to help poor people? Let the market dictate wages. Fix your broken high schools. [If the people who run your local high school tell you that memorizing poetry, writing about a student's summer vacation and learning the language of a country whose citizens routinely brave death to get to this country is really important, then discussion is useless, you need a lynch mob.]

If your kid comes home from the sixth grade and can't read, you are sentencing your child to a life of poverty. Yet, you accept the lie that the schools are trying their best to teach your children to read. [If you feel that I am being unfair, please explain to me how you teach a child to read without the part of the process that goes, 'then a miracle happens.' Reading is a process of analysis. First you read words and then you analyze what you have read. By definition, you can't teach the process. There is a solution to the problem. If yuou can get me in touch with a young [we will destroy the current process of education,] female [I don't need some ass hole who doesn't understand the problem trying to tell me that he does,] PhD [got to have the union card,] we can solve the problem. No, I am not kidding.]

 

[Tuomas]

I was thinking of replying to this thread. Hell I had numbers and everything. Then I realized something.

The work I do is important, I take care of the family members of the people who are ever so willing to vote against wage increases. I am a proffesional and am at risk for so many thngs. I was ready to chew everyones asses about how hard my work is and how hard my life is. was ready to try and explain my position, then I realized something.

Until you have been there, until you have been pissed on, shit upon, cursed at and threatened with lawsuits then you have absolutely no clue.

I had much the same discussion with the C.E.O. of my hospital. From the vaunted heights of his position where he gets six figure raises he looked down upon me with a blank expression. He has no clue. He mouths the platitudes of making sacrifices to further oneself yet has never been there.

Have you been in the position of having maybe $50.00 dollars left over at the end of the month and being told that you can, if you scrimp and save, put yourself through school? I have, that's where I am now.

No I am not stupid of economics. I know what companies have to pay and why. I see where the money goes.

Come down here and spend a month or so in my shoes, in the shoes of those you despise and claim are to stupid to move up. Try our lifestyle for a bit then mouth your platitudes.

Cat

What if your CEO expressed the same thing...?

You see, I had this friend who worked at a net processing plant. He started working the floor, putting in 8hrs a day. He would always complain to me about how his boss (the supervisor) was lazy and never did anything while he was out busting his balls all the time. Two years later, he was promoted to supervision from the floor. He then put in 10hr work days and started complaing about the people one the floor who hardly worked at all. He complained about his boss (plant manager) who spent all of his time in the office doing nothing and didn't care about the employees. One year later, he was promoted to plant manager. I asked him how much his work had improved, now that he was in charge. Immediately he started complaining about how the employees were hugely lazy, the floor didn't work, and the supervisors did not do their jobs properly. Then he enunciated how much more work he had to do because of his manager's job, about how he regularly put in 12-14 hours a day, besides working on weekends. I figured I would point out how just three years ago he had a different perspective of the managerial job, but he wouldn't hear of it

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence

 

[Liar]

I pointed out that you yourself had said that learning the wrong thing was bad. However, it is not just a waste of time, it is a loss of opportunity to learn the right thing.

Right-o. We agree.

NO! The math, physics and programming were NOT education.

Yes it is.

Education is a sequence of lies that the student is forced to memorize.

No it's not.

Or are you saying that stuff you leaned that YOU found useful was "learning" and stuff you learned that YOU found not useful was "education"? Eh, whatevwer, are we just quibbling semantics here? Apparently. Let's not. It's beyond silly.

You live in Sweden. Probably you do talk frequently with Germans. I live in the United Stated, we DON'T talk frequently with the Germans.

Like I said, different companies, different needs.

I understand economics, borth micro and macro very well. I am able to sell, not just market products to high level customers. Unfortunately, the last two skills were always hated and feared by my supervisors, since I could do thing they were required to do/know and I could do them better than the supervisors. You say, "they could communicate in an effective way with non-programmers about what the heck they were doing." Let's just analyze your statement. A computer programmer, with no special training in interpersonal; communications, is to be required to communicate effectively with people who are EDUCATED in such communications. [In my country we are talking about English, psychology, philosophy, business.] Apparently, your vaunted education is not suffcient to allow such EDUCATED people to talk with a programmer. Tell me, what other classes of people are your EDUCATED people unable to communicate with?

Nice topsy-turvy analysis. Completely off-the-walls wrong though. There is no macic "communicator" guild out there, but commnicative skills are required of EVERYBODY. Who are those "EDUCATED" (still the mysterious scorn...why?) people vis-a-vis the programmers? They are the marketers. They are the sales people. They are designers. They are the process manufacturers. They are the mechanic engineers. All with a specific skill set and knowledge domain, with terminology and mechanics that are alien to all the others. In order to work together and achieve a common goal, they must ALL be able to communicate effectively between each other, to explain their field of expertise to the experts in the other fields. It is not skilled labor versus some strange educated communicator phantom, that's just ridiculous. EVERYBODY is skilled labor and EVEBODY needs to communicate well.

Of course, if only one side of the conversation is a good communicator, it is possible to get the message across, but if it's the recieving end of the information that needs to do the hard work, (like it would be if your "EDUCATED" whatever needs to know what a non-communicative programmer is doing) then it's highly innefficient. Much better if BOTH parts know how to adapt info to the reciever and exchange it.

Am I getting through yet?

I didn't have it my way. I was forced to take classes in each of high school and college that were not just a waste of my time, but were classes that prevented me from focusing my attention on the learning I really needed. The useless classes also cost me my college scholarship, so I was forced to divert more time from my studies to earn my way through college. The useless classes were not just useless, they were destructive!

And thus you take your bitterness of your college experience out on the noun "education"? I don't get it.

Now comes the capper. You have admitted that college educated people who are trained in communication, can't communicate effectively with trained people.

No. I did not. That was your weird spin on something I can not fathom how you read it.

Maybe my communication skills are lacking? Hell I have another year of college left to get my master's. Maybe I can educate myself in that area.

 

[Adrenaline]

What if your CEO expressed the same thing...?

You see, I had this friend who worked at a net processing plant. He started working the floor, putting in 8hrs a day. He would always complain to me about how his boss (the supervisor) was lazy and never did anything while he was out busting his balls all the time. Two years later, he was promoted to supervision from the floor. He then put in 10hr work days and started complaing about the people one the floor who hardly worked at all. He complained about his boss (plant manager) who spent all of his time in the office doing nothing and didn't care about the employees. One year later, he was promoted to plant manager. I asked him how much his work had improved, now that he was in charge. Immediately he started complaining about how the employees were hugely lazy, the floor didn't work, and the supervisors did not do their jobs properly. Then he enunciated how much more work he had to do because of his manager's job, about how he regularly put in 12-14 hours a day, besides working on weekends. I figured I would point out how just three years ago he had a different perspective of the managerial job, but he wouldn't hear of it

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence

I re-read the post you were replying to and re-read yours. Besides the fact that your friend sounds like a chronic whiner are you implying, by your explanation, that six-figure C.E.O.'s regularly feel envy of the lower class? They may be working their ass off but they are being amply compensated, in general.

 

[cloudy]

I didn't have it my way. I was forced to take classes in each of high school and college that were not just a waste of my time, but were classes that prevented me from focusing my attention on the learning I really needed. The useless classes also cost me my college scholarship, so I was forced to divert more time from my studies to earn my way through college. The useless classes were not just useless, they were destructive!

I disagree wholeheartedly.

I didn't particularly enjoy having to take numerous classes that had nothing to do with my major, either, but I can't argue with the end result at all. I have a very well-rounded education to back up the specifics that I learned in my major classes. It taught me to be well-spoken, have confidence, and able to carry on a conversation with just about anybody. Above all, every single class I took taught me how to learn, and that's the point of a university education after all.

There is no "useless" knowledge. I don't think you could be more wrong.