I miss Jobst

On 4/13/2011 8:30 PM, A. Muzi wrote:
Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 4/13/2011 10:53 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Apr 13, 2:15 am, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 4/12/2011 6:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Apr 12, 4:07 pm, wrote:

The median wage for a man in Texas is $12/hour. The median wage for a
woman in Texas is $10/hour. These people don't have to shop at
Hellmart, but they can't afford locally tailor-made clothing or Phil
parts for their custom recumbents.

I sometimes wonder about what people can afford, especially relative
to what my family could afford when I was a kid.

When I was growing up in the '50s, my father had quite a good job by
most standards. Mom was a homemaker. They were products of the
depression and chose to have a large flock of kids. So we had a small
house, especially on a square-feet-per-person basis. He gardened and
tended six apple trees, and she preserved food. Most cars were bought
used. He built the garage, paved the driveway and finished the
basement rec room himself, with family help. Despite his love of
music, we had no stereo, and (of course) just one TV. Household toys
were not extravagant, the most prominent being a ping-pong table and a
home-built pool table, plus lots of board games to play with the
kids. By today's standards, we kids were deprived.

These days, a person in his professional position would absolutely own
a home 2.5 times as large, even though there would be just one or two
kids. The cars might be Lexi or BMWs, there would be Wii, three
computers, four cell phones, a TV in each room with the main wide-
screen one hooked into a complete home theater system. But the music
part would be little used because everyone would have an iPod. There
would be more Nintendos than family board games. Kids would be given
cars at age 16. And it goes without saying, Mom would work full time,
because "things are so expensive these days."

Been in a grocery store recently?

In brief, it seems to me most middle class families are into buying
stuff, far more than they used to be. We're enslaved by our
possessions - or by the people who convince us to buy them. I think,
for most people, more modest living could yield a lot more real,
personal prosperity.

_Your Money Or Your Life_ was an interesting book somewhat related to
this subject.

$10/hour is barely enough for rent in most urban areas, if you want to
stay out of the slums.

Yep. I wouldn't call $10/hr middle class. Neither would the Census
Bureau, I think.

- Frank Krygowski

The shouting heads on the tee-vee think $10/hour jobs are
"opportunities". Of course, these shouting heads really deserve to be
re-educated in a labor camp for their sin of pandering for profit to
the rich and powerful.

Without those $8~10 jobs, no one gets that 'first job'. The important
resume-building, character building, self discipline inspiring First
Job. The important one.

Maybe hiring practices should be changed?

As for résumé building, no one cares for higher level jobs what a person
did working part-time in a non-skilled job in high school or college,
since so many people have done so. And having seen people go through
those jobs, the character and self-discipline building does not occur -
people have them to start with, or they do not have them at all.

But is does make a good story to justify exploiting labor in a market
that is manipulated to keep unemployment artificially high.

My first job with an actual legitimate taxes-withheld paycheck involved
a broom. I moved up to the next position in a couple of weeks which is a
typical course.

Many workers in the US are stuck in these jobs, since better
opportunities no longer exist (unlike the 1950's through late 1970's,
prior to the "Ray-Gun Revulsion").

Might one support a flock of children, a drug/liquor habit, second car
and cable television on $10/hour? Of course not.

Most people are only making it by, because their parents accumulated
some assets, such as houses, during the period in US history when labor
got a reasonably fair deal (again, 1950's through late 1970's). Those
assets have been mostly dissipated through mortgages, leading to great
financial wealth in the banking sector, and near destruction of the
"blue" and "pink" collar middle classes.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 4/13/2011 8:55 PM, James Steward wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 4/13/2011 10:53 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Apr 13, 2:15 am, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 4/12/2011 6:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Apr 12, 4:07 pm, wrote:

The median wage for a man in Texas is $12/hour. The median wage
for a
woman in Texas is $10/hour. These people don't have to shop at
Hellmart, but they can't afford locally tailor-made clothing or Phil
parts for their custom recumbents.

I sometimes wonder about what people can afford, especially relative
to what my family could afford when I was a kid.

When I was growing up in the '50s, my father had quite a good job by
most standards. Mom was a homemaker. They were products of the
depression and chose to have a large flock of kids. So we had a small
house, especially on a square-feet-per-person basis. He gardened and
tended six apple trees, and she preserved food. Most cars were bought
used. He built the garage, paved the driveway and finished the
basement rec room himself, with family help. Despite his love of
music, we had no stereo, and (of course) just one TV. Household toys
were not extravagant, the most prominent being a ping-pong table
and a
home-built pool table, plus lots of board games to play with the
kids. By today's standards, we kids were deprived.

These days, a person in his professional position would absolutely
own
a home 2.5 times as large, even though there would be just one or two
kids. The cars might be Lexi or BMWs, there would be Wii, three
computers, four cell phones, a TV in each room with the main wide-
screen one hooked into a complete home theater system. But the music
part would be little used because everyone would have an iPod. There
would be more Nintendos than family board games. Kids would be given
cars at age 16. And it goes without saying, Mom would work full time,
because "things are so expensive these days."

Been in a grocery store recently?

In brief, it seems to me most middle class families are into buying
stuff, far more than they used to be. We're enslaved by our
possessions - or by the people who convince us to buy them. I think,
for most people, more modest living could yield a lot more real,
personal prosperity.

_Your Money Or Your Life_ was an interesting book somewhat related to
this subject.

$10/hour is barely enough for rent in most urban areas, if you want to
stay out of the slums.

Yep. I wouldn't call $10/hr middle class. Neither would the Census
Bureau, I think.

- Frank Krygowski

The shouting heads on the tee-vee think $10/hour jobs are
"opportunities". Of course, these shouting heads really deserve to be
re-educated in a labor camp for their sin of pandering for profit to
the rich and powerful.

Without those $8~10 jobs, no one gets that 'first job'. The important
resume-building, character building, self discipline inspiring First
Job. The important one.

My first job with an actual legitimate taxes-withheld paycheck
involved a broom. I moved up to the next position in a couple of weeks
which is a typical course.

Might one support a flock of children, a drug/liquor habit, second car
and cable television on $10/hour? Of course not.


My first was picking cherries.

I suspect picking cherries now would yield $10 per hour, maybe more.
Last I heard it was close to that anyway.

I was able to earn enough during the picking season to afford fuel,
food, books and a few bike and car parts while going through Uni.

Do not know about contemporary OZ, but in the US with current tuition
and housing prices, no way can a person put themselves through school at
a 4-year *public* college/university at $10/hour, nor would they make
that much doing seasonal agricultural work. Maybe in the 1950's through
late 1970's when real wages were much higher, and food, energy, housing,
and educational expenses much less. But that has been sacrificed so the
already-too-rich-to-be-able-to-spend-my-income group can have even more.

As a licensed engineer with more than 10 years experience making a wage
within one-half standard deviation of the mean, I [1] barely have the
discretionary income to pay for tuition, fees, books and housing for one
(1) undergraduate student at a state university. Sending two (2)
children to a state school at the same time would be out of the
question, without borrowing nearly half the money. As for private
universities - fuggedaboutit.

[1] Example case - I am not actually paying for a student, but the costs
are readily available.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 4/13/2011 9:16 PM, Bad Idea wrote:
On Apr 13, 5:54 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 4/13/2011 10:53 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:



The shouting heads on the tee-vee think $10/hour jobs are
"opportunities". Of course, these shouting heads really deserve to be
re-educated in a labor camp for their sin of pandering for profit to the
rich and powerful.

Ted Kennedy promulgated public policy of $6.80/hour as a “living wage
for families� (his words).

Ted Kennedy was the beneficiary of inheriting great wealth originally
obtained by less than ethical means.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 4/13/2011 8:55 PM, James Steward wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 4/13/2011 10:53 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Apr 13, 2:15 am, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 4/12/2011 6:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Apr 12, 4:07 pm, wrote:

The median wage for a man in Texas is $12/hour. The median wage
for a
woman in Texas is $10/hour. These people don't have to shop at
Hellmart, but they can't afford locally tailor-made clothing or
Phil
parts for their custom recumbents.

I sometimes wonder about what people can afford, especially relative
to what my family could afford when I was a kid.

When I was growing up in the '50s, my father had quite a good job by
most standards. Mom was a homemaker. They were products of the
depression and chose to have a large flock of kids. So we had a
small
house, especially on a square-feet-per-person basis. He gardened and
tended six apple trees, and she preserved food. Most cars were
bought
used. He built the garage, paved the driveway and finished the
basement rec room himself, with family help. Despite his love of
music, we had no stereo, and (of course) just one TV. Household toys
were not extravagant, the most prominent being a ping-pong table
and a
home-built pool table, plus lots of board games to play with the
kids. By today's standards, we kids were deprived.

These days, a person in his professional position would absolutely
own
a home 2.5 times as large, even though there would be just one or
two
kids. The cars might be Lexi or BMWs, there would be Wii, three
computers, four cell phones, a TV in each room with the main wide-
screen one hooked into a complete home theater system. But the music
part would be little used because everyone would have an iPod. There
would be more Nintendos than family board games. Kids would be given
cars at age 16. And it goes without saying, Mom would work full
time,
because "things are so expensive these days."

Been in a grocery store recently?

In brief, it seems to me most middle class families are into buying
stuff, far more than they used to be. We're enslaved by our
possessions - or by the people who convince us to buy them. I think,
for most people, more modest living could yield a lot more real,
personal prosperity.

_Your Money Or Your Life_ was an interesting book somewhat
related to
this subject.

$10/hour is barely enough for rent in most urban areas, if you
want to
stay out of the slums.

Yep. I wouldn't call $10/hr middle class. Neither would the Census
Bureau, I think.

- Frank Krygowski

The shouting heads on the tee-vee think $10/hour jobs are
"opportunities". Of course, these shouting heads really deserve to be
re-educated in a labor camp for their sin of pandering for profit to
the rich and powerful.

Without those $8~10 jobs, no one gets that 'first job'. The important
resume-building, character building, self discipline inspiring First
Job. The important one.

My first job with an actual legitimate taxes-withheld paycheck
involved a broom. I moved up to the next position in a couple of weeks
which is a typical course.

Might one support a flock of children, a drug/liquor habit, second car
and cable television on $10/hour? Of course not.


My first was picking cherries.

I suspect picking cherries now would yield $10 per hour, maybe more.
Last I heard it was close to that anyway.

I was able to earn enough during the picking season to afford fuel,
food, books and a few bike and car parts while going through Uni.

Do not know about contemporary OZ, but in the US with current tuition
and housing prices, no way can a person put themselves through school at
a 4-year *public* college/university at $10/hour, nor would they make
that much doing seasonal agricultural work.

I was living at home. Our tuition expenses are covered mostly by a loan
from the govt until you finish the uni course and start full time work,
then pay it back as part of your tax return (debt).

Certainly, $10/hour x 10 hours x 7 days x 6 weeks = $4200 is not enough
to survive on ones own here per annum. Pensioners barely exist on 2-3
times that.

I made a couple of thousand each summer holiday, which was enough to get
by, given my circumstances, and was a valuable experience in learning
the value of money.

Some folks do live by traveling around following the seasonal work.

JS.

AMuzi wrote:

Chalo wrote:

AMuzi wrote:

Chalo wrote:

thirty-six wrote:

AMuzi wrote:

It's all steel, right?

Just like all whisky's the same, to the uknowing.

Some things are best when you make your own.

Mao tried that 'home forge' program.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...ap_forward.htm

I wasn't taking about steel.

But I am reminded of this:
http://www.thomasthwaites.com/thomas/toaster/page2.htm

Was there any aspect of that which was not reasonable and
considered?

I happen to agree with him, but even if you do not, he
wasn't spewing ranting and calling names there was he?

I'm no longer sure what you're talking about, but the article you
posted above was cogent.

I was reminded of The Toaster Project by the prospect of Chinese
peasants making steel locally.

Chalo

On Apr 12, 7:09*pm, Chalo wrote:
thirty-six wrote:

Chalo wrote:

thirty-six wrote:

AMuzi wrote:

It's all steel, right?

Just like all whisky's the same, to the uknowing.

Some things are best when you make your own.

How do you decide when the take should start?

When you can no longer smell Super Elastic Bubble Plastic, of
course.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/b9owner/4190592645/

Chalo

Not had that one, but I do remember some bubble gums having a sugary
(fake strawberry) acetone-like smell, is this what you mean? I've
heard the odour on some spirits referred to as Airfix glue, which
supposedly includes some latex as well as acetone solvent.

On Apr 14, 10:28*am, Jay Beattie wrote:

What is an "inequitable profit"? *Gross profit is revenue less cost of
goods sold. GAAP doesn't have a category for "inequitable profits."
And if you are saying profits are too high, why not drop the revenues
by reducing the price of finished goods? *

Obviously, because it would interfere with this trend:

http://www.epi.org/images/snap20060621.jpg

My God, we don't want to return to the horrors of the 1970s and 1980s,
when American CEOs were begging on every street corner!

- Frank Krygowski

Tºm Shermªn™ °_° " writes:

On 4/13/2011 8:55 PM, James Steward wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 4/13/2011 10:53 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Apr 13, 2:15 am, Tºm Shermªn™ °_°""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 4/12/2011 6:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On Apr 12, 4:07 pm, wrote:

The median wage for a man in Texas is $12/hour. The median wage
for a
woman in Texas is $10/hour. These people don't have to shop at
Hellmart, but they can't afford locally tailor-made clothing or Phil
parts for their custom recumbents.

I sometimes wonder about what people can afford, especially relative
to what my family could afford when I was a kid.

When I was growing up in the '50s, my father had quite a good job by
most standards. Mom was a homemaker. They were products of the
depression and chose to have a large flock of kids. So we had a small
house, especially on a square-feet-per-person basis. He gardened and
tended six apple trees, and she preserved food. Most cars were bought
used. He built the garage, paved the driveway and finished the
basement rec room himself, with family help. Despite his love of
music, we had no stereo, and (of course) just one TV. Household toys
were not extravagant, the most prominent being a ping-pong table
and a
home-built pool table, plus lots of board games to play with the
kids. By today's standards, we kids were deprived.

These days, a person in his professional position would absolutely
own
a home 2.5 times as large, even though there would be just one or two
kids. The cars might be Lexi or BMWs, there would be Wii, three
computers, four cell phones, a TV in each room with the main wide-
screen one hooked into a complete home theater system. But the music
part would be little used because everyone would have an iPod. There
would be more Nintendos than family board games. Kids would be given
cars at age 16. And it goes without saying, Mom would work full time,
because "things are so expensive these days."

Been in a grocery store recently?

In brief, it seems to me most middle class families are into buying
stuff, far more than they used to be. We're enslaved by our
possessions - or by the people who convince us to buy them. I think,
for most people, more modest living could yield a lot more real,
personal prosperity.

_Your Money Or Your Life_ was an interesting book somewhat related to
this subject.

$10/hour is barely enough for rent in most urban areas, if you want to
stay out of the slums.

Yep. I wouldn't call $10/hr middle class. Neither would the Census
Bureau, I think.

- Frank Krygowski

The shouting heads on the tee-vee think $10/hour jobs are
"opportunities". Of course, these shouting heads really deserve to be
re-educated in a labor camp for their sin of pandering for profit to
the rich and powerful.

Without those $8~10 jobs, no one gets that 'first job'. The important
resume-building, character building, self discipline inspiring First
Job. The important one.

My first job with an actual legitimate taxes-withheld paycheck
involved a broom. I moved up to the next position in a couple of weeks
which is a typical course.

Might one support a flock of children, a drug/liquor habit, second car
and cable television on $10/hour? Of course not.


My first was picking cherries.

I suspect picking cherries now would yield $10 per hour, maybe more.
Last I heard it was close to that anyway.

I was able to earn enough during the picking season to afford fuel,
food, books and a few bike and car parts while going through Uni.

Do not know about contemporary OZ, but in the US with current tuition
and housing prices, no way can a person put themselves through school
at a 4-year *public* college/university at $10/hour, nor would they
make that much doing seasonal agricultural work. Maybe in the 1950's
through late 1970's when real wages were much higher, and food,
energy, housing, and educational expenses much less. But that has
been sacrificed so the already-too-rich-to-be-able-to-spend-my-income
group can have even more.

As a licensed engineer with more than 10 years experience making a
wage within one-half standard deviation of the mean, I [1] barely have
the discretionary income to pay for tuition, fees, books and housing
for one (1) undergraduate student at a state university. Sending two
(2) children to a state school at the same time would be out of the
question, without borrowing nearly half the money. As for private
universities - fuggedaboutit.

[1] Example case - I am not actually paying for a student, but the
costs are readily available.

The rise in US post-secondary education costs illustrates graphically
why government subsidy of debt is a horrible idea.



--

Jay Beattie wrote:

Chalo wrote:

The share of business revenues that could be used to pay all those
people a living wage is siphoned off as inequitable profits for
capital, mostly. *I don't deny anyone a profit for a successful
business plan carried out, but... first things first. *Fairly paying
the people who make the revenue happen, and don't get to take the
profit, comes first.

What is an "inequitable profit"? *

That would be a profit reaped by capital without labor having gotten a
living wage. First things first, like I said.

Chalo wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
Chalo wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
Chalo wrote:
thirty-six wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
It's all steel, right?
Just like all whisky's the same, to the uknowing.
Some things are best when you make your own.
Mao tried that 'home forge' program.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...ap_forward.htm
I wasn't taking about steel.

But I am reminded of this:
http://www.thomasthwaites.com/thomas/toaster/page2.htm
Was there any aspect of that which was not reasonable and
considered?

I happen to agree with him, but even if you do not, he
wasn't spewing ranting and calling names there was he?

I'm no longer sure what you're talking about, but the article you
posted above was cogent.

I was reminded of The Toaster Project by the prospect of Chinese
peasants making steel locally.

Chalo

I erred by replying to your previous post quoting Mr
Thomson on 'bikes belong' so I deleted my comments but
obviously not quickly enough.

Yes, I had seen the toaster piece before. His point was
clear in an entertaining way.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971