Author Topic: Andrew Yang  (Read 13700 times)

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #110 on: January 14, 2020, 12:43:49 PM »
"But your reply, and Greg's, seem to imply that we all "worked hard for it", further implying that the "less well-off" simply have not worked enough for it."

Worked hard on something valuable. Makes sense now?

Cardboard

Ohhhhhhhh I get it - so according to you, 44% of all US workers simply aren't working on something valuable. That makes sense!  ::)

"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom


LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #111 on: January 14, 2020, 01:08:41 PM »

LC you make a lot of assumptions about my stances. I have never said that poor people donít work hard. But I would argue that your assumption that everyone would be rocket scientists if they had a little extra money in their pockets is laughable.
Well what a load of baloney as I've ever read it. First, show me where I make that assumption. And second, when you post stuff like

"UBI comes across to me as a bad parent. Itís not much different than a parent giving in to a kid who is being a brat and buying them that price of candy in the checkout line so they stop making a scene for 10 minutes.

I believe the physiological meaning and motivation behind how someone has obtained money is extremely important for a society. Itís what moves the world forward. The idea of working and achieving something is very important. I donít think UBI helps to achieve this. Welfare should work towards a solution that make people feel enthralled to earn and save and be productive.

ďA working man is a happy man. An idle man is a most unhappy man.Ē - Ben Franklin


That seems to me a total implication that the poor are poor because they aren't working.

Quote
1) Have you ever been poor?

2) Have you ever worked a blue collar job for an extended period of time?

3) Have you ever associated with the lower class or lived alongside them for an extended period of time?

If the answer to those three questions is no then quite honestly I donít give a lot of merit to your views on it. You can cite all the stats you want, but I can assure you those stats are not anywhere near encompassing of reality that exists. This is the issue with many academics in my opinion. As with everything we build two camps when the reality is probably somewhere in the middle. But the fact remains and will remain that people are inclined to be lazy if given the opportunity.
Ah I see - factual data is useless, anecdotal stories are how we should design our social policies. And it's shocking (SHOCKING!) that those stories happen to benefit those like you... ::)


Quote
To go along with what DTEJD1997 said about postal workers. I have seen a similar thing happen in my short time at UPS. Probably close to 50 people walked away from an 80-100k a year job because they didnít want to work hard.
Well again there is some nonsense afoot because the starting salary for a USPS worker is something like 30,000/year. I guess these anecdotal stories also include 70K in overtime work. Here's one more of those silly stats:

According to the American Postal Workers Union, clerks' salaries depended on their service grade. Level 3 employees in the lowest spot on the pay scale earned $25,657 to start. The bureau reported the nation's 65,040 postal clerks overall averaged $52,860, or $25.41 an hour.


Quote
Go talk to anyone who runs a blue collar business (welding, construction, landscaping, carpentry) and they will tell you how difficult it is to find good people to do a job and be consistent.
That's odd because there's tons of South American guys in my neighborhood who do great work for reasonable prices. Hell, one of my roofer's wife drove by during lunch with coolers of tacos, tamales, rice and beans, etc. Lunch was great (even the neighbors came out and bought some) and they did an excellent job (4 buildings in 2 days!).

It's a wonder the real estate market can grow at all:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brendarichardson/2019/07/18/robust-us-housing-market-continues-to-expand-amid-recession-jitters/#1dcce92b3298

Quote
Again, we absolutely need a system which helps the poor and needy. No doubt about it. But it needs to be one that build incentive and makes individuals feel like they are gaining something. Perhaps something that rewards consistency and dedication?
Well I partly agree, but again we have 44% of the workforce who are barely above the poverty line. More than half who work full time, year round. A third who have children.

But apparently they lack consistency, dedication, and the right incentives? Well, you tell me what incentives they are lacking because your beliefs about how a welfare program should be structured does not align with reality.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2020, 01:12:06 PM by LC »
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom

Castanza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1558
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #112 on: January 14, 2020, 02:03:49 PM »

LC you make a lot of assumptions about my stances. I have never said that poor people donít work hard. But I would argue that your assumption that everyone would be rocket scientists if they had a little extra money in their pockets is laughable.
Well what a load of baloney as I've ever read it. First, show me where I make that assumption. And second, when you post stuff like

"UBI comes across to me as a bad parent. Itís not much different than a parent giving in to a kid who is being a brat and buying them that price of candy in the checkout line so they stop making a scene for 10 minutes.

I believe the physiological meaning and motivation behind how someone has obtained money is extremely important for a society. Itís what moves the world forward. The idea of working and achieving something is very important. I donít think UBI helps to achieve this. Welfare should work towards a solution that make people feel enthralled to earn and save and be productive.

ďA working man is a happy man. An idle man is a most unhappy man.Ē - Ben Franklin


That seems to me a total implication that the poor are poor because they aren't working.

Quote
1) Have you ever been poor?

2) Have you ever worked a blue collar job for an extended period of time?

3) Have you ever associated with the lower class or lived alongside them for an extended period of time?

If the answer to those three questions is no then quite honestly I donít give a lot of merit to your views on it. You can cite all the stats you want, but I can assure you those stats are not anywhere near encompassing of reality that exists. This is the issue with many academics in my opinion. As with everything we build two camps when the reality is probably somewhere in the middle. But the fact remains and will remain that people are inclined to be lazy if given the opportunity.
Ah I see - factual data is useless, anecdotal stories are how we should design our social policies. And it's shocking (SHOCKING!) that those stories happen to benefit those like you... ::)


Quote
To go along with what DTEJD1997 said about postal workers. I have seen a similar thing happen in my short time at UPS. Probably close to 50 people walked away from an 80-100k a year job because they didnít want to work hard.
Well again there is some nonsense afoot because the starting salary for a USPS worker is something like 30,000/year. I guess these anecdotal stories also include 70K in overtime work. Here's one more of those silly stats:

According to the American Postal Workers Union, clerks' salaries depended on their service grade. Level 3 employees in the lowest spot on the pay scale earned $25,657 to start. The bureau reported the nation's 65,040 postal clerks overall averaged $52,860, or $25.41 an hour.


Quote
Go talk to anyone who runs a blue collar business (welding, construction, landscaping, carpentry) and they will tell you how difficult it is to find good people to do a job and be consistent.
That's odd because there's tons of South American guys in my neighborhood who do great work for reasonable prices. Hell, one of my roofer's wife drove by during lunch with coolers of tacos, tamales, rice and beans, etc. Lunch was great (even the neighbors came out and bought some) and they did an excellent job (4 buildings in 2 days!).

It's a wonder the real estate market can grow at all:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brendarichardson/2019/07/18/robust-us-housing-market-continues-to-expand-amid-recession-jitters/#1dcce92b3298

Quote
Again, we absolutely need a system which helps the poor and needy. No doubt about it. But it needs to be one that build incentive and makes individuals feel like they are gaining something. Perhaps something that rewards consistency and dedication?
Well I partly agree, but again we have 44% of the workforce who are barely above the poverty line. More than half who work full time, year round. A third who have children.

But apparently they lack consistency, dedication, and the right incentives? Well, you tell me what incentives they are lacking because your beliefs about how a welfare program should be structured does not align with reality.

1.) The only thing Iím implying is that creating policy which neglects how people act is just plaid stupid. Socialism looks great on paper (academic level) it fails when you introduce human sociology and psychology. Who is ignoring reality? Iím not the one who advocates for policies which ignore reality. I advocate for policies which allow for the least amount of coercion on a mass scale BECAUSE human behavior will always be the fly in the ointment. 

2.) You have this idea of cosmic justice and social justice that is really nothing more than totalitarianism concealed as compassion. You seem to have no problem investing in companies which donít pay their workers a livable wage. Did you happen to pay those roofers more than what they priced the job at? Probably not

3.) If you canít see how UBI is nothing more than a ďplease be quiet allowanceĒ from big daddy government then I donít know what else to tell you. Let me at least ask you this. Say we implement UBI, what do you think the odds are that people will ask for a higher UBI within 10 years? How do we scale UBI? Because even a modest increase would be an enormous amount.
Core: MSFT | GOOG | | VZ | INTC | RTX | MSGS | BATRK | TPL | USB | PNC | BAC | PCYO | PPL | GRBK | PLNT | ESPO | HACK

SafetyinNumbers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #113 on: January 14, 2020, 02:32:38 PM »

LC you make a lot of assumptions about my stances. I have never said that poor people donít work hard. But I would argue that your assumption that everyone would be rocket scientists if they had a little extra money in their pockets is laughable.
Well what a load of baloney as I've ever read it. First, show me where I make that assumption. And second, when you post stuff like

"UBI comes across to me as a bad parent. Itís not much different than a parent giving in to a kid who is being a brat and buying them that price of candy in the checkout line so they stop making a scene for 10 minutes.

I believe the physiological meaning and motivation behind how someone has obtained money is extremely important for a society. Itís what moves the world forward. The idea of working and achieving something is very important. I donít think UBI helps to achieve this. Welfare should work towards a solution that make people feel enthralled to earn and save and be productive.

ďA working man is a happy man. An idle man is a most unhappy man.Ē - Ben Franklin


That seems to me a total implication that the poor are poor because they aren't working.

Quote
1) Have you ever been poor?

2) Have you ever worked a blue collar job for an extended period of time?

3) Have you ever associated with the lower class or lived alongside them for an extended period of time?

If the answer to those three questions is no then quite honestly I donít give a lot of merit to your views on it. You can cite all the stats you want, but I can assure you those stats are not anywhere near encompassing of reality that exists. This is the issue with many academics in my opinion. As with everything we build two camps when the reality is probably somewhere in the middle. But the fact remains and will remain that people are inclined to be lazy if given the opportunity.
Ah I see - factual data is useless, anecdotal stories are how we should design our social policies. And it's shocking (SHOCKING!) that those stories happen to benefit those like you... ::)


Quote
To go along with what DTEJD1997 said about postal workers. I have seen a similar thing happen in my short time at UPS. Probably close to 50 people walked away from an 80-100k a year job because they didnít want to work hard.
Well again there is some nonsense afoot because the starting salary for a USPS worker is something like 30,000/year. I guess these anecdotal stories also include 70K in overtime work. Here's one more of those silly stats:

According to the American Postal Workers Union, clerks' salaries depended on their service grade. Level 3 employees in the lowest spot on the pay scale earned $25,657 to start. The bureau reported the nation's 65,040 postal clerks overall averaged $52,860, or $25.41 an hour.


Quote
Go talk to anyone who runs a blue collar business (welding, construction, landscaping, carpentry) and they will tell you how difficult it is to find good people to do a job and be consistent.
That's odd because there's tons of South American guys in my neighborhood who do great work for reasonable prices. Hell, one of my roofer's wife drove by during lunch with coolers of tacos, tamales, rice and beans, etc. Lunch was great (even the neighbors came out and bought some) and they did an excellent job (4 buildings in 2 days!).

It's a wonder the real estate market can grow at all:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brendarichardson/2019/07/18/robust-us-housing-market-continues-to-expand-amid-recession-jitters/#1dcce92b3298

Quote
Again, we absolutely need a system which helps the poor and needy. No doubt about it. But it needs to be one that build incentive and makes individuals feel like they are gaining something. Perhaps something that rewards consistency and dedication?
Well I partly agree, but again we have 44% of the workforce who are barely above the poverty line. More than half who work full time, year round. A third who have children.

But apparently they lack consistency, dedication, and the right incentives? Well, you tell me what incentives they are lacking because your beliefs about how a welfare program should be structured does not align with reality.

1.) The only thing Iím implying is that creating policy which neglects how people act is just plaid stupid. Socialism looks great on paper (academic level) it fails when you introduce human sociology and psychology. Who is ignoring reality? Iím not the one who advocates for policies which ignore reality. I advocate for policies which allow for the least amount of coercion on a mass scale BECAUSE human behavior will always be the fly in the ointment. 

2.) You have this idea of cosmic justice and social justice that is really nothing more than totalitarianism concealed as compassion. You seem to have no problem investing in companies which donít pay their workers a livable wage. Did you happen to pay those roofers more than what they priced the job at? Probably not

3.) If you canít see how UBI is nothing more than a ďplease be quiet allowanceĒ from big daddy government then I donít know what else to tell you. Let me at least ask you this. Say we implement UBI, what do you think the odds are that people will ask for a higher UBI within 10 years? How do we scale UBI? Because even a modest increase would be an enormous amount.

All the wide scale "welfare" we have seen has been based on certain conditions being met. As soon as conditions are introduced, people are incentivized to change behavior. If it's really hard to qualify for a lot of these programs the incentives might become skewed to incentivize people to stay on welfare and not seek other income.

I think most people will not think UBI is enough income and will be encouraged to pursue other sources of income and now might have the capital and flexibility to do so. But if they don't at least they are incentivized to not go to prison so they can keep collecting their Freedom Dividend.

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #114 on: January 14, 2020, 02:42:32 PM »
Quote
1.) The only thing Iím implying is that creating policy which neglects how people act is just plaid stupid. Socialism looks great on paper (academic level) it fails when you introduce human sociology and psychology. Who is ignoring reality? Iím not the one who advocates for policies which ignore reality. I advocate for policies which allow for the least amount of coercion on a mass scale BECAUSE human behavior will always be the fly in the ointment.

It's difficult for me to buy into a policy which makes social aid contingent on factors of someone's choosing. This problem is not just affecting the stoners and fraudsters (as Greg put it). When a problem affects 45% of the working population, the contingencies and conditions are simply bullshit. It's a systematic problem that will not be solved with contingent solutions.

Quote
You have this idea of cosmic justice and social justice that is really nothing more than totalitarianism concealed as compassion. You seem to have no problem investing in companies which donít pay their workers a livable wage. Did you happen to pay those roofers more than what they priced the job at? Probably not

I mean, the insurance company paid them, I had zero involvement. But I paid the guy's wife $20 bucks for a lunch she charged me $9 for, and tossed the guys a pack of smokes and some beer, so... maybe? Hey if it makes you feel better I almost always tip 30+% (as should everyone who has ever worked in food or drink service, which I did for years FYI)

But really your argument is a non-sequitur. I invest in Berkshire, I'm sure there are divisions which pay people barely nothing. I am in no position to change that. I would if I could. We have elected officials who legislate minimum wages and other regulations, which are supposed to reign in the anti-social externalities of a majority capitalist system.

And, if you think a piece of legislation that is 1 voted on by hundreds of representative members of society, 2 signed by a freely-elected President, and 3 which escapes the inevitable Supreme Court case happens to be totalitarianism, well then we should all be grateful that the horror of actual totalitarian societies has faded from memory.

Quote
3.) If you canít see how UBI is nothing more than a ďplease be quiet allowanceĒ from big daddy government then I donít know what else to tell you. Let me at least ask you this. Say we implement UBI, what do you think the odds are that people will ask for a higher UBI within 10 years? How do we scale UBI? Because even a modest increase would be an enormous amount.
Oh I agree there are definitely problems with UBI. Hell, it's not really a great solution, it's certainly not my first or even fifth choice. A great solution would not allow 45% of our working citizens to be living at the poverty line in the first place. Reforms to education, healthcare, immigration, taxation...all these things would be great and would have (in my estimation) helped prevent this problem in the first place.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom

Nell-e

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 121
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #115 on: January 14, 2020, 04:28:23 PM »
I agree, I think we need to do more to help people at the bottom of the ladder.  Even if just for my own selfish reason of maintaining stability in the US and other 1st world democracies. 

I'm not sure if UBI will accomplish that.

The public education system has been undermined so much that some high school graduates can hardly read, write and do basic math required for a job in construction.

Is it possible that UBI will further separate those who can/do succeed in our system and those that fail (for whatever reason: lack of development and training, lack of opportunity, mental health issues, addiction issues, lower raw intelligence, no trained work ethic, etc).   Sure they will have a basic income, but won't they want much more and still be resentful of the more successful?   What is the expression: "the devil makes work for idle hands"?

I think we need to find ways to build strong communities where everyone is engaged in some occupation and able to contribute in accordance with their abilities.  Those with lesser abilities are better off doing something than nothing.





No one has responded to my 12/18 post.  I can only assume that either people were so overwhelmed by its sublime reasoning and had no retort OR no one bothered to read it.

I argue UBI is necessary to prevent the entire neighborhood from going to hell because if we let our poorest communities disintegrate into shantytowns then we will pay more in HUMAN costs.


I thought of a more straightforward (and hopefully more convincing) way to express my support of UBI.  In short, 10 to 20 years from now I donít want to find that the U.S. has devolved into conditions present in countries like India, China, Mexico, or South Africa which result from wealth inequality. 

In India, 73% of the wealth generated in 2017 went to the richest 1%.  The richest family lives in a billion dollar house while millions live in open sewer slums.  India also has the most people living in modern slavery.  In China, scamming and counterfeiting are commonplace.  People go to such extremes such as flinging themselves in front of cars to extort a payoff.  In Mexico, average people are kidnapped and held for ransom.  In South Africa, armed robberies and car jackings are so prevalent that even the wealthiest citizens fear for their safety.  As an example, a celebrity athlete mistakenly shot his model girlfriend because he was paranoid about intruders. 

I support UBI to avoid the further erosion of civility. Recently, a poor inner-city 14 year old is suspected to have stabbed a female college student in a robbery gone bad in greater NYC.  The victim was originally from Charlottesville, Virginia.  These are real costs measured in human life not dollars which hopefully most citizens wonít experience directly but the probabilities will rise if conditions worsen.

In economic terms, I think of UBI as a necessary tax to maintain poor rural and inner city areas to avoid negative externalities.  Simply, UBI is paid to keep the entire neighborhood from going to hell.  Off the top of my head, hereís a partial list of externalities which in my subjective view are influenced by wealth inequality and populism.

    ē Idiotic, corrupt, narcissistic, criminal, and/or murderous leaders are swept into power by angry mobsĖ [fill in the blank with examples throughout different time periods and geography].
    ē The worst examples in human cost include WW2 and the Stalin and Mao regimes.  Over 70 million died in WW2 and tens of millions died under both Stalin and Mao.
    ē I donít think our current situation is anywhere as dire as the stated examples because people arenít starving but they are a frame of reference for what is possible when social cohesion disintegrates.
    ē Presently, we have Trump.  IMO his worst effects are perpetrating lies and normalizing the mentality that winning is the only goal and that cheating is ok as long as you donít get caught.  You could go on and on about all of Trumpís downsides that are impossible to quantify.
    ē Deterioration of public discourse and the absurdity of alternative facts
    ē Current and potential stupid/counterproductive policies
        ◦ [fill in the blank]
        ◦ I put the $15 min wage in this category.
        ◦ Potential dumb policies include but not limited to -  Building a wall and having Mexico pay for it, Federal Jobs Guarantee, Wealth Tax, Reparations for slavery, etc.  Even the mention of reparations raises expectations of future stupid policies.
    ē Declining life expectancy.  Record levels of suicides, depression, stress, mental illness.
    ē The opioid epidemic.
    ē Mass shootings.  Duck and cover drills that stress out parents/children but havenít saved lives. 
    ē Metal detectors everywhere.  Longer wait times at public events, airports etc because of metal detectors and getting frisked. 
    ē Deterioration of our environment i.e. lead in drinking water
    ē Neglected infrastructure where there are more potholes that lead to more vehicle repairs.
    ē Political gridlock, bureaucracy, corruption
    ē A dumber population causing things like measles to return because idiots think vaccines cause autism. 
    ē A dumb electorate that elects dumb congress people across the political spectrum.
    ē A society where frivolous lawsuits and scamming exist so average people need to buy Umbrella Insurance policies.
    ē You get the point. Extreme wealth inequality causes difficult to quantify externalities for everyone that donít remain contained to poor areas.


Thought experiment:  What if the poorest counties of Mississippi, Alabama, and New Mexico deteriorate into the complete lawlessness found in 3rd world countries by 2030? Letís say things get so bad that gangs start hijacking vehicles carrying anything of value and carjackings occur more regularly.  What will happen to the cost of shipping and how will that percolate through the greater economy?  In a country where there are already 390 million guns in circulation how much more security will be needed in public places?  What would the effects be on general and mental health?  Ultimately, what would be the cost in human lives?

If you think Iím being overly dramatic, is it really that difficult to imagine Rodney-King magnitude riots during the next recession?  Or more frequent Oklahoma City bombings?  Also ask: Is it more likely in 10 years that the poorest communities will have their downtowns revitalized or that those communities will continue to decline into shantytowns?

Bottomline, I think people who have the ďmoochers donít deserve UBIĒ mentality are missing the big picture.  If poor areas keep deteriorating then we will ALL pay a bigger HUMAN cost.

Many people across the country live in small towns with struggling economies and downtowns/shopping malls that are abandoned with shuttered buildings and broken windows everywhere.  Hereís a good short video showing what some of these dilapidated downtowns look like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K86gJMXB2Bg

If you agree that itís in no oneís interest for these communities to disintegrate into shantytowns, then we should either renovate or demolish rundown areas.  The question then is - Should the federal government or private industry do the work?   I would prefer private industry but in current conditions thereís no profit incentive for private business to get involved because the residents are poor.

Thatís why I favor UBI.  The policies of tax cuts for the rich or college loans for everyone are solutions that brought us to our current situation.  Other proposals on the table include a Federal Jobs Guarantee, higher minimum wages, free college, free daycare, etc.  These proposals are truly wasteful and the ones we need to avoid.  Sadly, itís also the direction the political climate is blowing towards.

With UBI, thereís optionality.  Residents can pool their resources and decide what to do with their own communities.  It gives local entrepreneurs a chance to start businesses to renovate old buildings or locals might decide that they would rather let national chain stores (i.e. Walmart, CVS, Lowes) come in and upgrade their downtown.  At the very least, when residents have money thereís an incentive for private industry to engage again.  The hope is that communities will revive their downtowns or at least upgrade the aesthetics of their surroundings that theyíll feel better about life which results in better outcomes related to areas like the local economy, crime, health and education.  Weíre in trial and error territory and UBI seems like the best option.  Obviously, itís not going to be 100% effective as some communities/individuals will use their funds better than others.  No policy is 100% effective.  Many people who get tax breaks donít spend it wisely either.  However, tax breaks are less effective for small towns where people already pay low rates and the local economies have weak job markets.

@nodnub, in direct response to your post
"I think we need to find ways to build strong communities where everyone is engaged in some occupation and able to contribute in accordance with their abilities.  Those with lesser abilities are better off doing something than nothing."

I think step 1 is to make poor communities FEEL better about their environment which will provide a foundation for better outcomes.



Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4603
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #116 on: January 14, 2020, 04:28:48 PM »
The UBI is really the only solution because anything more complex or sophisticated, and thus better fitting, is not feasible given all the red tape and bullshit posturing that always has to occur in order for anything to get done.

Its part of the reason private sector does things better. Government officials need something to tout in one giant 5-6 word headline so they can bring it back to their idiot constituents and those idiots can understand it. Free stuff is easier to explain than "available to those that need it and are doing enough to warrant it", even though conceptually we know both are pretty much the same except the latter would be more precise and a better use of funds.

Cardboard

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3384
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #117 on: January 14, 2020, 05:30:41 PM »
"The UBI is really the only solution because anything more complex or sophisticated, and thus better fitting, is not feasible given all the red tape and bullshit posturing that always has to occur in order for anything to get done. "

Better solution is no government at all or a system that steal from ones pocket to exchange it for a vote from someone else then grab a good chunk in the process.

DTEJD1997

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1868
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #118 on: January 14, 2020, 08:23:52 PM »
Quote
To go along with what DTEJD1997 said about postal workers. I have seen a similar thing happen in my short time at UPS. Probably close to 50 people walked away from an 80-100k a year job because they didnít want to work hard.
Well again there is some nonsense afoot because the starting salary for a USPS worker is something like 30,000/year. I guess these anecdotal stories also include 70K in overtime work. Here's one more of those silly stats:

According to the American Postal Workers Union, clerks' salaries depended on their service grade. Level 3 employees in the lowest spot on the pay scale earned $25,657 to start. The bureau reported the nation's 65,040 postal clerks overall averaged $52,860, or $25.41 an hour.


Oh Ok, so what my local post master told me is incorrect?  That there are several clerks working at that postal station that were/are making about $120k a year?  That he is lying to me?

I don't think so...you aren't going to make that your 1st year out, but 5 years into the postal service you most DEFINITELY can.  According to https://www.nalc.org/news/body/paychart-11-24-18.pdf

A city clerk hired after 2013 with about 5 years into the service is going to have a baseline salary of about $50k a year, or about $25/hour.  That is for about a 2k hour year.  What if you are willing to work 2,700 (or more) hours a year?  What if you are willing to cluster those overtime hours, say from Thanksgiving to Christmas?  Every hour after 8 in a day is paid at 1.5x time, every hour after 40 in a week is paid at 1.5x time.  Every hour after 10 in a day OR after 50 a week is paid at x2 time.  There are also Sunday & holiday super special pay rates.  So if you are willing to "bust ass", you most certainly can make 6 figures (or close) working at the Post Office.  You also get paid vacation time, Health, vision & Dental, pension, and you also have union representation.

This kind of money goes a LONG way in the Detroit/Michigan area.  If you are making $75k a year, you own & insure cars, can own a house(s), have vacations, big screen TV's, interweb access, go out to eat, and so on.

Point is, a lot of people SHOULD be able to qualify for this job.  The fact that so many are NOT able to is a problem with the education system and also personal responsibility.

If people are educated properly, have a good family/mentoring/tutoring, stay out of expensive skools, work hard, stay off drugs/alcohol/gambling, don't have children out of wedlock, don't have run ins with the law, the vast majority should be able to attain a middle class standard of living.

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: Andrew Yang
« Reply #119 on: January 14, 2020, 10:02:58 PM »
Quote
Oh Ok, so what my local post master told me is incorrect?  That there are several clerks working at that postal station that were/are making about $120k a year?  That he is lying to me?
Well I wouldn't dare call your local postmaster a liar. We know what happens when you piss off the postman. But I'd say you are misrepresenting your case. Are we talking about a postal clerk who has been there 10 years? Or a new hire off the street?

Quote
A city clerk hired after 2013 with about 5 years into the service is going to have a baseline salary of about $50k a year, or about $25/hour.
New hires for CCA positions in the link you provide start at 39,600/year per Table 2 which is post-2013. It will take them aprox. seven 46-week periods to reach the pre-2013 starting salary of 50,000. Base salaries have shrunk 20% from pre-2013 hires.

Anyways, you're working say, 55 hour weeks to make 80K. Absolutely can happen, I have no doubt about that. But it's a heavy ask, is dependent on your managers, and a host of other factors. For example here's a review I felt was seemingly balanced:

Quote
Pros
As a City Carrier Assistant (CCA) you can work a lot of overtime but they try to keep you from working too many hours because of the double overtime pay. The pay is progressive, so it gets better the longer you stay. The TSP match of 4% and 1% employer contribution is great but you can't get that until you go full career.

Cons
If you're a veteran stay away. During INDOC they say that they care about veterans but nothing is further from the truth. Vets can make more money and get treated with respect at a whole lot of other companies. You'll get all of the crap routes and they rotate you in a way that you can never learn a route. Since you don't learn a route, they have an easy excuse to get rid of you because they say "you're too slow". You'll see, some CCA's on probation get to stay on the same routes over and over, those will be the ones that make it. If they don't like you they will definitely get rid of you within the 3-4 month probation period. You can be faster than some of the career people but still get canned. CCA's don't really have any job security because you can be released after 3-4 months of probation. After that probation period, you're a little safer from not getting let go. After probation, you'll need to wait for someone to retire before you make career. If you're in a small office, chances are you'll be waiting a long to to go career. If you're in a big office then the more likely you'll be making career in under 2 years. Also, if you have carpal tunnel then stay away from this job. Casing mail takes a toll on your fingers and wrists due to the repetitive movement.

The point is this isn't as straightforward as you represent it to just work 50-60 hours and make 75-80K. There's a reason the average USPS salary is 65K, and that number includes all the clerks working there 15 years pulling six figures.

And it's not like this is an easy job. I mean, you've heard the term, "going postal"...

Quote
If people are educated properly, have a good family/mentoring/tutoring, stay out of expensive skools, work hard, stay off drugs/alcohol/gambling, don't have children out of wedlock, don't have run ins with the law, the vast majority should be able to attain a middle class standard of living.
Or stated differently: "If everyone was born into a middle class lifestyle".

A couple of points:
Unlike some folks on this forum, you actually know what the hood is like. You think the majority of these kids have the type of environment you're talking about? Hell no.

And I absolutely think the lack of education and a strong support system is a huge root cause of the problems facing the working class. But changing that culture cannot be legislated.

Also, let's not pretend there aren't people who make a killing by exploiting these weakness. Hell, our president should be re-titled to the "Slumlord-in-Chief".

Finally, I think your point is a hard point to make: that the labor market is so inefficient that 50 million people or almost half of all labor market participants are getting it all wrong. If that's the case, well then we've got much bigger problems than UBI.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
akam| brk.b | goog | irm | lyv | net | nlsn | pm | ssd | t | tfsl | v | wfc | xom