Well, President Bush finally admitted it. We're not winning the war in Iraq. Which seems really really unlikely considering our military prowess and the economic advantages we have.
So I started thikning of the war like a chess game. On our side, an extremely rich and powerful king, with pawns replaced by Queens and Knights. (our airforce and smart bombs) The other side has no Queen, the king is locked up and unable to move, and only has pawns and bishops left on the table. But somehow as we try to build up the Rooks and create a Strong second line, their pawns keep slipping through and blowing them up.
The problem is not the front line, our soldiers are among the most committed, well trained, and well equipped soldiers in history.
The problem is clearly the strategy. we need to get better players.
Sunday, December 24, 2006
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Clarification
The apparent reason I was denied the job is because my consumer credit rating is too low.
Here are the negatives against my rating for the past 7 years:
My student loans are in default (After 4 years of trying to get my payments down to asomething I might be able to afford, and 4 years of the loan company refusing to lower them to something reasonable for my income level. The last offer they gave me for a "reduced payment" was 486 dollars a month. It's worth noting that at the time I made the last request for a reduced payment I was homeless and my income was from unemployment. Of the two defaulted loans: One went into default when I was told it was going into "Deferment" and didn't recieve any bill or statement from the loan company for over a year. Since they didn't send me bills when it was in scholastic deferment, I didn't think anything of it until I started recieving harassing phone calls from a collection agency. The other one recently went into default because I could not open their e-mailed statements. I did call to have them correct the problem, I asked them to mail me my statements, and applied over the phone for a deferment. They e-mailed the paperwork (that I couldn't open) and I haven't heard from them since. (I've tried calling them a few times, early morning,mid afternoon, late night, it's over a 2 hour wait on hold every time. Each tiem I've called I've waited until "the cell phone company with the fewest dropped calls" dropped the call.)
3 NSF checks. Two of which were NSF for less than 48 hours, and the other was because I thought my new landlord had already cashed the check, as I began to close out the account. (Not having a mailing address can really screw up your ability to monitor your account statements)
I have no credit card. (Nor do I want one. I'd know I'd just buy music and rum. Probably in equal amounts.)
I haven't had a steady job for more than 2 years since 2002, and have been "self employed" for some periods during that time. (Unfortunately this is because 3:4 of my last employers have been worse at getting work than I was at doing it.)
Some bills have been payed late. (Reasons being: I was in NY when it came due and didn't recieve the bill for three weeks after it was due, or I'm disputing the charges. End of list. )
My phone isn't in my name. (Because my girlfriend has better credit than I do, and it's a multiple line account. Go figure...)
I've moved twice in the past four years. (Well, duh.. most people do move when they can't find work in their area, ask anybody in California with an Oklahoma accent...)
I do accept my personal responsibility in this. I know that if I had lived in under a bridge, walked the (average) 40+ mile per day commute, sold all of my possessions, and eaten nothing for the past 4 years the loans could have been payed off. (Oh, and FYI, my personal entertainment expenses for the past 4 years total about 4k between music, movies, books, games and television. Or about 20 dollars a week on average. I've spent about 6k on gasoline in that time, mostly commuting and moving, and 7-8k on vehicle repairs.)
all of which add up to "I'm poor". Which apparently is more important than my ability, and wilingness to do the job.
Oh, and some things that apparently don't matter to them:
In the past 4 years I've missed 5 days of work. 3 were due to a sprained back, one due to blizzard, and one for a stomach bug.
I can not only do the job I am applying for, I have run workshops teaching students from 3rd grade to post graduate level the basic skill sets involved.
I've never even been accused of stealing from an employer.
I have a good track record of dealing with groups that range in age from elementary to post-graduate levels of schooling.
I Spent 4 YEARS OF MY LIFE LEARNING HOW TO DO THE JOB I APPLIED FOR AND I'M GOOD AT IT!! Which I would think should be the deciding factor. But that's just me... To put this into perspective: This would be like the Grand Ol Opry denying Willie Nelson because he ahs tax problems. Not saying I'm as good at what I do as Willie is, but then again, the Museum of Science and Industry isn't exactly the Grand ol opry either.
Here are the negatives against my rating for the past 7 years:
My student loans are in default (After 4 years of trying to get my payments down to asomething I might be able to afford, and 4 years of the loan company refusing to lower them to something reasonable for my income level. The last offer they gave me for a "reduced payment" was 486 dollars a month. It's worth noting that at the time I made the last request for a reduced payment I was homeless and my income was from unemployment. Of the two defaulted loans: One went into default when I was told it was going into "Deferment" and didn't recieve any bill or statement from the loan company for over a year. Since they didn't send me bills when it was in scholastic deferment, I didn't think anything of it until I started recieving harassing phone calls from a collection agency. The other one recently went into default because I could not open their e-mailed statements. I did call to have them correct the problem, I asked them to mail me my statements, and applied over the phone for a deferment. They e-mailed the paperwork (that I couldn't open) and I haven't heard from them since. (I've tried calling them a few times, early morning,mid afternoon, late night, it's over a 2 hour wait on hold every time. Each tiem I've called I've waited until "the cell phone company with the fewest dropped calls" dropped the call.)
3 NSF checks. Two of which were NSF for less than 48 hours, and the other was because I thought my new landlord had already cashed the check, as I began to close out the account. (Not having a mailing address can really screw up your ability to monitor your account statements)
I have no credit card. (Nor do I want one. I'd know I'd just buy music and rum. Probably in equal amounts.)
I haven't had a steady job for more than 2 years since 2002, and have been "self employed" for some periods during that time. (Unfortunately this is because 3:4 of my last employers have been worse at getting work than I was at doing it.)
Some bills have been payed late. (Reasons being: I was in NY when it came due and didn't recieve the bill for three weeks after it was due, or I'm disputing the charges. End of list. )
My phone isn't in my name. (Because my girlfriend has better credit than I do, and it's a multiple line account. Go figure...)
I've moved twice in the past four years. (Well, duh.. most people do move when they can't find work in their area, ask anybody in California with an Oklahoma accent...)
I do accept my personal responsibility in this. I know that if I had lived in under a bridge, walked the (average) 40+ mile per day commute, sold all of my possessions, and eaten nothing for the past 4 years the loans could have been payed off. (Oh, and FYI, my personal entertainment expenses for the past 4 years total about 4k between music, movies, books, games and television. Or about 20 dollars a week on average. I've spent about 6k on gasoline in that time, mostly commuting and moving, and 7-8k on vehicle repairs.)
all of which add up to "I'm poor". Which apparently is more important than my ability, and wilingness to do the job.
Oh, and some things that apparently don't matter to them:
In the past 4 years I've missed 5 days of work. 3 were due to a sprained back, one due to blizzard, and one for a stomach bug.
I can not only do the job I am applying for, I have run workshops teaching students from 3rd grade to post graduate level the basic skill sets involved.
I've never even been accused of stealing from an employer.
I have a good track record of dealing with groups that range in age from elementary to post-graduate levels of schooling.
I Spent 4 YEARS OF MY LIFE LEARNING HOW TO DO THE JOB I APPLIED FOR AND I'M GOOD AT IT!! Which I would think should be the deciding factor. But that's just me... To put this into perspective: This would be like the Grand Ol Opry denying Willie Nelson because he ahs tax problems. Not saying I'm as good at what I do as Willie is, but then again, the Museum of Science and Industry isn't exactly the Grand ol opry either.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Fuck you and your problems
Fuck it.. Why bother, give up.
I was just denied a job because I'm poor. That's right, because I'm poor. Since graduating from college 4 1/2 years ago I have made about 50k. Less than poverty level, Losing job after job due to either a lack of work or my supervisors desire to show how much he was in charge. The only contribution I have made to my being unemployed is committing myself to the positions that I have had, and trying to do the best job I could.
This is why people go into crime. I'm about as low as it is possible to be right now, So unless you're Homeless, dying of cancer, AND hiv+ with a bad case of dysentery. I don't want to hear you fucking complain.
I was just denied a job because I'm poor. That's right, because I'm poor. Since graduating from college 4 1/2 years ago I have made about 50k. Less than poverty level, Losing job after job due to either a lack of work or my supervisors desire to show how much he was in charge. The only contribution I have made to my being unemployed is committing myself to the positions that I have had, and trying to do the best job I could.
This is why people go into crime. I'm about as low as it is possible to be right now, So unless you're Homeless, dying of cancer, AND hiv+ with a bad case of dysentery. I don't want to hear you fucking complain.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Kicking around
This was written as a response to an editorial in the Chicago Tribune. You don’t need to have read the article to understand this, as they didn’t present any new arguments, just the same ones the republican party has been using since Reaganomics was a buzzword, not a nostalgia trip.
I hung my head when I read the recent editorial on the idea of raising the minimum wage. Although many of your points were technically correct, they were truly propaganda designed to play off of peoples’ fears instead of valid arguments.
Your example of the new oven* was designed to play on rust belt fears of automation replacing laborers. The truth is, almost any piece of technology or equipment eliminates a job for somebody. With the invention of gas and electric stoves, restaurants and hotels no longer needed to keep a fire going in the kitchen. Or, closer to home, since the invention of the printing press and movable type there is little call for those skilled in Woodcuts and handwritten copies of books. Blaming the effects of technology on an increased minimum wage is simply and intentionally misleading. Yes, the raise in minimum wage might end up being the deciding factor, but chances are the change was already being considered.
The other question you fail to bring up is how are the paychecks of those remaining workers affected. If raising the minimum wage meant that 14 part -time workers depending on Food stamps and section 8 housing turned into 12 workers who were able to provide for themselves and 2 workers who needed assistance, that’s a price most of us would gladly pay.
Instead of looking at the number of "jobs" created or lost, perhaps we should also be considering hours gained and lost. Since most minimum wage positions are part time, we count two part time positions being merged into one full time position as a “lost job”. Even though the total hours worked might stay the same, or even increase. For example: Instead of having one waitress come in for a 3 hour lunch shift, and another coming in for a three hour dinner shift, one full time waitress can handle both shifts if the employer is willing to keep them on for the couple slow hours in between the mealtime rushes.
The second argument you present is: “Even as individuals reach their late 20’s, they work less and earn less the longer they were exposed to a higher minimum wage, especially as a teenager.” However you fail to give us the example that you were referring to, or any explanation as to why. Leaving us to believe that the minimum wage itself is a bad thing. Could it be that students who are working in order to help provide for their families have less time to study, and interact with other people? Which is a disadvantage that continues to haunt them through college, and as they enter the post-education workforce. Also most teens working for minimum wage through high school and college are going to be from a poor background, which means they are less likely to have family connections or the resources to afford and mount an extended job search.
Also, as workers reach your late twenties, they may begin to look less desirable for a minimum wage position because they either have, or will soon have personal, and family obligations that cannot be met at minimum wage. This means they will be less willing to stay with the company unless they begin to see an increase in their wages. Since most low wage jobs are in companies that have a relatively flat hierarchy, there is simply no place for them in the company to advance to. It may be more cost effective for the company to keep turning over younger workers who don’t care what they make per hour as long as they can go out on Friday night.
Finally you offer the EITC as the saving grace of those in poverty. When really, all it is a way to federally subsidize employers failing to pay their employees a reasonable wage. But the EITC doesn’t help on a steady on going basis. It comes in once a year and drops a pile of money all at once, only to retreat until the following year. As anybody who has ever lived check to check can tell you, those balloon payments do not last long. It might cover the overdue notices on the car, heat bill, student loans, rent and maybe even some decent shoes for the kids. But if that money was coming in over the course of the year, perhaps those overdue bills could get paid on time. Which would save those families from the threat of losing their lights, heat, or the roof over their head at Christmas. Not to mention all of the late charges and additional fees those late payments create.
In addition to these problems, like all federal programs, the IETC is also disproportionately financed by those in the lower income brackets.** So those at the bottom are essentially paying the government to ensure that they still have lousy jobs.
I was surprised you left out the oft-touted ripple effects on the economy: Minimum wage goes up, union wages go up, other people’s wages go up to compensate and prices rise to pay the new wages and inflation spirals out of control. Is the argument we’ve been fed for years really true? Sort of: local price increases can be directly effected by wage increases, or local corporate scandals, or even a bad storm. However, prices will go up regardless of wage increases at any level. As more people exist on the planet our finite resources can only stretch so far. The increased traffic on the roads leads to more time spent stopped in traffic, so fuel is wasted increasing demand and a million other examples.
Remember, currency is merely a convenient way of saying “this is the part of the world that I control.” Instead of bartering with bags of corn or bread, we simply exchange pieces of paper. If the people at the top of the corporate ladders were also suffering a loss of real buying power, I might be able to understand holding off on an increase in the minimum wage, but they are doing better comparatively better than they were 40 years ago, whereas those at the bottom are doing comparatively worse. Eventually this will expand farther into the middle class, and suddenly, there won’t be any consumers left except the top tier.
Another idea you may not have entertained is that perhaps these jobs aren’t worth doing. If a full time position doesn’t pay enough to cover the basic cost of living, maybe it shouldn’t exist. If somebody is giving 40+ hours of their life to another person, they should be able to afford basic necessities, and honestly, at least a few non-essential items so their life is worth living.
You have also forgotten the basic truth about why the minimum wage exists in the first place. Find someone who remembers the dust bowl, the mass migration of people in search of work, the massive levels of poverty, and homelessness. Talk to somebody who remembers “Hoovervilles” and food rotting in crates because people couldn’t afford to buy it, and it was cheaper to let it rot than transport it to market. Find those people who still remember, and ask them if life was better without a minimum wage.
*The story was that a restaurant bought a new oven and fired three or four of its cooks because the minimum wage went up.
** The top 10 percent of wage earners in the US paid 40% or the federal Taxes collected in 2004. They made 60% of the income. (According To the President)
I hung my head when I read the recent editorial on the idea of raising the minimum wage. Although many of your points were technically correct, they were truly propaganda designed to play off of peoples’ fears instead of valid arguments.
Your example of the new oven* was designed to play on rust belt fears of automation replacing laborers. The truth is, almost any piece of technology or equipment eliminates a job for somebody. With the invention of gas and electric stoves, restaurants and hotels no longer needed to keep a fire going in the kitchen. Or, closer to home, since the invention of the printing press and movable type there is little call for those skilled in Woodcuts and handwritten copies of books. Blaming the effects of technology on an increased minimum wage is simply and intentionally misleading. Yes, the raise in minimum wage might end up being the deciding factor, but chances are the change was already being considered.
The other question you fail to bring up is how are the paychecks of those remaining workers affected. If raising the minimum wage meant that 14 part -time workers depending on Food stamps and section 8 housing turned into 12 workers who were able to provide for themselves and 2 workers who needed assistance, that’s a price most of us would gladly pay.
Instead of looking at the number of "jobs" created or lost, perhaps we should also be considering hours gained and lost. Since most minimum wage positions are part time, we count two part time positions being merged into one full time position as a “lost job”. Even though the total hours worked might stay the same, or even increase. For example: Instead of having one waitress come in for a 3 hour lunch shift, and another coming in for a three hour dinner shift, one full time waitress can handle both shifts if the employer is willing to keep them on for the couple slow hours in between the mealtime rushes.
The second argument you present is: “Even as individuals reach their late 20’s, they work less and earn less the longer they were exposed to a higher minimum wage, especially as a teenager.” However you fail to give us the example that you were referring to, or any explanation as to why. Leaving us to believe that the minimum wage itself is a bad thing. Could it be that students who are working in order to help provide for their families have less time to study, and interact with other people? Which is a disadvantage that continues to haunt them through college, and as they enter the post-education workforce. Also most teens working for minimum wage through high school and college are going to be from a poor background, which means they are less likely to have family connections or the resources to afford and mount an extended job search.
Also, as workers reach your late twenties, they may begin to look less desirable for a minimum wage position because they either have, or will soon have personal, and family obligations that cannot be met at minimum wage. This means they will be less willing to stay with the company unless they begin to see an increase in their wages. Since most low wage jobs are in companies that have a relatively flat hierarchy, there is simply no place for them in the company to advance to. It may be more cost effective for the company to keep turning over younger workers who don’t care what they make per hour as long as they can go out on Friday night.
Finally you offer the EITC as the saving grace of those in poverty. When really, all it is a way to federally subsidize employers failing to pay their employees a reasonable wage. But the EITC doesn’t help on a steady on going basis. It comes in once a year and drops a pile of money all at once, only to retreat until the following year. As anybody who has ever lived check to check can tell you, those balloon payments do not last long. It might cover the overdue notices on the car, heat bill, student loans, rent and maybe even some decent shoes for the kids. But if that money was coming in over the course of the year, perhaps those overdue bills could get paid on time. Which would save those families from the threat of losing their lights, heat, or the roof over their head at Christmas. Not to mention all of the late charges and additional fees those late payments create.
In addition to these problems, like all federal programs, the IETC is also disproportionately financed by those in the lower income brackets.** So those at the bottom are essentially paying the government to ensure that they still have lousy jobs.
I was surprised you left out the oft-touted ripple effects on the economy: Minimum wage goes up, union wages go up, other people’s wages go up to compensate and prices rise to pay the new wages and inflation spirals out of control. Is the argument we’ve been fed for years really true? Sort of: local price increases can be directly effected by wage increases, or local corporate scandals, or even a bad storm. However, prices will go up regardless of wage increases at any level. As more people exist on the planet our finite resources can only stretch so far. The increased traffic on the roads leads to more time spent stopped in traffic, so fuel is wasted increasing demand and a million other examples.
Remember, currency is merely a convenient way of saying “this is the part of the world that I control.” Instead of bartering with bags of corn or bread, we simply exchange pieces of paper. If the people at the top of the corporate ladders were also suffering a loss of real buying power, I might be able to understand holding off on an increase in the minimum wage, but they are doing better comparatively better than they were 40 years ago, whereas those at the bottom are doing comparatively worse. Eventually this will expand farther into the middle class, and suddenly, there won’t be any consumers left except the top tier.
Another idea you may not have entertained is that perhaps these jobs aren’t worth doing. If a full time position doesn’t pay enough to cover the basic cost of living, maybe it shouldn’t exist. If somebody is giving 40+ hours of their life to another person, they should be able to afford basic necessities, and honestly, at least a few non-essential items so their life is worth living.
You have also forgotten the basic truth about why the minimum wage exists in the first place. Find someone who remembers the dust bowl, the mass migration of people in search of work, the massive levels of poverty, and homelessness. Talk to somebody who remembers “Hoovervilles” and food rotting in crates because people couldn’t afford to buy it, and it was cheaper to let it rot than transport it to market. Find those people who still remember, and ask them if life was better without a minimum wage.
*The story was that a restaurant bought a new oven and fired three or four of its cooks because the minimum wage went up.
** The top 10 percent of wage earners in the US paid 40% or the federal Taxes collected in 2004. They made 60% of the income. (According To the President)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
