- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
100% spot on!!

100% spot on!!
That ticket taker is an entry level job.How about $200K plus for sitting on their butt and writing computer programs in an airconditioned, drop dead gorgeous building.
I can tell you that ticket taker works harder than than that programmer. Especially dealing with people, some of which may be looking down on them.
All true.That ticket taker is an entry level job.
The same kind of entry level job that the programmer once had, before the programmer chose a career, got an education, gained experience, and rose in that same career.
The OP, and the programmer, are confusing job with career.
My daughter, the surgeon, hence had a job, working at an ice cream store. She worked hard, likely harder than the ticket taker, and certainly for less money.
Her Dad didn’t think it was a career, and he certainly didn’t tell her to expect a “living wage” for a teenager’s job.
Her Dad expected her to value the money she was paid, to respect her boss, to work hard in school, and to pursue a career.
She chose medicine.
Not ice cream scooper. Not ticket taker.
The programmer needs to value the education and experience they gained in order to become a programmer, just as the world values the education and experience of a surgeon. Both have genuinely earned their current pay level.
The ticket taker has yet to earn anything beyond minimum wage.
Please help me to understand how you are calculating what you said
The market should define what the wages are. If you can't get people to do those things-you need to pay more. The service industry (i.e. restaurants/fast food) have found this out recently.But we still need people to take tickets, collect the trash, clean the bathrooms. Shouldn't they be able to sustain themselves in exchange for their labor?
This is too abstract. What does this mean to you? To me? To somebody else?I would say most people using the phrase "living wage" mean a wage that a person can live comfortably on, unfortunately most businesses like to pay as little as they possibly can which makes it extremely hard for those doing the actual work to meet their needs & save money too, that is where a lot of people run into the problem of going into poverty & also have trouble getting out, my heart is with the poor, because I know what it's like to work horrible jobs & get the smallest reward, I have done hard labor jobs, I have pain from injuries that will not go away until I am out of this world, I received crumbs for my work while a rich person made massive gains, I have a lot of respect for those who are less fortunate, my respect for the rich? Well it lacks, I have never met anyone well off that was willing to put in the kind of work that their employees put in just to survive.
To me it means, instead of paying those who labor the smallest amount, why not give them what their work is worth, for example, people that clean bricks are in the sun burning up, in major pain from swinging their hammer for hours, these people get paid $50 to $75 per pallet for their labor, the person who pays them sells the pallet for up to $500, the bricks themselves come from a building or house that has been torn down, so the person that tore the building or house down has already made a major profit on that & is now underpaying people to do the labor of cleaning the bricks, why not pay the brick cleaners $200 a pallet instead of $50 to $75, it wouldn't put the person who is not doing the hard labor at a loss & it would give the person who is working their hand to the bone a better chance to succeed in life & live more comfortable like the one undercutting others pay to make the massive gain for themselves.This is too abstract. What does this mean to you? To me? To somebody else?
Too hard to define.
Yes and "living wage" and "minimum wage" need to be separated and never connected. That said, I can't define "comfortably" for anyone else.I would say most people using the phrase "living wage" mean a wage that a person can live comfortably on
Do "these people" work in the U.S. legally?To me it means, instead of paying those who labor the smallest amount, why not give them what their work is worth, for example, people that clean bricks are in the sun burning up, in major pain from swinging their hammer for hours, these people get paid $50 to $75 per pallet for their labor, the person who pays them sells the pallet for up to $500, the bricks themselves come from a building or house that has been torn down, so the person that tore the building or house down has already made a major profit on that & is now underpaying people to do the labor of cleaning the bricks, why not pay the brick cleaners $200 a pallet instead of $50 to $75, it wouldn't put the person who is not doing the hard labor at a loss & it would give the person who is working their hand to the bone a better chance to succeed in life & live more comfortable like the one undercutting others pay to make the massive gain for themselves.