[PLUG-TALK] Re: Inflation Sounds good to me ;)
Russ Johnson
russj at dimstar.net
Mon Jun 24 06:24:21 UTC 2002
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002 22:22:42 -0700 (PDT)
Jeme A Brelin <jeme at brelin.net> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Russ Johnson wrote:
> > So? If the work performed won't support a higher wage, that's how the
> > cookie crumbles.
>
> So the only value is commercial value. Is that what I'm to understand?
Asked and answered.
> > If they aren't happy shovelling shit, then they need to do what it
> > takes to find a different job. That's another beautiful thing about
> > this system. No one is REQUIRED to do any particular job.
>
> But SOMEBODY is required to do some jobs. And unless you have security
> (wealth or social support), you don't have the opportunity to leave your
> job or obtain training.
Ever heard of night school? If you want to get ahead in life, it might hurt for a while. If you are working 8 hours, that leaves another 8 for training, and 8 for sleeping.
> > If they don't like what they are doing, nothing is stopping them from
> > trying something different.
>
> Except starvation... or maybe just the fear of starvation.
See above.
> But you're cool with that.
That's their choice.
> You believe in your system even though it's probably not fair.
>
> This begs the question: Why support an unfair system?
Life isn't fair. Is it fair that folks get cancer? Is it fair that some kids die? Is it fair that you had the parents you did, and Patty Hearst had her parents?
> So the fact that profits are skyrocketing and wages are dropping is, to
> you, "the way the cookie crumbles"?
Exactly. And I find that life works out for those that work for it. I can work for it, or I can be bitter. I have found that being bitter just makes me unhappy... :) So, I do the best I can with what I have an go on.
>
>
> > > > If one works, one is compensated for that work (assuming we're not
> > > > volunteering..) and one gets to pursue happiness with that
> > > > compensation.
> > >
> > > I'm asking about compensation that isn't adequate for survival, let alone
> > > pursuits beyond that.
> >
> > Again, maybe this fictional character needs to seek other employment.
>
> And you don't believe there are forces that prevent a person from doing
> so, right?
After my life? No, I don't. Everyone makes choices. The choices one makes determine what they have available to them. I started out washing dished and then pumping gas (after the strawberries and the paper routes). I'm now a Systems Administrator for a software development company. I worked my way up, and gave myself my education. If I can do it, others can too. OR, they can sit around and have a pity party. It's their choice.
> > > I'm trying to get at the fundamental disconnect between the societal and
> > > the commercial value of labor.
> >
> > Well, I'm not sure I see a big problem...
>
> Do you not see the disconnect or do you not see the problem with the
> disconnect?
I don't see a problem.
> Then we have an interesting paradox because the purpose of industrial
> capitalism is, theoretically, to maximize productivity and decrease cost.
> What happens when productivity increases and cost decreases so much that a
> person doing the labor cannot afford to survive? Do we then decrease our
> productivity and increase the cost of food?
Generally, we find a better way to produce the goods. What we're seeing is a consolidation of farming. The same way other industries have consolidated. Only in this industry, the government meddled, and now we have an industry that should have finished consolidating, propped up by government subsidies.
> I didn't write anything like that. I wrote that a person should decide
> whether or not they need a thing. Whether or not the other person
> deserves it doesn't come up. If you need a thing, keep it. If you don't
> need it, give it away when asked and do whatever you want with it until
> then. That's the only value judgment that should be made.
OK, thanks for the clarification. I now understand what you said.
> > Define survival. I do not know of a single paying job in the US that
> > does not provide enough money for someone to get food.
>
> And I would argue that without minimum wage laws, we'd see that end almost
> instantly.
How so?
> > Water is free in a stream, and living under a bridge gets one out of
> > the rain. That could be termed "survival".
>
> But the water's been privatized, so even taking it out of a stream is
> stealing, and it's illegal to live under a bridge.
No it's not. I can drink all the water I want to out of the McKenzie River. I can't stick a pipe in it, but I can pull a bucket out if I want.
Living under a bridge was an example. There are many places you can live that don't cost you. I know of several places up the McKenzie (can you tell I'm from Eugene?) that folks hang out all year with little or no cost to themselves.
> > That depends. Most folks that enjoy one type of work have other areas
> > they enjoy equally. It's not up to me to find them a job.
>
> That's not what I asked. I asked if that's a desired effect of your
> ideals.
That might be an effect. Haven't figured out if it's desired or not yet.
> > Well, that's also why most strawberry pickers are kids earning money
> > to buy a bike, or older folks picking to bake a pie.
>
> You have a false understanding of that industry.
I know that most of the people I worked with were under 18. Those that were over 18 were folks just there to earn a little "extra" money.
> Most strawberry pickers are migrant workers who follow crops from season
> to season.
Not in my experience.
> > Picking fruit just isn't a viable career.
>
> That's my whole point. It's a necessary role in society, but a person
> can't make a living doing it.
That may be, but that's how it works. Otherwise, you end up with fruit that the farmer can't sell for a profit, and he's out of business.
> You're lucky to have other options. I lived in a rural area where there
> was no newspaper delivery. There were really three jobs: picking berries,
> catching chickens, and cleaning horse stalls.
So you did have options.
My 17 year old son is in a similar situation in Creswell. There's not much work there, and without a car, he can't get to Eugene where the jobs are. He joined the Youth Corp. to get a summer job. That was another option he had. In addition, there are lots of other way that we can (today) find work. Lot's of resorts hire temporary workers for the summer. Many even provide transportation. Or at least they used to. I don't know about today. It all depends on what one is willing to do to get ahead or even to get started.
> The first two are vital agricultural work that puts food on people's
> tables and are dependent on illegally low pay and a fair amount of child
> labor to maintain the profits to which the landowners have become
> accustomed.
So now you are saying the land owner (assuming the farmer here) is making too much of a profit?
> The last was a service to the wealthy, as common people have
> no more than a handful of stalls and cannot afford the luxury of servants.
Maybe they need to examine if they should be owning livestock...
> > > > Backbreaking work. But it's not a career. I'd also turn this around...
> > > > Why should we pay a living wage for picking strawberries?
> > >
> > > Because we need strawberries.
> >
> > But the work is not worth the wage you are proposing.
>
> Strawberries aren't worth it. I see. In fact, no fruit is worth paying
> someone a reasonable wage to have it picked. But it's worth a servant
> class of impoverished farm workers toiling all day to keep the prices low.
>
> That's what you believe?
Evidently.
> You're making up numbers. What assurance do you have that the price of
> strawberries is related at all to the compensation given to the workers in
> the strawberry field?
I'm assuming that the price paid for strawberries in the store has to pay for the space in the store, the wages of the store, the wages of the broker that sold them to the store, the wages of the truck driver that got them to the store, and a whole slew of people I haven't mentioned yet. If the price the store has to sell them for is too high, people won't buy them. If people won't buy them, they rot. If they rot, someone is going broke.
> So you don't know how a person can guarantee adequate access to the means
> of survival in this society.
That's what I said. I don't have the answer to how to get rid of a poor group of people. Giving them money or services doesn't change how they are. The welfare system has proven that. Folks on welfare tend to stay on welfare, and they have kids that end up on welfare.
> But your point is taken. Your system requires and impoverished working
> class to provide the basic needs of society. A living wage is not viable.
Well, it's not my system. It's the system we currently live in.
> Give what you don't need, work when you can.
But that won't work. Human beings are greedy by nature. If they can get something for free, they will. If they don't have to work, they won't.
Oh, I'm sure there are those folks that would work, even if they didn't have to, but then you end up with a bunch of freeloaders that sponge off everyone else.
> Don't think about whether
> you're getting what you deserve or whether someone else deserves what
> they're getting. That kind of thought only leads to frustration and
> corruption.
So if someone isn't working when they can, but they still get the exact same things as me, I'm not supposed to worry about it, right? Everyone gets a new computer every year, even though Tom over there hasn't worked for 5 years because he's been too drunk to even figure out how to turn it on?
> But what if there is not enough food? Well, then more people are going to
> have to go out and work the fields next season or somebody's going to have
> to go out and assess the plantation to see if they can't improve the
> output.
Why would they if they don't like it? I don't like farmwork. I enjoy working with computers.
--
"The power to untie is stronger than the power to tie."
Well, yeah, otherwise my shoes would tie themselves.
---
Russ Johnson
Stargate Online
http://www.dimstar.net
telnet://telnet.dimstar.net
ICQ: 3739685:Airneil
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list