entitlement

[Guest nicemac]

This guy is a prime example of why we are where we are. Entitlement. Priceless. He is a third year college student and has no clue he is doing wrong by stealing from the government.

Judge Judy Quizzes ‘Moron’ to Whom Taxpayers Have Given $70,000 « LewRockwell.com Blog

[Guest nicemac]

From the US Dept. of Labor:

Most minimum wage earners are young. While 2.2% of all hourly workers earn minimum wage or less, just 1.4% of workers over the age of 25 are paid at or below the Federal minimum wage. More than half (51.2%) of minimum wage workers are between 16 and 24 years old. Another 21.2% are between 25 and 34.

Most minimum wage earners work in food service. Nearly two-thirds of those paid minimum wage (or less) are food service workers. Many of these people receive supplemental income in the form of tips, which the government does not track.

Most minimum wage earners never attended college. Just 1.2% of college graduates are paid the minimum wage. If you only have a high school degree, you’re more likely (1.9%) to be paid minimum wage. Those without a high school degree are nearly three times as likely (3.7%) to earn minimum wage. 59.8% of all minimum wage workers have no advanced education.

Part-time workers are five times more likely to be paid the minimum wage than full-time workers.

So if they work full time, the percentage of the population that makes minimum wage should be: 2.2% * 1/3 (exclude food service workers that get tips) ÷ 5 (full time five times more likely to not make minimum than part time) = approximately 1/8% of all full time (non-food service) workers make minimum wage.

I have three kids working at fast food restaurants. One is only 14. They started him above minimum wage.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Hi nicemac

I don't think anyone is especially destined in life. Otherwise we could identify the winners and losers in grade school.

IQ is not a good predictor, though we don't find many very slow people making lots of money, and we don't find many very bright people making nearly-nothing.

Even a genius who keeps doing dumb stuff, stepping on his own pecker against his own best interests, would be colloquially identified "dumb". Are you saying that colloquially-dumb people would all do fabulous if only they would act smart? Even if true, what real-world difference does it make? It is plainly obvious that not everybody acts smart, and it seems plainly obvious that this is unlikely to change.

While 2.2% of all hourly workers earn minimum wage or less, just 1.4% of workers over the age of 25 are paid at or below the Federal minimum wage. More than half (51.2%) of minimum wage workers are between 16 and 24 years old. Another 21.2% are between 25 and 34.

Ok, so 27.6 percent of minimum wage workers are above the age of 34 and there are about 155 million people with jobs. That is 941,160 (almost a million) minimum wage people above the age of 34.

Why does full-time versus part-time matter? The excessive number of under-employed part-time workers who would rather be full-time is one of our problems. If a person not only works minimum wage but also works part-time-- It just adds insult to injury. If the minimum wage part time workers would apply themselves and act smart, then they could all work full-time at minimum wage. Then they can apply themselves and act even smarter to work full-time at a penny above minimum wage!

In 2009 we had about 214 million people between ages 18 and 75. Some people younger than 18 and older than 75 work, but probably most of the 155 million workers are between 18 and 75.

That leaves at least 59 million non-working adults who either choose not to work or are not swooft enough to get and hold a job. That is 27 percent. A plenty big enough percent to hold a few millions who are not even swooft enough to work for minimum wage.

Conservatives want to repeal the minimum wage because they say a lot of people are not worth that much in the job market. If just about everybody ought to be worth more than minimum wage in the job market, then why bother to repeal the minimum wage? It would be fixing a nonexistent problem!

[Guest Zombie-Hunter]

I think you guys are looking at it all wrong. In your scenario's each person is a hard worker from the time of turning 18-20 truth is most children aren't raised to be hard workers saving a bank account. Most in my opinion spend 18-26 not caring much about anything but getting laid, making babies and only half caring about the future.

Isn't until our age do they even start talking responsible, and even most of them are lining up for some sort of Gooberment check to supplement the early years of parting, finding yourself or whatever the desire was at the time.

[Guest nicemac]

Lester, it is 27% of 2.2%(the minimum wage earners), not 27% of all workers…

Only 2.2% of all workers are making minimum wage. (2.2% of the ENTIRE POPULATION is only 6.6 million people. We don't have 300 million workers) The people making minimum wage are constantly changing–The same people don't make minimum wage for life. MANY (2/3) of those people making minimum are food service workers that get tips that are not included in these numbers, so the number is dramatically lower. Half of those remaining are under 24 years old.

This is my point. We do not have milions making minimum wage for life.

Edited August 2, 2011 by nicemac

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Lester, it is 27% of 2.2%(the minimum wage earners), not 27% of all workers…

Only 2.2% of all workers are making minimum wage. (2.2% of the ENTIRE POPULATION is only 6.6 million people. We don't have 300 million workers).

Hi nicemac

I got that. Here is what I said--

Ok, so 27.6 percent of minimum wage workers are above the age of 34 and there are about 155 million people with jobs. That is 941,160 (almost a million) minimum wage people above the age of 34.

That is 0.276 * 0.022 * 155,000,000 workers = 941160 people over age of 34 working minimum wage.

It is doubtful that all those folks are age 35. It shows a "not insignificant" number of older folks making minimum wage. OTOH perhaps before age 35 they were all earning top-dollar.

The 300 million is approx current population and would include those not yet of working age who are not likely to make much money, and those already retired who did not make much money.

The people making minimum wage are constantly changing–The same people don't make minimum wage for life. MANY (2/3) of those people making minimum are food service workers that get tips that are not included in these numbers, so the number is dramatically lower. Half of those remaining are under 24 years old.

The older folks on min wage may be as likely sweeping up or digging ditches than waiting tables.

This is my point. We do not have milions making minimum wage for life.

I didn't say EXACTLY minimum wage. I said--

There are most likely millions of citizens who make near minimum wage their entire lives.

If a person makes $10.00 per hour rather than $7.25 it is not much a distinction. Still very difficult to get by nowadays. Long ago it was easier to get by on low pay, as best I recall. When I was making low pay there were lots of falling-down cheap apartments to rent. Nowadays those are mostly gone and you have to pay more for better apartments which meet modern standards. The average housing might be a little nicer today, but only if you make enough money to cover the higher rent!

It is also interesting that a fed minimum wage worker would make as much or more than the typical social security payout.

The federal stats you quote probably reference those working for Federal Minimum wage of $7.25

List of U.S. minimum wages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see, many states minimum wage is higher than fed min wage. For instance there are likely many people in CA working the CA Min wage of $8.00 per hour, or San Fran Min wage of $9.92 per hour, not counted in the quoted Federal stats. Can't say fer sure because you didn't include a link.

Or the opposite, when I was a kid in S. GA, the GA min wage was lower than federal, and when I worked sweeping up or digging ditches back then for companies that did not do interstate trade, it was lower than fed min wage.

Anyway, it is sorta pointless debate topic. If you think just about everybody would do well if only they would act smart, then it is fine with me.

====

An interesting context ran across was military recruitment standards-- It seems that the min AFQT score to get in the military is 50, and only a small percentage that low are accepted.

It appears there is a decent 0.8 correlation between AFQT and IQ, described here--

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG265/images/webG1471.pdf

It appears that an AFQT score of 50 grossly correlates to an IQ of 100, a full standard deviation higher than the 15.8 percent I was referring. It looks like it is difficult to enter the military in any capacity unless a person is at least average smart. So it seems likely just about any vet we meet is a bright fellow.

Maybe am interpreting it wrong. Just seemed interesting.

[Guest nicemac]

Re:"If you think just about everybody would do well if only they would act smart, then it is fine with me."

Generally speaking, yes.

I just get tired of hearing about how many people are making minimum wage and they can't support a family on that kind of salary. It's TRUE! You can't. It was never intended for that. (what was it's intention anyway?) But MOST people only make minimum wage for a (very) short season of their lives, then move on to make more. And the people making minimum wage today mostly aren't the people making minimum wage just a couple of years ago. The group is not static. And it is not generally adults that make minimum wage–it is the teenager/ college student. It is not very hard to make yourself more valuable than a minimum wage earner.

So how much is a living wage? According to what standard? I hear Maria Shriver is asking for $40k per month in alimony. She would really suffer on my income. But $8.75 per hour is just fine for my son. It is all relative…

This is getting off topic of the entitlement of SS. Same mentality (we are all entitled to more $$ than minimum wage), but off topic.

</finished>

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Hi nicemac

I don't have a firm opinion on whether we should have a min wage or what it should be. Am not playing tiny violins in sympathy.

I only made a simple observation that a non-insignificant percentage of the population won't make a lot of money over their lives regardless of their work ethic. Am pretty certain that is truly the case.

I know fine fellows my age who work hard, never miss work, and don't make much money. They are not difficult to find. The world am what it am.

edit: substantiating documentation, Figure F here--

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/08inreturnsbul.pdf

Out of 142 million tax returns, 65 million make between $1 and $30,000. About $15,000 is full time minimum wage. Hint: They ain't all youngsters.

Edited August 2, 2011 by Lester Weevils

[Jonnin]

Hi nicemacI don't have a firm opinion on whether we should have a min wage or what it should be. Am not playing tiny violins in sympathy.I only made a simple observation that a non-insignificant percentage of the population won't make a lot of money over their lives regardless of their work ethic. Am pretty certain that is truly the case.I know fine fellows my age who work hard, never miss work, and don't make much money. They are not difficult to find. The world am what it am.edit: substantiating documentation, Figure F here--http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/08inreturnsbul.pdfOut of 142 million tax returns, 65 million make between $1 and $30,000. About $15,000 is full time minimum wage. Hint: They ain't all youngsters.

Well, the law of averages kicks in too. It will always be as you said... if the low end of the earning folks make $1 million a year, your hamburgers will go up to $5000 each to cover labor costs.... there will always be a hefty percentage of the working population who do low skill, low paying jobs and struggle to make ends meet. One thing about SS wages... by the time you draw it, your home and car should be paid for, your kids should be gone and on their own, and overall your expenses *should* be lower (but due to medical costs, often are not). A healthy retired person can do pretty well off a much lower salary than a 40 year old with 2 kids and a house payment and 3-4 car payments, is what I am saying. Hard work does not mean high paying, either. Its supply and demand of labor --- what can the person do that most other people cannot do that is of value to some company? That is what governs salary. Anyway, if you took every adult (over 18) in the country, it would not amaze me at all if 75% of them were making less than $15 an hour, including areas where low wages are beefed up for high cost of living.

[Guest nicemac]

Anyway, if you took every adult (over 18) in the country, it would not amaze me at all if 75% of them were making less than $15 an hour, including areas where low wages are beefed up for high cost of living.

$15 per hour is $30,600 per year.

Average wage in the US for 2009 (last year with data) is $40,711.61, or approximately $20 per hour. That averages all wages, so if you only took adults (over 18) that number would be significantly higher still.

National Average Wage Index

[G27]

Well, the law of averages kicks in too. It will always be as you said... if the low end of the earning folks make $1 million a year, your hamburgers will go up to $5000 each to cover labor costs.... there will always be a hefty percentage of the working population who do low skill, low paying jobs and struggle to make ends meet.

yep, which is one of the reasons min wage needs to go away - we complain that we can't compete globally with other manufacturers - in large part that's due to our artificially inflated wages.

Edited August 2, 2011 by crimsonaudio
formatting

[Guest Lester Weevils]

For statistics like this, the median is often more telling than the average. The average tends to skew too high if the distribution is not normal. For instance, the average pay for programmers would be drastically different depending on whether we include Bill Gates' pay in the average. But the median would be nearly the same regardless whether we include Billy.

[Guest nicemac]

For statistics like this, the median is often more telling than the average. The average tends to skew too high if the distribution is not normal. For instance, the average pay for programmers would be drastically different depending on whether we include Bill Gates' pay in the average. But the median would be nearly the same regardless whether we include Billy.

Understood, but if 75% of the adults in America were making less than $15 per hour, you would not see most adults living in their own home. They would be in Momma's basement.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Understood, but if 75% of the adults in America were making less than $15 per hour, you would not see most adults living in their own home. They would be in Momma's basement.

I agree. $15 may be a little on the low side.

The gov has lots of statistics but it is still often difficult to find exactly what is desired, and sometimes the answers are "soft" depending on what statistics you look at. Last time I was nerding out on IRS spreadsheets, the median looked to be somewhere around $40,000 and $50,000 per return, but it is deceptive because so many of the returns are married filing jointly. There are not near as many returns filed as the number of workers.

And on the low end it is difficult to separate out retirees from low-wage workers. Many retirees have to file for statutory reasons just to avoid getting skinned alive by Uncle Sugar, even if they didn't make much money and owe little or no tax.

[Jonnin]

Understood, but if 75% of the adults in America were making less than $15 per hour, you would not see most adults living in their own home. They would be in Momma's basement.

I would say as many as 50% of adults are not living in their own home, though that is a strange term... do you own your home? The bank owns mine, and I am on a rent-to-own program for the next 10 years or so. How many live at home or school off mom & dad, how many in an apartment (rent), how many in a trailer (rented or do not own the property it is parked on, etc), how many homeless, how many have a home but do not yet own it, etc? How many live in big citys in projects or govt' provided housing? How many live in nice apartments or homes at a heavily reduced rate due to state laws that ensure a % of low income people are allowed to rent in nicer areas? I do not know, but here again, it wouldnt be much of a shocker to me if the numbers show that very few DO actually on their home and the property that it sits on.

[Guest nicemac]

US Government (census) web site:

Frequently Asked Questions

5. Q. How many housing units are there in the United States?

• A. There were 128,203,000 housing units in the United States in 2007. Approximately 110,692,000 were occupied as regular residences and 17,511,000 were vacant or seasonal.
  

6. Q. How many owner occupied units are there in the United States?

• A. Approximately 75,647,000 or 68.3 percent of the occupied units were owners in 2007.
  

7. Q. What is the average value of an owner occupied home in the United States?

• A. In 2007, the median value of owner occupied homes was $191,471.
  

8. Q. What is the average age of owner occupied units in the United States?

• A. The average (median) owner occupied home was 32 years old in 2007.
  

9. Q. How many renter occupied units are there in the United States?

• A. Approximately 35,045,000 or 31.7 percent of the occupied units were occupied by renters in 2007.
  
• 
  

[Jonnin]

Yes, but "A housing unit is owner occupied (including acooperative or condominium unit) if someone whose nameis on the deed, mortgage, or contract to purchase lives inthe unit" --- that 70% includes ME, but my house is not owned yet, its still being paid for. It depends on how you define "own", I call that rent - to - own.

[Guest nicemac]

Yes, but "A housing unit is owner occupied (including acooperative or condominium unit) if someone whose nameis on the deed, mortgage, or contract to purchase lives inthe unit" --- that 70% includes ME, but my house is not owned yet, its still being paid for. It depends on how you define "own", I call that rent - to - own.

Most people call that "own."

[Warbird]

Most people call that "own."

Correct. By law the person on the deed is the owner. A lien is not the same thing as rent. Many things in a rent fall to the owner for responsibility. And ultimately the responsibility is on an owner, not on a renter. If you own a home, but have a lien, the lien holder will not be responsible for repairs and modifications to the property unless the owner fails to meet their financial obligations, or voluntarily gives them up. In that case the lienholder will take possession, but if that lienholder sells the property for less than the value of the loan the owner is still responsible for that difference.

I will also add that it would be very difficult to calculate how many people own their owns owing nothing and though the government could certainly find out I have no desire for them to know who owes on their home or their cars or anything else for that matter. We already give away far too much of this information to the IRS for the sake of so-called deductions.

Edited August 2, 2011 by Warbird

[Guest Lester Weevils]

One thing about SS wages... by the time you draw it, your home and car should be paid for, your kids should be gone and on their own, and overall your expenses *should* be lower (but due to medical costs, often are not). A healthy retired person can do pretty well off a much lower salary than a 40 year old with 2 kids and a house payment and 3-4 car payments, is what I am saying.

That is true. Have never been fond of debt but for several years me & wife have been getting ready. We are about done. Wonder if there is a name for this? If there is no name, I nominate "The 55 year old scramble."

Still need to put a new roof on the house. Probably this fall. Was planning this spring but been too busy to mess with it.

Got a vehicle last year to replace the 17 year old truck. The old one was in decent shape but not likely to last forever. The salesman did a double take when I said, "I'm looking for a truck to last until I croak."

Even paid-off houses are not free. Looks like property tax and insurance will take almost two months of SS checks. Assuming that there are SS checks by then.

[Guest nicemac]

Thomas Sowell. Genius as always.

Misleading Words Part II - Thomas Sowell - Townhall Conservative

[G27]

Thomas Sowell. Genius as always.

Misleading Words Part II - Thomas Sowell - Townhall Conservative

GREAT article - I've been arguing this for years now. Nothing more irritating that someone with an EBT card buying luxury items and/or driving a new car.

[Guest nicemac]

We are entitled!

Free cell phones are now a civil right

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That's free 250 minutes a month to call their local crack dealer.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

GREAT article - I've been arguing this for years now. Nothing more irritating that someone with an EBT card buying luxury items and/or driving a new car.

It is a good article.

The food stamps are means tested. That doesn't mean fraud would never happen, but they are means tested.

Food Stamps are on a sliding scale. They calculate a dollar amount of benefit per person in the household. Then they assign a price to the client to buy the benefit.

For instance if it is calculated that a household needs to spend $400 on food, and the income/assets are very low, the state may sell the $400 card for the price of one dollar. But the price slides all the way up (or it did last time I looked at it). At the high end of qualified income/assets, the client may have to pay $390 for the $400 benefit.

It usually cuts off voluntarily by the client before it gets that large, because unless somebody is really stretched or really stingy, not many people would submit to the aggravation of the fiscal anal exam and sitting hours in a Human Services office waiting to talk to a benefits worker, just to save $10 or $20 bucks a month.

Am not defending the setup. Just explaining it. We can't assume in the grocery line that we know how much each person is being subsidized. It may be near a 100 percent subsidy or it may be a trivially small subsidy.

One would hope that a fairly-prosperous looking person in line is paying near the top for the benefit, but one never knows.

There might also be cases of a middle-aged child or a neighbor using the card to shop for an elderly granny or whatever.

Or a person who bought the new car right before being laid-off, or getting cancer. There are all kinds of situations. Though fraud and abuse certainly does happen, one can't just assume that each case is fraud and abuse.

Another possible would be people who house foster kids for the state. IIRC, the stamps would be part of the package taking care of kids removed by the state and placed with temporary foster parents.

It would have to get to the point of not being able to afford beans and rice before I'd use such a benefit. Too embarrasing in the grocery line.

Edited August 3, 2011 by Lester Weevils