I Met Two Waitresses Last Evening - a Point about Economics

[JoeB131]

What's your point?

My point is that most of the government entitlements you whine about you are fine with.

Those were earned through work. There was not choice to participate when the recipients were working.

You truly do not see the difference?

Except they really weren't.

You don't pay into unemployment insurance, your employer does.

Medicare is only 1% of your income for life. That would be wiped out with a serious medical condition in less than a year. (It doesn't help that so many old people just go to the doctor because they are lonely and the Doctor is the only one who will listen to their problems.)

That leaves us with Social Security. Forget for the moment that more than 50% of what is paid into SSI is employers, not employees. If you retire at 65 and live to be 72, you will get back everything you paid in. The average lifespan is 78. That's why SOcial Security is going broke. The Oldsters are living longer after Corporate America sucks them dry.

SNAP, TANF, and other welfare programs not only do not require work, but their advocates violently oppose any kind of work requirement, no matter how lenient. The thread topic specifially talks about a kind of job that almost anyone willing to work can get.

An unwilling horse is more trouble than walking.

Except no everyone willing to work would be able to get a job as a waitress. Quite the contrary, a waitress job requires a certain skill set (if you are any good at it) in being able to deal with demanding customers.

Yes, which is another topic. When a minimum wage person gets those benefits, we the taxpayer are subsidizing their ability to work for minimum wage with no benefits. Therefore it is another type of corporate welfare, which some posters, such as @pknopp, have not condemned on this thread.

We should have universal health care. Linking health care to employment is insanity. We are the only country that does it this way, and we get the worst results.

I agree that if we are going to have a minimum wage it should be something real. The compromise of having a minimum wage but keeping it so low benefits no one but employers who would probably have to pay more in a free market. They can effective collude and wage-fix with other employers by simply making all entry level jobs $7.50.

Again, the problem here is that employers tend to be assholes. Yes, when times are good (usually when a Democrat is in office) employers will pay above minimum wage to get employees for these entry level jobs. Conversely, when times are not so good (usually after a Republican Tanks the economy, and here we go again) Employers are very quick to low ball employees and get rid of people they hired when times were good.

Fixing the minimum wage is part of it. So are other worker's rights issue like getting rid of "At Will" employment.

Take away the benefits, go after employers hard for paying illegals under the table, and the market will demand that employees be paid more.

You think Republicans want to go after the people who hire illegals.

 

[sparky]

Make your own booze

i already do.....~S~

 

[sparky]

. Linking health care to employment is insanity.

they (Congress) were told that back in the early 60's Joe

they didn't listen then.......

~S~

 

[SaxonJackson]

Make your own booze and grow your own weed. It`s easy enough.

... while lowering your work ethic. Been there and done that.

 

[Seymour Flops]

As a customer who is expected to pay a living wage, maybe it would help if I knew how much my waitress made last week and last year so I can tip accordingly.

If you are struggling to get by, maybe I should tip you more.
If the waitress makes more than I do, maybe I should say……Here is five bucks

Interesting. Do you pay your doctor the same way? You make more than me, so here is five bucks?

 

[Seymour Flops]

My point is that most of the government entitlements you whine about you are fine with.

Your point is wrong. I'm not fine with them, just because I didn't mention every government program that I'm opposed to in this thread.

Except they really weren't.

You don't pay into unemployment insurance, your employer does.

Medicare is only 1% of your income for life. That would be wiped out with a serious medical condition in less than a year. (It doesn't help that so many old people just go to the doctor because they are lonely and the Doctor is the only one who will listen to their problems.)

That leaves us with Social Security. Forget for the moment that more than 50% of what is paid into SSI is employers, not employees. If you retire at 65 and live to be 72, you will get back everything you paid in. The average lifespan is 78. That's why SOcial Security is going broke. The Oldsters are living longer after Corporate America sucks them dry.

Yes, I'll get back what I paid in - if I live to 72. If I had been allowed to invest that money instead of handing it over to Uncle Sam, I'd be in far better financial shape than waiting for my government check.

Important concept for you to understand: If my employer contributes to my medicare, my SSN, my health insurance, pays my union dues, gives me a free gym membership, or helps pay for college, or sends me on a cruise as a performance bonus, that is not welfare or charity, that is part of my agreed upon compensation for working, or it is my employers attempt to keep me working as hard as I do. I earn ALL of it.

Social Security is something I earned though work, regardless of how well or how poorly it is administered. What government programs are NOT poorly administered?

That is far different from lifelong and multi-generational welfare dolees living off of the work of myself and others.

An unwilling horse is more trouble than walking.

Except no everyone willing to work would be able to get a job as a waitress. Quite the contrary, a waitress job requires a certain skill set (if you are any good at it) in being able to deal with demanding customers.

Being able to deal with demanding customers takes patience and a willing to work hard to serve others. Those are not natural talents blessed to only a few, those are skills that should be taught to everyone by their parents.

We should have universal health care. Linking health care to employment is insanity. We are the only country that does it this way, and we get the worst results.

Which country has the best UHC that you would say, "yes, we should be like ________."

Don't say "all of them," be specific.

Again, the problem here is that employers tend to be assholes. Yes, when times are good (usually when a Democrat is in office) employers will pay above minimum wage to get employees for these entry level jobs. Conversely, when times are not so good (usually after a Republican Tanks the economy, and here we go again) Employers are very quick to low ball employees and get rid of people they hired when times were good.

Fixing the minimum wage is part of it. So are other worker's rights issue like getting rid of "At Will" employment.

What would fix the minimum wage?

You think Republicans want to go after the people who hire illegals.

View attachment 1191501

No, I never said I think Republicans want to go after the people who hire illegals. What gave you that idea?

 

[citygator]

Here is the economic problem addressed in this post:

Nearly 100 million Americans received some form of government assistance in 2019, according to a 2023 estimate from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The federal government has assistance programs in place to support Americans who can’t afford food, housing, healthcare, and other needs. This is sometimes referred to as a social safety net, a system of programs designed to support people struggling economically. In 2022, around one in three Americans was enrolled in at least one of those programs, including nearly half of all American kids.

How many people receive government assistance from social security, medicare, and other programs | USAFacts

In 2022, around one in three Americans was enrolled in at least one government assistance program, including nearly half of all American kids.

usafacts.org

So what about the waitresses? They were former waitresses, actually.

It was at a poker room. One was about seventy, playing low stakes 1/3 hold 'em, while her husband was playing high stakes 15/30 Hi-Lo. The other was a dealer, maybe thirty to forty. She was Filipina and it's harder for me to tell their ages.

Somehow the topic of waitressing came up. The older player said she waitressed all through high school, that it was fun and she couldn't believe how much money she was making compared to friends working fast food. The younger dealer talked about how fast she was, and how she one day had to serve the whole restaurant because everyone else was out. She didn't care because that meant she was getting all the tips.

Now, she still has a job for tips, but I'm guessing much more, plus she isn't on her feet for eight to ten hours.

Whats the economic lesson? It isn't about how much education you have, how rich your parents are, how good your school was. It's about being willing to put in the work. That is a lesson today's welfare layabout need badly. What are the qualifications to wait tables? Knowing how to read, I suppose, but even that could be gotten around. Don't even have to do math anymore. Just be willing to work hard and put on a cheerful face even when you're tired.

That last may seem absolutely crazy to a typical welfare layabout. "Being tired suck!" Yes, but that is what people do when they have jobs. They work, work, work, and when the boss comes in and asks how ya doin'? they say "great!" The boss did the same and still does the same when the region manager checks in with him after a tough week. Why should people who do that be forced to pay for your leisure lifestyle?

Why did these ladies not simply go on welfare, take the easy way out? My guess is that they each come from a culture in which the idea of living off the work of others is hateful. The American culture from the sixties and seventies and the Fillapino culture.

We need to get that culture back. Fairness aside, the system in which anyone who prefers not to work can simply live off of the work of others is not sustainable. We can change it, or we can watch our economy tank. If not for us, for our grandchildren.

I doubt either was supporting a family on tips. What welfare are you talking about? There are ONLY about 2.4M people on TANF which is direct government assistance. That is less than 1%.

If you are talking food stamps almost half go to children which the US has about the highest child poverty rate in the modern first world.

You have no idea what you are talking about. You are an old failure playing at the low stakes table with the social security money I give you. Barking dogs is all I hear in this thread.

 

[rightwinger]

Interesting. Do you pay your doctor the same way? You make more than me, so here is five bucks?

I don’t tip doctors

 

[b m belk 485]

If you're a waitress, then it really helps to be good looking.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I doubt either was supporting a family on tips.

Probably not. It is an entry level job, not a way to support a family. Here is the order of events in a successful person's life:

1) start working
2) advance in work until your salary or wages can support a family
3)start a family.

The Democrats and "not Democrats" on here have it bass-ackwards:
1)start a family.
2)get free stuff forever.

What welfare are you talking about? There are ONLY about 2.4M people on TANF which is direct government assistance. That is less than 1%.

If you are talking food stamps almost half go to children which the US has about the highest child poverty rate in the modern first world.

Just making stuff up now?

In fiscal year 2024, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) served an average of 41.7 million people per month, or 12.3 percent of U.S. residents. The share of residents receiving SNAP benefits ranged from as high as 21.2 percent in New Mexico to as low as 4.8 percent in Utah. In 36 States, the share was between 8 and 16 percent.

Percent of population receiving SNAP benefits in fiscal year 2024 | Economic Research Service

In fiscal year 2024, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) served an average of 41.7 million people per month, or 12.3 percent of U.S. residents. The share of residents receiving SNAP benefits ranged from as high as 21.2 percent in New Mexico to as low as 4.8 percent in Utah. In...

www.ers.usda.gov

You have no idea what you are talking about. You are an old failure playing at the low stakes table with the social security money I give you. Barking dogs is all I hear in this thread.

Actually, I uploaded $100 to an online poker site during COVID, after first playing for hours with play money. I used money I made online to finance my live poker. I don't collect social security, even though I am eligible, because I'd rather keep working and get more later on.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, I'll get back what I paid in - if I live to 72. If I had been allowed to invest that money instead of handing it over to Uncle Sam, I'd be in far better financial shape than waiting for my government check.

Or you could have lost your shirt in a market correction. Like the one that is coming very soon.

Social Security is something I earned though work, regardless of how well or how poorly it is administered. What government programs are NOT poorly administered?

Most of them do what they are supposed to do.

On the other hand, most of the companies I've worked for in the private sector have been some form of dysfunctional.

Which country has the best UHC that you would say, "yes, we should be like ________."

Don't say "all of them," be specific.

If I were to pick a specific country, I'd probably pick Japan's.

The Japanese Healthcare System

Learn all you need to know about healthcare in Japan, including how to access care and navigate health insurance as a visitor or expat.

www.internationalinsurance.com

 

[Seymour Flops]

Or you could have lost your shirt in a market correction. Like the one that is coming very soon.

Only if I decided to pull out everything i had put into the market as soon as the correction happened.

Even if I had, the money remaining would still be more than I will ever get from Social Security.

Most of them do what they are supposed to do.

On the other hand, most of the companies I've worked for in the private sector have been some form of dysfunctional.

I'll bet.

If I were to pick a specific country, I'd probably pick Japan's.

The Japanese Healthcare System

Learn all you need to know about healthcare in Japan, including how to access care and navigate health insurance as a visitor or expat.

www.internationalinsurance.com

Thanks. Few are willing to answer that question.

Okay, so we should be like Japan.

Well, I like their very restrictive immigrations policies and that they actually enforce them. I assume you agree that the U.S. must adopt such policies in order to be able to provide Japan-type UHC.

I would hate for Americans to be as racist as the Japanese, do you think that part could be left out and we could still have UHC?

I am especially interested to know which superpower will be providing our defense so that we can spend that money on our UHC? We have provided it for Japan for decades as you may or may not be aware. Which country is waiting to protect us?

 

[Lisa558]

Here is the economic problem addressed in this post:

Nearly 100 million Americans received some form of government assistance in 2019, according to a 2023 estimate from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The federal government has assistance programs in place to support Americans who can’t afford food, housing, healthcare, and other needs. This is sometimes referred to as a social safety net, a system of programs designed to support people struggling economically. In 2022, around one in three Americans was enrolled in at least one of those programs, including nearly half of all American kids.

How many people receive government assistance from social security, medicare, and other programs | USAFacts

In 2022, around one in three Americans was enrolled in at least one government assistance program, including nearly half of all American kids.

usafacts.org

So what about the waitresses? They were former waitresses, actually.

It was at a poker room. One was about seventy, playing low stakes 1/3 hold 'em, while her husband was playing high stakes 15/30 Hi-Lo. The other was a dealer, maybe thirty to forty. She was Filipina and it's harder for me to tell their ages.

Somehow the topic of waitressing came up. The older player said she waitressed all through high school, that it was fun and she couldn't believe how much money she was making compared to friends working fast food. The younger dealer talked about how fast she was, and how she one day had to serve the whole restaurant because everyone else was out. She didn't care because that meant she was getting all the tips.

Now, she still has a job for tips, but I'm guessing much more, plus she isn't on her feet for eight to ten hours.

Whats the economic lesson? It isn't about how much education you have, how rich your parents are, how good your school was. It's about being willing to put in the work. That is a lesson today's welfare layabout need badly. What are the qualifications to wait tables? Knowing how to read, I suppose, but even that could be gotten around. Don't even have to do math anymore. Just be willing to work hard and put on a cheerful face even when you're tired.

That last may seem absolutely crazy to a typical welfare layabout. "Being tired suck!" Yes, but that is what people do when they have jobs. They work, work, work, and when the boss comes in and asks how ya doin'? they say "great!" The boss did the same and still does the same when the region manager checks in with him after a tough week. Why should people who do that be forced to pay for your leisure lifestyle?

Why did these ladies not simply go on welfare, take the easy way out? My guess is that they each come from a culture in which the idea of living off the work of others is hateful. The American culture from the sixties and seventies and the Fillapino culture.

We need to get that culture back. Fairness aside, the system in which anyone who prefers not to work can simply live off of the work of others is not sustainable. We can change it, or we can watch our economy tank. If not for us, for our grandchildren.

I’ve said before that what this country now lacks is a sense of shame for irresponsible and entitled beahvior.

And yes….a woman with three or four kids already on food stamps, and free lunches, and Medicaid, with three or four baby daddies who pay no child support, who then goes on to have an ADDITIONAL baby, with no child support from the next daddy either, should feel some SHAME. And so too should the fathers.

Instead, they all feel it is “business as usual,” and that the government - meaning other people - will support all these kids.

That’s what happens when the Democrats try to put forward the idea that all choices are equally valid, and equally desirable. It is an offshoot of their “everyone is equal” mantra.

 

[August West]

... while lowering your work ethic. Been there and done that.

One year of working in a deli. 35 years of being a steelworker and 16 more as a seasonal horticulture worker at a zoo. My work ethic?

 

[initforme]

Retiring before 55 should be everyones goal.

 

[sparky]

2)get free stuff forever.

there is nothing 'free' in this life ,nor is there ever going to be......~S~

 

[SaxonJackson]

One year of working in a deli. 35 years of being a steelworker and 16 more as a seasonal horticulture worker at a zoo. My work ethic?

Probably "pretty good." Without booze and pot? Probably stellar.

 

[initforme]

there is nothing 'free' in this life ,nor is there ever going to be......~S~

And working in ones 60s is not winning either. So there is no winning or anything to really look forward to. Reality.

 

[JoeB131]

Thanks. Few are willing to answer that question.

Okay, so we should be like Japan.

Well, I like their very restrictive immigrations policies and that they actually enforce them. I assume you agree that the U.S. must adopt such policies in order to be able to provide Japan-type UHC.

Actually, quite the contrary, Japan's restrictive immigration policies are killing it.

Japan is in a Demographic Death Spiral. Its population is actually shrinking.

But because they won't allow immigration, and because immigrating to Japan would be pretty difficult, as Japanese is a very difficult language to learn, they aren't addressing the problem.

 

[Muhammed]

Well at least I guess you come close to condemning it.



Coke rakes in billions and the single mom gets a little bit of an assist and we know who is demonized.

The person who defrauds the social safety net gets demonized.