Comic Strip of the Day

CSotD: Let them stream video

Db130402
In the current Doonesbury story arc, Zonker is considering joining a strike against the restaurant where he works.

Such base ingratitude! Such disloyalty!

I'd like to see the Venn diagram of people who don't want to raise the minimum wage and those who think we spend too much on welfare and other entitlement programs. Based on public statements and what I read on-line, my guess is that it would be hard to draw a better circle freehand.

Except that we're starting to see a disconnect between those who make the most noise and the actual numbers. It's pretty obvious in the gay marriage discussion: The floors of Congress may be black with heelmarks, but the Vox Populi is beginning to drown out the Vox Dei, or at least it's drowning out the voices of those who claim to speak for Deus.

I'm even noticing that the trolls are facing opposition in the comments sections of many news sites. Oh, they still dominate, with their clever talk of "libtards" and "Obummer," but there are other voices in that swirl of sewage.

But it certainly isn't a roar. So far, the resurrection of Ebenezer Scrooge continues, and he's still complaining about what he already pays to support the workhouses and prisons, and he still sees the poor as surplus population.

Speaking of resurrection, as we were a few days ago, I saw a cartoon complaining about people who care more about bunnies and colored eggs than the risen Lord.

Back when I was a kid, we were able to enjoy the Easter Bunny and still go to church and keep in our minds that it was a holiday and that "holiday" and "Holy Day" are one and the same.

Part of why it was so easy to keep in mind is that our parents made Easter a big deal. And part of it was that there was nothing else to do anyway.

Because all the freaking stores were closed and all the parents were home with their kids where they belonged.

You want family values? How about you worry a little less about penises and vaginas and work a little harder to build a nation where parents of whatever gender, sexual orientation or marital status can actually spend some time with their kids?

Ebenezer Scrooge begrudged Bob Crachitt his day off, but he saw it as unavoidable.

In this economy, however, the robber barons believe nothing is unavoidable when it comes to trimming the fat and taking advantage of business opportunities.

It's the disloyalty and unpatriotic attitudes of ungrateful workers that are holding our economy back. Ask Edison Lee:

Edison

Edison is joking, of course. Harley isn't an "employee." He's an "associate," or, if you are really planning to put the screws to him, a "partner."

But where indeed can an employer find associates and partners with the kind of work ethic you would find, for instance, in the slums of Bangladesh?

There are so many ways in which the system doesn't work that I hardly know where to start. But, for one thing, the poor of Bangladesh aren't relentlessly urged to purchase big screen TVs and then blamed for wanting them.

Although it doesn't take much to start that process: Back in the early 80s, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat expressed concern about Western television.

The problem was that he favored using low-orbit, geo-synchronous satellites to beam television into isolated rural communities, with the idea that you would have one television at the equivalent of the town hall, and people could gather there and see educational programs about how to grow crops with saline water.

Getting the people to gather, however, required something more entertaining than that, and using shows like "Dallas" meant good crowds, but showing them lush green lawns, beautiful houses, fast cars and flashy clothing sent an unintended message of how life in the big city differs from life in the rural desert and sent little Fatima and Muhammad off to Cairo, where, in place of the plain but sustainable life they had known, or the glorious life they thought they would enjoy, they found only the grinding poverty and despair of the already overcrowded slums.

Which would piss them off and motivate them to do things like assassinate Anwar Sadat.

He didn't say that last part. I did.

Meanwhile, back in the First World, you have to create consumer need. However, if you want it to remain the First World, you also need to create credible, sustainable consumers, and that isn't happening.

Check this out: It's a chart from the National Low Income Housing Coalition on how many hours a minimum-wage worker needs to put in each week, in order to afford a two-bedroom apartment:

2013_OOR-hours

You can click on that for a larger version or go here to download the full report. 

This assumes that you would be devoting 30 percent of your gross income to housing, which is part of how it should work, if you intend to feed yourself and perhaps a child, wear clothing, pay utilities and get back and forth to work on the kind of regular basis that leads to successful employment.

If you'd like a more cheerful assessment, here's the most Marie-Antionette-friendly set of recommendations I've ever read. If you now or have ever worked for minimum wage, I would suggest you bolt your computer to the desk before clicking on that link, to prevent you from hurling it across the room.

On the other hand, if you have a taste for dark humor, this is one helluva lot funnier than any cartoon you'll ever see posted here. Marie Antoinette didn't actually make that crack about how people who couldn't afford bread should eat cake instead.

These recommendations, by contrast, are for real.

For instance, you should live near your job, so you can walk or ride your bike, and that saves you having to own a car or pay for the bus. Fair enough, I guess, as long as you can find work in the ghetto, and I'm sure you'll be the only one looking there.

But you don't have to live in those expensive cities. You should move to a rural area where minimum wage jobs are plentiful and you can find an apartment for $200 a month.  

(Editor's note: If you do find that $200 a month country apartment, you'll also save $$$ on utilities, because it isn't going to have plumbing or electricity.)

And, they recommend, rather than pay $20 a month for cable TV, you just stream free on-line video at the library.

Out in the country, within walking distance of both your job and your $200 a month apartment.

 

 

Previous Post
Jack Ohman remembers Rex Babin
Next Post
Mark Pett publishes 2nd children’s book

Comments 10

  1. I must tell you that I love your blog. I read it every day with anticipation for new insights. Here is something you will find hilarious or depressing (probably both). I have a friend who is a conspiracy nut. I posted the stats for Presidential Executive Orders on his Facebook page. He responded that he had posted an average of 8 per president and 900 for Obama and wondered aloud which was correct. I posted a link to the National Archives for him. No response. Another person posted that it didn’t matter how many, but rather how many were not for the good of the country but were partisan. I posted that most were general things and encouraged him to read the details of each one. No response. Oh well.

  2. Right…at those libraries whose budgets and hours have been slashed because they are “unnecessary when everyone has home internet and everything is online” –assuming they can even get fast enough internet that you could stream (lot of areas don’t have that yet).
    *headdesk*

  3. I will admit that I do try to ride my bike to the train for work to save on gas and improve my health and I do try to cook as much as I can to save on food costs.
    Otherwise, the rest of the article seems to be written by someone who likes to talk about “working smarter, not harder” and other pie-in-the-sky ideals without realizing the biggest truths: “Talk is Cheap” and “Easier Said Than Done.

  4. And I’m sitting here listening to Asa* Hutchinson (on The Newshour) tell Judy Woodruff that the more armed guards we put in schools the safer the kids will be. Where would the armed guards come from? I suppose they would be good-citizen-volunteers like the gentleman who shot Trayvon Martin.
    *that’s how they are pronouncing it, but I bet it’s spelled with more “s”es

  5. Ann Landers used to say that nobody could take advantage of you without your permission.
    Ann Landers was in little danger of running out of people who needed her advice, despite the fact that, if they took that bit to heart, the rest would follow.

  6. “You want family values? How about you worry a little less about penises and vaginas and work a little harder to build a nation where parents of whatever gender, sexual orientation or marital status can actually spend some time with their kids?
    Ebenezer Scrooge begrudged Bob Crachitt his day off, but he saw it as unavoidable.”
    Take a gander at The Tax Racket by Martin L. Gross for an explanation of the change. We went from having one earner families with reasonable taxation to having two earner families and high taxation. The net result (on average) was that momma was working to pay the increased taxes.
    The price for larger government is measured in something larger in dollars. It is measured in harm done to our families by requiring more work out of each family in order to get by.
    Aside from reading a thing or two, I lived through it as well….
    Regards,
    Dann

  7. I do hope you are not suggesting that other expenses have remained the same and that the only change is in the level of taxation, Dann. Having lived through a generation or two of change, I’ve seen the change in housing, in the cost of cars, in the number of cars, in the level of conspicuous consumption … and, again, I refuse to watch people bombarded with relentless messages urging them to consume and then blamed when they do.

  8. Dann,
    The facts do not support your assertion that taxes have increased since the days of one earner families. The tax rates for all levels of income dropped from 1950 to 1980. See http://www.stanford.edu/class/polisci120a/immigration/Federal%20Tax%20Brackets.pdf In particular, in 1950 the tax rate for those earning more than $400,000 was 84.3%. The 2013 tax rate for those earning more than $400,000 is 39.6% See http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/01/15/irs-announces-2013-tax-rates-standard-deduction-amounts-and-more/ The difference between the time of one wage earners supporting a family and now is the precipitous lowering of wages when adjusted for inflation. I live in Philadelphia. Back in the day, blue collar (union) employees had enough discretionary income to buy a small second house down at the Jersey shore. Now – blue collar (non-union) employees are earning $10 – $12 per hour … so the spouse has to work.

  9. … and I retain the right to use this again, but there is an African story about the leopard and his son. The leopard goes hunting, leaving his son, who wanders out onto the plain and into the midst of a herd of elephants who promptly recognize him as a predator and stomp him to death.
    The leopard returns, looks for his cub and finds the battered corpse. Grief stricken, the enraged father shouts, “Who has done this! Who has killed my son!”
    A nearby jackal says, “It was the elephants who trampled your boy.”
    The leopard looks across the plain at the herd of elephants. Then he takes a second look. “No,” he says, “it was not the elephants. It was the goats! I’m sure it was the goats who killed by son!”
    And he went out and wreaked his vengeance upon them.
    (However, I’m sure it was the taxes that caused those changes in society. Yes, it was the taxes!)

  10. Hi Dave,
    Please give The Tax Racket a good read first.
    Mr. Gross’ reasonably well documented assertion is that the total amount of money going to fund government at all levels increased in the late 60s/early 70s. He uses several illustrations from New York where property taxes and state/local income taxes skyrocketed along with increases in federal taxation. (State and local governments do have to spend more money to comply with federal laws.)
    Also, no one…and I do mean not a single individual on the face of the planet…ever paid an 84.3% US income tax rate on their income. There were too many tax shelters, loopholes, dodges, and accounting acts prestidigitation for that to ever happen. We seem to be in the habit of cleaning those things out every decade or so, but Congress keeps creating new ones.
    Also, you are forgetting FICA taxes, gas taxes, tax on taxes, etc. ad infinitum.
    Hi Mike,
    Of course the price of goods has gone up due to inflation. I will make the undocumented assertion that government regulatory policies and increasing taxation are the single largest drivers of inflation.
    And you are correct to suggest that some of the changes to our culture occurred outside of the tax issue. Perish the thought that I am singly focused on taxation as a driver of cultural change. IMO, increasing government taxation and spending were and continue to be very influential in this area.
    At least, influential enough to justify the assertion that the costs of government activity ought to be fully balanced against the theoretic benefits.
    Regards,
    Dann

Comments are closed.

Search

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get a daily recap of the news posted each day.