Replies

The thing that amazes me, truly astounds me in fact is the venom directed towards people who work hard and want to make a little more.
I cannot believe the lack of empathy towards people who would like to make a living wage. The same people who will comment on jobless rate and stick their tongue out at Obama and comment, and rightfully so that he has been a disaster for the economy can turn around and say oh just get a better job. These are the jobs this economy is creating. We are not creating low skill entry positions where a person can work hard and better themselves. Those jobs are the scarcest of the scarce.
I refrained from making this statement early but now i guess i will. The problem is capitalism. There. Now flame me. I’m not advocating communism,socialism or anything else but merely pointing out a flaw. what is the ultimate goal of capitalism? The greatest production with the fewest employees. That is the goal. That is maximization of profits. That problem is put off by new technologies but each growth cycle spurred by innovation needs fewer workers because its building on other new technology.
I don’t know the answer and this is not directed at you although i don’t think i’ve been venomous in my little missive. Oh i’ve been on wall Street for 30 years and the whole fewer workers producing more is something i have witnessed in this industry and others many times over.
I’d rather not answer 100 attacks but i suppose i will.

the venom directed towards people who work hard and want to make a little more

No flaming, just rational discourse here.

IMO, the way to "make a little more", is through hard work....not - as this article put it - by going on strike and demanding more.

I've worked in a lot of different jobs (no McDonald's, though) from lousy menial work, through retail, through white-collar, corner-office gigs. In very nearly all of them, the way to advancement was hard work, and advancing the company's interests.

In the few positions where there *wasn't* any advancement or opportunity - for instance, if management/ownership changed for the worse, or my position was being set up to be outsourced - then I worked hard to move within the organization, or to jump to another workplace. These situations were never easy, either. Sometimes it took a year or more to make the change. And meanwhile, I worked my butt off so that I was valuable enough not to get dumped.

Going on strike, would never cross my mind. After all, I agreed to a salary when I took the job. If, after training and experience, I feel that I am more valuable than my original negotiation, then a raise should be in order. If no raise is forthcoming, then I look elsewhere - did my training, experience, etc really make me worth more? If that's the case, then there will (eventually) be someone who will pay me for it. If not (as in the case of these striking workers....min wage is about it for their job) then the question should be "What do I need to do to make more money? School? Training? More hard work? Move to another state?"

The striking workers seem incredibly arrogant to me. Their argument, approximately, is "I want more money because....I want it." No mention of whether or not they'd earned it, whether they deserve it, or whether the market even would *bear* it.