Young White Men Without College Are Dropping Out Of Work Force

[Toni]

Union membership has declined since the 1960s in countries all over the world.

What's Australia's minimum wage and who lobbied to get it? Hint: it starts with an L and a U.

I have zero idea how you think your question somehow addresses or refutes what I've written.

I think if you think about it hard enough you could figure it out. Get back to me if you need some help.

I've thought about it and I can't figure it out. So I will appeal to you again. What does what you've written somehow inform, address, rebut, what you quoted me saying?

The minimum wage is quite large in Australia, and western Europe. Why? because left leaning Politicians and labor unions lobbied and ran campaigns. They want all workers to have what union membership gets. Good pay, good benefits, etc. Basically unions in Australia and Europe are making themselves redundant. That's a good thing for everyone.

So, you agree there is no compelling reason for the majority of workers to join unions today, and you understand why I made the decision that the majority of the working population in each and every industry makes.

However, the idea of an enforced minimum wage in Australia (before federation) arose from the Harvester judgment.

So the minimum wage was established in AU about a hundred twenty years ago and that explains absolutely everything about Australia's minimum wage today. Got it. Thanks.

Were you born constructing strawmen or did you take lessons?

I learned it from the best, you.

The day the student surpasses the teacher.

Australia and Western Europe are not the entire planet. While unions in the US have done much to secure workplace safety, establishing a workweek, securing wages and benefits, there has been a concerted campaign to discredit unions in the US and to drive down union membership. The results have been a stagnant minimum wage since 2009, despite increase in COLA of at least 50% since 2009. Housing, health care and education costs have very far surpassed the general rate of inflation, making it more and more difficult for families in the US to meet expenses.

The federal minimum wage in the USA is set by the Fair Labor Standards Act, not unions.

Union membership in the US has been steadily decaying since at least 1960. Blaming a stagnant federal wage on either lower union membership or a conspiracy to reduce union membership does not make sense.

I’m sorry you do not understand how influence works with regards to federal laws.

I am not completely certain if you are unaware that laws and policies are dynamic and respond to various pressures, especially the will of the people and lobbying efforts of various groups—or if you pretend not to understand if something is inconvenient for your argument or position.

I don’t really care much, either way.

 

[Metaphor]

Union membership has declined since the 1960s in countries all over the world.

What's Australia's minimum wage and who lobbied to get it? Hint: it starts with an L and a U.

I have zero idea how you think your question somehow addresses or refutes what I've written.

I think if you think about it hard enough you could figure it out. Get back to me if you need some help.

I've thought about it and I can't figure it out. So I will appeal to you again. What does what you've written somehow inform, address, rebut, what you quoted me saying?

The minimum wage is quite large in Australia, and western Europe. Why? because left leaning Politicians and labor unions lobbied and ran campaigns. They want all workers to have what union membership gets. Good pay, good benefits, etc. Basically unions in Australia and Europe are making themselves redundant. That's a good thing for everyone.

So, you agree there is no compelling reason for the majority of workers to join unions today, and you understand why I made the decision that the majority of the working population in each and every industry makes.

However, the idea of an enforced minimum wage in Australia (before federation) arose from the Harvester judgment.

So the minimum wage was established in AU about a hundred twenty years ago and that explains absolutely everything about Australia's minimum wage today. Got it. Thanks.

Were you born constructing strawmen or did you take lessons?

I learned it from the best, you.

The day the student surpasses the teacher.

Australia and Western Europe are not the entire planet. While unions in the US have done much to secure workplace safety, establishing a workweek, securing wages and benefits, there has been a concerted campaign to discredit unions in the US and to drive down union membership. The results have been a stagnant minimum wage since 2009, despite increase in COLA of at least 50% since 2009. Housing, health care and education costs have very far surpassed the general rate of inflation, making it more and more difficult for families in the US to meet expenses.

The federal minimum wage in the USA is set by the Fair Labor Standards Act, not unions.

Union membership in the US has been steadily decaying since at least 1960. Blaming a stagnant federal wage on either lower union membership or a conspiracy to reduce union membership does not make sense.

I’m sorry you do not understand how influence works with regards to federal laws.

I am not completely certain if you are unaware that laws and policies are dynamic and respond to various pressures, especially the will of the people and lobbying efforts of various groups <snip>

So, the people have not cared to elect people who want to raise the federal minimum wage and deliver on that promise since 2009, nor have they cared to join unions for more than 60 years.

I'm sorry you don't respect people's choices.

 

[Toni]

Union membership has declined since the 1960s in countries all over the world.

What's Australia's minimum wage and who lobbied to get it? Hint: it starts with an L and a U.

I have zero idea how you think your question somehow addresses or refutes what I've written.

I think if you think about it hard enough you could figure it out. Get back to me if you need some help.

I've thought about it and I can't figure it out. So I will appeal to you again. What does what you've written somehow inform, address, rebut, what you quoted me saying?

The minimum wage is quite large in Australia, and western Europe. Why? because left leaning Politicians and labor unions lobbied and ran campaigns. They want all workers to have what union membership gets. Good pay, good benefits, etc. Basically unions in Australia and Europe are making themselves redundant. That's a good thing for everyone.

So, you agree there is no compelling reason for the majority of workers to join unions today, and you understand why I made the decision that the majority of the working population in each and every industry makes.

However, the idea of an enforced minimum wage in Australia (before federation) arose from the Harvester judgment.

So the minimum wage was established in AU about a hundred twenty years ago and that explains absolutely everything about Australia's minimum wage today. Got it. Thanks.

Were you born constructing strawmen or did you take lessons?

I learned it from the best, you.

The day the student surpasses the teacher.

Australia and Western Europe are not the entire planet. While unions in the US have done much to secure workplace safety, establishing a workweek, securing wages and benefits, there has been a concerted campaign to discredit unions in the US and to drive down union membership. The results have been a stagnant minimum wage since 2009, despite increase in COLA of at least 50% since 2009. Housing, health care and education costs have very far surpassed the general rate of inflation, making it more and more difficult for families in the US to meet expenses.

The federal minimum wage in the USA is set by the Fair Labor Standards Act, not unions.

Union membership in the US has been steadily decaying since at least 1960. Blaming a stagnant federal wage on either lower union membership or a conspiracy to reduce union membership does not make sense.

I’m sorry you do not understand how influence works with regards to federal laws.

I am not completely certain if you are unaware that laws and policies are dynamic and respond to various pressures, especially the will of the people and lobbying efforts of various groups <snip>

So, the people have not cared to elect people who want to raise the federal minimum wage and deliver on that promise since 2009, nor have they cared to join unions for more than 60 years.

I'm sorry you don't respect people's choices.

Lol.

About what I expected.

 

[Metaphor]

Union membership has declined since the 1960s in countries all over the world.

What's Australia's minimum wage and who lobbied to get it? Hint: it starts with an L and a U.

I have zero idea how you think your question somehow addresses or refutes what I've written.

I think if you think about it hard enough you could figure it out. Get back to me if you need some help.

I've thought about it and I can't figure it out. So I will appeal to you again. What does what you've written somehow inform, address, rebut, what you quoted me saying?

The minimum wage is quite large in Australia, and western Europe. Why? because left leaning Politicians and labor unions lobbied and ran campaigns. They want all workers to have what union membership gets. Good pay, good benefits, etc. Basically unions in Australia and Europe are making themselves redundant. That's a good thing for everyone.

So, you agree there is no compelling reason for the majority of workers to join unions today, and you understand why I made the decision that the majority of the working population in each and every industry makes.

However, the idea of an enforced minimum wage in Australia (before federation) arose from the Harvester judgment.

So the minimum wage was established in AU about a hundred twenty years ago and that explains absolutely everything about Australia's minimum wage today. Got it. Thanks.

Were you born constructing strawmen or did you take lessons?

I learned it from the best, you.

The day the student surpasses the teacher.

Australia and Western Europe are not the entire planet. While unions in the US have done much to secure workplace safety, establishing a workweek, securing wages and benefits, there has been a concerted campaign to discredit unions in the US and to drive down union membership. The results have been a stagnant minimum wage since 2009, despite increase in COLA of at least 50% since 2009. Housing, health care and education costs have very far surpassed the general rate of inflation, making it more and more difficult for families in the US to meet expenses.

The federal minimum wage in the USA is set by the Fair Labor Standards Act, not unions.

Union membership in the US has been steadily decaying since at least 1960. Blaming a stagnant federal wage on either lower union membership or a conspiracy to reduce union membership does not make sense.

I’m sorry you do not understand how influence works with regards to federal laws.

I am not completely certain if you are unaware that laws and policies are dynamic and respond to various pressures, especially the will of the people and lobbying efforts of various groups <snip>

So, the people have not cared to elect people who want to raise the federal minimum wage and deliver on that promise since 2009, nor have they cared to join unions for more than 60 years.

I'm sorry you don't respect people's choices.

Lol.

About what I expected.

90% of the United States working population don't belong to a union. You are in the minority. Deal with it.

 

[Swammerdami]

Union membership in the US has been steadily decaying since at least 1960. Blaming a stagnant federal wage on either lower union membership or a conspiracy to reduce union membership does not make sense.

A picture is worth a thousand words.

 

[Metaphor]

Union membership in the US has been steadily decaying since at least 1960. Blaming a stagnant federal wage on either lower union membership or a conspiracy to reduce union membership does not make sense.

A picture is worth a thousand words.

You really will have to explain this in words.

You have a graph tracking raw numbers in unions from 1910 (U.S. population 92m) versus 2010 (U.S. population 309m), purporting to show a correlation (?) between union membership and the income of the top 1%?

What point are you even trying to make?

 

[Swammerdami]

You really will have to explain this in words.

You have a graph tracking raw numbers in unions from 1910 (U.S. population 92m) versus 2010 (U.S. population 309m), purporting to show a correlation (?) between union membership and the income of the top 1%?

What point are you even trying to make?

How brilliant of you to notice that U.S. population increased over the period. That makes the decline in union membership even more pronounced!

The correlation between Reagan's ascension and the decline of relative prosperity for the average American is shown rather starkly in the graph. Cause-effect relationships can be debated.

As for attempting to lead you to points or explanation, that may be futile. I forget: Does your Ilk think income inequality is good or bad?

 

[Metaphor]

You really will have to explain this in words.

You have a graph tracking raw numbers in unions from 1910 (U.S. population 92m) versus 2010 (U.S. population 309m), purporting to show a correlation (?) between union membership and the income of the top 1%?

What point are you even trying to make?

How brilliant of you to notice that U.S. population increased over the period. That makes the decline in union membership even more pronounced!

The correlation between Reagan's ascension and the decline of relative prosperity for the average American is shown rather starkly in the graph.

How does that graph show anything of the sort? I don't see any line corresponding to the 'prosperity' of the average American. I see union members (the vast majority of the US workforce, let alone of the 'average American' do not belong to unions), and I see a top 1% share line, which also does not belong to the 'average American' but instead reflects only 1% of them.

Cause-effect relationships can be debated.

As for attempting to lead you to points or explanation, that may be futile. I forget: Does your Ilk think income inequality is good or bad?

My "ilk"? I can't speak for anybody else, only myself.

Since you are so fond of graphs, here is another: union membership (percentage of workforce) and real GDP (2012 chained dollars/1000), from 1960-2020.



And the correlation over that time, between real GDP and union membership percentage in the US? -.966

 

[Bomb#20]

Is that four year gap in the data when unions kept their member lists secret because Reagan outlawed unions?

 

[Bomb#20]

The correlation between Reagan's ascension and the decline of relative prosperity for the average American is shown rather starkly in the graph. Cause-effect relationships can be debated.

As for attempting to lead you to points or explanation, that may be futile. I forget: Does your Ilk think income inequality is good or bad?

Remind me: What does your Ilk think about whether income inequality is good or bad?

The average American is a lot richer than the average human; consequently, anything that makes the average American poorer reduces income inequality. Does that mean you're in favor of it? Or is "relative prosperity" a thing that matters only intermittently?

 

[Swammerdami]

Remind me: What does your Ilk think about whether income inequality is good or bad?

The average American is a lot richer than the average human; consequently, anything that makes the average American poorer reduces income inequality. Does that mean you're in favor of it? Or is "relative prosperity" a thing that matters only intermittently?

It's hard to discern much about Metaphor's understanding, but I'll try you.

Do you think the average medieval Kings felt better about their place in society than the average minimum-wage worker in America today? Remember: Those Kings didn't have smart-phones or even flush toilets.

Who probably clicks a higher number on a Life Satisfaction survey? An American taking home $1400/month, or a Cambodian taking home $800?

Let's see if you can answer those questions. Then we'll consider yours.

 

[Metaphor]

Remind me: What does your Ilk think about whether income inequality is good or bad?

The average American is a lot richer than the average human; consequently, anything that makes the average American poorer reduces income inequality. Does that mean you're in favor of it? Or is "relative prosperity" a thing that matters only intermittently?

It's hard to discern much about Metaphor's understanding, but I'll try you.

You can help my understanding by answering my question in post 68.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Isn't unionization better seen as another beneficial program enacted under FDR? In my thinking it isn't different than the WPA or CCC. It was a way to get money into circulation and repair the economy. The Great Depression under Hoover was supposed to be solved by corporations. Well, that didn't happen, corporations did nothing and along came FDR and his many programs, many good and necessary programs.

Unionization certainly raised the standard of living and improved workplace safety for hundreds of millions of employees across multiple disciplines, both labor and management. it was certainly a win, win, win for everyone over countless generations. It was in some ways a necessary evil, a necessary counterweight to unfettered greed by owners. In essence a bit of that greed was given to unions and it worked.

 

[TV and credit cards]

And the award for Reasons to Unionize goes once again to Hyundai Motor Group and the great state of Alabama for their ongoing commitment violating child labor laws, poor wages, exploiting impoverished rural communities, and poor enforcement of worker safety.

This isn't the first time for the parts suppliers of Hyundai/Kia. There's been news in the past of their disregard for worker safety, demanding quotas that encourage unsafe practices. Of course enabling all this is Right to Work Alabama who if they fine these part suppliers or employment agencies that serve Hyundai at all, it will be a pittance that will only encourage more of the same.

 

[ZiprHead]

The federal minimum wage in the USA is set by the Fair Labor Standards Act, not unions.

Please don't act so obtuse. The FLSA is amended to raise the MW by congress which is lobbied by labor unions to do so. Almost no other organizations do that. Corporations hire lobbying firms to lobby congress to not raise the MW.

 

[ZiprHead]

So, the people have not cared to elect people who want to raise the federal minimum wage and deliver on that promise since 2009, nor have they cared to join unions for more than 60 years.

I'm sorry you don't respect people's choices.

You really think the people have a choice in these matters? How quaint.

 

[Elixir]

anything that makes the average American poorer reduces income inequality.

I don't believe you are really that math-challenged.
Turning the marginally poor into the totally destitute (the apparent mission of the extreme right) does not in any way reduce income inequality.

 

[Politesse]

Unions work for a while but most union companies end up destroyed, eaten by non-union competitors.

When facts don't agree with your opinions, just state your opinions as fact, eh Loren?

 

[Politesse]

Reports are coming in the young white men without college degrees are dropping out of the work force. This is a demographic that heavily votes Republican.

...
The study, conducted by Pinghui Wu, a researcher at the Boston Fed, found that men without a college degree are more likely to stop working or seeking work when their expected earnings fall in comparison to other workers. For these men, jobs aren't just a source of income; they're a source of social status.

That's especially true for white men, Wu writes, and younger men, who see a job with limited pay growth — which they believe could affect their marriage prospects and social status — as worse than no job. So what are they doing instead? Wu cited research showing that prime-age men who are not in the labor force spend twice as much time on leisure activities and sleeping, compared with labor force participants.
...

Men without college degrees are dropping out of the workforce because they viewed their dead-end jobs as a threat to social status

Men without degrees are quitting in growing numbers because limited pay growth impacts their social status and marriage prospects.

www.businessinsider.com

The way that this magazine chose to report on the study is both absurd and deeply telling...

 

[Toni]

Union membership has declined since the 1960s in countries all over the world.

What's Australia's minimum wage and who lobbied to get it? Hint: it starts with an L and a U.

I have zero idea how you think your question somehow addresses or refutes what I've written.

I think if you think about it hard enough you could figure it out. Get back to me if you need some help.

I've thought about it and I can't figure it out. So I will appeal to you again. What does what you've written somehow inform, address, rebut, what you quoted me saying?

The minimum wage is quite large in Australia, and western Europe. Why? because left leaning Politicians and labor unions lobbied and ran campaigns. They want all workers to have what union membership gets. Good pay, good benefits, etc. Basically unions in Australia and Europe are making themselves redundant. That's a good thing for everyone.

So, you agree there is no compelling reason for the majority of workers to join unions today, and you understand why I made the decision that the majority of the working population in each and every industry makes.

However, the idea of an enforced minimum wage in Australia (before federation) arose from the Harvester judgment.

So the minimum wage was established in AU about a hundred twenty years ago and that explains absolutely everything about Australia's minimum wage today. Got it. Thanks.

Were you born constructing strawmen or did you take lessons?

I learned it from the best, you.

The day the student surpasses the teacher.

Australia and Western Europe are not the entire planet. While unions in the US have done much to secure workplace safety, establishing a workweek, securing wages and benefits, there has been a concerted campaign to discredit unions in the US and to drive down union membership. The results have been a stagnant minimum wage since 2009, despite increase in COLA of at least 50% since 2009. Housing, health care and education costs have very far surpassed the general rate of inflation, making it more and more difficult for families in the US to meet expenses.

The federal minimum wage in the USA is set by the Fair Labor Standards Act, not unions.

Union membership in the US has been steadily decaying since at least 1960. Blaming a stagnant federal wage on either lower union membership or a conspiracy to reduce union membership does not make sense.

I’m sorry you do not understand how influence works with regards to federal laws.

I am not completely certain if you are unaware that laws and policies are dynamic and respond to various pressures, especially the will of the people and lobbying efforts of various groups <snip>

So, the people have not cared to elect people who want to raise the federal minimum wage and deliver on that promise since 2009, nor have they cared to join unions for more than 60 years.

I'm sorry you don't respect people's choices.

Lol.

About what I expected.

90% of the United States working population don't belong to a union. You are in the minority. Deal with it.

1. I'm retired.
2. I've never belonged to a union in my life. Except for the Mother's Union, which I assured my children was real when they were kids.

I also am familiar with labor history in the US from the 20th century forward. I've lived through a lot of it, actually.