Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

EmseB

Members
  • Content Count

    4,134
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

EmseB last won the day on April 16

EmseB had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

11,718 Excellent

About EmseB

  • Rank
    Amateur Bee Keeper
  • Birthday October 12

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Recent Profile Visitors

487 profile views
  1. Y'all need to use a password manager. First of all, longer passwords are harder to crack, not ones with more special characters, numbers, capitals, etc. It's so stupid for companies to set those requirements without requiring at least 20 characters because it basically tells anyone what things are/must be in the passwords thus giving them information about what characters are in passwords. The shorter a password is, the easy it is to brute force hack. A password manager will generate, save, and remember all your passwords for you. None of them will be duplicates and you don't have to think about it. We use LastPass and it works across all devices. I have one really long sentence to log in to my LastPass. On my phone it works via fingerprint. Anyway, just thought I'd mention it because it's eliminated a lot of strife from my life.
  2. No, landlords should not have to allow pets. But when looking at listings, I always think to myself that any extra damage deposit for pets should also apply to toddlers. 😄
  3. Six o'clock Scramble is the most expensive but the most customizable by recipe, as in each recipe might have gf or vegetarian instructions, a slow cooker option, etc. I currently use emeals which is much cheaper and has a lot of different menu plans to choose from (and you can switch between them).
  4. I don't know. I would think that parents could evaluate a preschool or daycare on its merits that would have nothing to do with degreed person teaching or being in charge of it. But I do know that a successful preschool program can be run without a college degree. Crafts, free play, outdoor time, snack, rest, stories, etc., do not require a degree. The fact that some people think we do need that for our toddlers to be "successful" runs against everything I believe to be true about early childhood, even if you gather them together in groups and call it school. It's one thing to have some fancy schmancy private pre-school in NYC with $30k tuition and a waiting list because parents think their kids will need it to get into the right college, but I don't buy into that anyway. In any case, preventing someone from offering a home daycare or pre-school to take care of small children while their parents work because that person does not have a college diploma is a great example of how the state places barriers on people in order to keep them from making money, while also saying that everyone needs to be paid more.
  5. That boggles the mind. The degree thing for 3-4yos. Like I said, I did ECE votech in high school, which involved being part of a student-run community pre-school as well as "interning" at a day care with various ages. None of the ladies I worked with were degreed. I can't even imagine going into school debt for an ECE job. It was at most a 2yr degree from a CC, and that was if you wanted to be a lead teacher or work somewhere hoity-toity or something. And pushing those ladies out of a job they were good at because they didn't go to college? The professions we require a 4-year degree for in this country are getting out of hand. It's almost like we're trying to make people poor.
  6. It would be interesting. We would have to get rid of low cost home based daycares and such, to start. Where a SAHM could clean up the basement and get licensed to take a couple extra kids. Teenage baby-sitters wouldn't be okay. My high school votech pre-school would probably be a no-go. It would rule out most of the retirees I knew teaching at our church pre-school. And my non-degreed friend who had a well-employed husband but loved toddlers and wanted pocket money. And the implications of keeping your pre-schooler at home would be interesting if only specialized, highly skilled people could take care of kids outside the home. I think it would have to be large, corporate daycare centers of some kind. The funny thing is that I think most things that people do to earn extra money from home without a degree have been either made illegal or so expensive to permit or license they are unfeasible for those in poverty. Childcare hasn't hit that point yet that I've seen. I really started thinking about this recently while watching the Street Food series on Netflix. It talks a lot about how menial, low wage food stands work to lift people out of poverty and is pretty interesting considering how we view stuff like that in the US.
  7. My point was that not all on-the-ball, intelligent people are degreed, so I don't think it is necessary for being a pre-school teacher. It is great your friend does that job with all her education. I didn't say she should find a job that requires competence. I think being a childcare provider requires competence. What I was tryjng to say, unclearly apparently, is that if someone in an unspecialized job needs to earn more money, and they have a degree and another language, there are jobs that are more specialized and pay more for the education and skills she has rather than waiting for the government to increase her wage. But if we want to twist this to me saying that we don't need smart people watching 3yos, okay. I did say that people don't find it difficult, but that is in a context of unskilled vs. specialized jobs. Daycare is not a specialized job set that requires a whole lot of barriers to entry. Most of the people I know working in ECE are not degreed or bilingual, except maybe directors or head teachers or at specialized $$$ schools. I don't think it leaves the dim-bulbs. I think we're talking past each other a bit because I don't think not having teachers like your friend leaves us with undesirables. I don't think degreed people moving up means somebody less than is doing less skilled jobs. That's all I'm trying to stay. People start at low skilled jobs all the time.
  8. Also this is exactly why we can't take reliable data on this without taking personal choice into account and personal circumstances. Clearly we all can't choose to stay in a minimum wage job for 15 years. As you point out, that is a luxury. We work at those jobs, most of us, as stepping stones. She could have chosen to do something different, with kids even, for more money. That is an option some people want and if they were laid off because their wage was increased by law they would take a less desireable job or no job if that was their niche. I happen to like my side hustle that pays by piece instead of min. wage, and if it was outlawed via wage laws theres not any other income I'd be able to make in such a flexible way. But if I were in a different situation it is not a job I wwould stau at with no possibility of a raise or promotion for over a decade. But if I stay there for 15 years as things stand now, I'd be fine with it. And it would look like, in analysis on paper that someone working below min wage for years and isn't that horrifying? When in reality, no...it's what I want. And there are tons of people across the network that have the same story. Are there hard circumstances? Yes. Undeniably. But everyone generally starts at a low paying job and works upward. Those jobs do support an important function in the eeconomy, especially for people with no specialization or no specific marketable skills. My first job at fast food will likely not exist in the near future due to technology and unavailability to teens. I don't know if that kind of phase out, while inevitable, is going to be good.
  9. Okay, she should make $50k per year (near DC). The single parent should make $70k. Now what for the day care? I know that sounds snarky, but I'm seriously asking. Run a day care with 4 teachers (how many 3yos is that with ratio?). $200k payroll minimum, right? Rent, supplies, insurance, other bills. How does it work out? What are people proposing? Oh, and now the wages are competitive so the people without degrees (dimwitted warm bodies?) don't have any chance of getting hired because they are priced out of the job. So where do they go?
  10. I don't think most of the daycare/preschool workers are dimwitted warm bodies because they get paid low wages. I don't know why that would be an assumption. Wage != skill or intelligence, obviously, but I don't think a degree does either, if we're not talking about a specialized field. I would much rather an undegreed grandma or high schooler with free time who wants to work with kids take care of pre-schoolers than someone who takes a million academic ECE classes, but that's personal preference I suppose. There are people like your friend who will take lower pay because they want to be closer to home, have more time with family, etc., etc. People make that trade off all the time...lower wages for other life benefits. I know retirees who taught at my kids private school, people who don't want to run the rat race so they do something slower paced even though they could climb a ladder. Your friend obviously has options and can negotiate a higher wage for herself and chooses not to do so. If the state stepped in and increased her wage would the school be able to operate? Would she be able to click the same amount of hours? Would tuition go up? But I don't see how the math works by just saying, "Pay people more." What do you do as a business owner if you can't financially swing that for your 12 employees? They'd be better off out of work? They are necessarily being exploited by some Mr. Burns caricature? That is not my experience with most business owners at all. It is nice feeling to want to pay teachers of little ones a ton of money because we as moms know how hard it is. The money has to come from somewhere. That doesn't negate knowing how hard certain jobs are and finding them valuable.
  11. Assuming we are talking NT kids, I don't think there are a lack of people who can do that job and if you get a degree to tech pre-school you're probably overqualified. I taught pre-school as a high schooler with minimal training in a licensed facility. It was a vocational program, so I did it for free. One person working in that school, the director and our teacher, made a salary. Right now, there are at least three houses in my neighborhood that have a licensed pre-school program in their daycare, no degree required. I think pre-schoolers in general should mostly be allowed to play independently, be provided with food, and, love and safety.S o in some sense, degreed pre-school teachers are a bit silly to me which is a big reason why I didn't pursue my ECE. But that's neither here nor there because my point isnt about daycare or "pre-school" specifically. I'm not saying the work itself is not taxing or difficult (again, cleaning houses is also taxing and not easy, IMO). But the amount of availability of people able to do those jobs and the specialization required directly affects wages. So does tuition cost. The pre-school can't magically pay people more without passing on those costs somehow. This doesn't reflect on how difficult or easy it is to care for children. But daycare wages can't ever go above the wages of the parents needing daycare, ever. Again, a person's wage is not reflective of their worth or even the difficulty of the work itself. It is an emotional argument to conflate the two and has nothing to do with the economic reality. In my case, I would do a lot of things before caring for other people's kids precisely because I know how hard it is. That doesn't mean the market can bear the price I'd be willing to work for. I can say that a good pre-school teacher is worth their weight in gold (this is why I pay my sitters well), but that doesn't mean it's financially feasible for a business to operate as if that is how much someone can logistically, financially be paid.
  12. Also, just want to add that I don't think someone's job, wage, income, wealth or lack thereof, etc. as single factors are reflective of a person's inherent dignity or worth as a human being. I don't think a low wage says anything about someone as a person. If I did, as a SAHM I'd be the lowest of the low, doing mostly unskilled labor for no pay. When hubby and I were below the poverty line, I didn't feel we deserved anything in particular from anyone else, we have both held undesirable jobs with low pay for varying times. It wasn't a reflection of our worth nor of the morality of the people who employed us at the wage we agreed to work for. Our station in life was not a moral issue except that we both worked and did our best at whatever job we had, same as now.
  13. I'm honestly not sure what's horrifying about this. I've done "pre-school" with all my own kids to one extent or another without any formalized training. I've been in charge of the minds and bodies of 3 three-year-olds so far and no one is paying me a wage or really even thinks it's all that difficult. There are many people who can get licensed to do day care or pre-school in their own homes in order to make money for their families without leaving their homes and with minimal barriers to entry besides having a clean, safe home and some kind of minimal curriculum. Thus, there are usually some options available for people to choose from, making prices competitive. Your friend may love working with pre-schoolers but she's way over-qualified for a job that doesn't require any special training whatsoever in order to do it well. That's not wrong, it is just the reality of economics. Even government subsidies usually don't make things like education cheaper, they just create a new baseline for tuition (whatever rate the government is subsidizing at), which then pushes prices up for the people who don't qualify for said subsidies (see: college tuition & health care). On the other hand, I've never paid a good, reliable baby-sitter less than minimum wage (especially when I lived in NoVA and SoMD) and I know nannies make more than minimum wage usually as well. I'm actually less shocked at a minimum wage pre-school teacher and more shocked that someone with that kind of education would stay in the same job with the same company waiting for the state to increase her pay instead of looking at the many other options for people who are that qualified and want to work with kids, especially in the greater DC area where bougie nannies seem like they would be in high demand. Unless you're totally unable to work anywhere else or have no desire to work anywhere else, why stay and hope your pay is increased by the government forcing your employer's hand? I almost get the argument for people who are stuck because of lack of education or experience (almost, but not really), but for someone like your friend? It doesn't compute.
  14. You're telling me the data says that the price of labor can be increased $5-7/hour for every job in the country without affecting any other economic indicators OR only affecting them in a positive way? Because I've looked at a lot of it and I've never seen that case made by really...anyone? People are seriously saying you can increase a business's labor costs by ~50% and they can just absorb that, no problem? Have you run a business or worked for anyone where that would be the case for their financials? In cities that have done this businesses haven't' closed? Moved out of town? Raised prices? Seen a slowdown in small business start ups? Seen an increase in the COL in their town? Seen a rise in youth unemployment? An increase in childcare costs? Are we saying if we implement this at a federal level then it will disappear the problems? If that is the case, if there are no trade offs and the net effect of raising wages is positive, why not raise the wages higher than $15/hour? Why not $20 or $40? Almost everyone acknowledges there would be some sort of problems arising at the higher amounts, yet deny there is a problem at lower amounts because we'll all just absorb the costs and the unemployment won't be that noticeable, and if you couldn't run a business paying employees that much then you didn't really deserve your business anyway. What that really means is that the problems are so gradual that it's like warming up the pot of water in increments instead of just setting it on high heat to boil immediately. The frog gets boiled either way, though. So we raise the wage and we get more of Amazon and Wal-Mart who might be able to absorb that hit to their business on a large scale...maybe, I don't know for sure. We get less independent retailers and business startups. We get more factory farms and less independent growers. I mean, I'm all for efficiency, but I happen to like my kids' tiny ballet studio that in no way, no how could afford to pay their teenage teachers $15/hour to teach dance class to my little ones. Are those teenagers being exploited by the owner who makes pennies on her tuition dollar because she really happens to like to teach dance to kids in the community? Should she raise tuition so I'm priced out of classes? Maybe so. I see something like that as a net loss that perhaps your "data" wouldn't capture with any kind of accuracy, but maybe her dance studio is problematic for the community and the owner is perpetuating poverty. This actually leads to the obvious prediction that once you raise the wage to $15/hour, that will be the new poverty line and the demand will increase yet again to a new amount because there will still be people working 40 hours/week at that wage who will still not be able to make ends meet. It will become inhumane to only pay people $15/hour because they are still at the bottom of the wage scale. Does anyone think once $15/hour gets passed that the campaigns will stop there? Really and honestly? And the thing is, I've never personally met a business owner who doesn't want to grow his or her business in such a way that s/he would be able to afford to employ more people at higher wages because that means...they are successful! They can widen their applicant pool and be more choosy about who to hire. But to arbitrarily enforce a $5-7 wage increase would be no small thing for most of the people I know trying to make payroll.
  15. Have you ever run a small business? The point is wages don't exist in a vacuum. If you think every business owner is swimming in cash like Scrooge McDuck and just refuses to pay his employees $5 more per hour, then I have to assume you have not. Employee salaries are a carefully budgeted item just like everything else. Comfortable isn't really the issue when many small business owners often forgo taking a salary themselves to get off the ground, get through tough economic times, or to try to grow their business. If I run a bakery and the price of grain goes up I have raise the sales price on my bread. Similarly, if the price of labor goes up, I have to make up that loss somewhere or go out of business. It's telling that you think no business is preferable to a business paying $7.25/hour when that bit of income could make a huge difference for someone for a variety of reasons. It is denying economic reality to say that we can raise wages without causing a ripple effect in other areas of the economy. It does us no good to earn extra money if prices are higher or less people overall have jobs. Your argument is emotionally compelling but doesn't address the actual issues with raising wages independent of other economic factors. When unemployment is high, we don't tell businesses to just hire more people to solve that problem because in general people realize that unemployment isn't a simple matter of businesses being unwilling to hire people. I don't know why people seem to think the answer of low wages is just telling businesses to pay more. Everyone says, "Oh, I will pay a little more so that businesses can pay a living wage," but the problem is you've just also raised prices on those same people you wanted to lift out of poverty by paying them more. It's so obvious the problem can't be solved this way. And yet.
×
×
  • Create New...