Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Grignard wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Grignard wrote:

How exactly are people going to improve their condition if they can't get the resources to even get started? Do you disagree that poverty can be self perpetuating?

Its irrelevant. Thats not the US.

That doesn't answer the questions. What makes that not the U.S.? I don't understand what you're getting at here, isn't this why we vote?

No one is in that state in the US, hence why its irrelevant.

Outside of the US, yep its different and hard. Thats wehy we have 20MM illegal aliens here. Conditions where thats at don't have minimum wage laws though, so again, its not relevant to the discussion. Wait this is way off whatever the OT is as well, so I guess it is!

Frazzled wrote:

Grignard wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Grignard wrote:

How exactly are people going to improve their condition if they can't get the resources to even get started? Do you disagree that poverty can be self perpetuating?

Its irrelevant. Thats not the US.

That doesn't answer the questions. What makes that not the U.S.? I don't understand what you're getting at here, isn't this why we vote?

No one is in that state in the US, hence why its irrelevant.

Outside of the US, yep its different and hard. Thats wehy we have 20MM illegal aliens here. Conditions where thats at don't have minimum wage laws though, so again, its not relevant to the discussion. Wait this is way off whatever the OT is as well, so I guess it is!

What do you mean no one is in that state in the US. I see some pretty deep poverty where I live, not to mention people who are homeless. For that matter, there are plenty of uninsured middle income people who are one accident away from disaster. I think there are plenty of people right here at home who are going to have a heck of a time getting out of the poverty trap.

No in is in that state in the US. You're talking about not being able to survive. There are far too many programs insuring that is not the case.

Please stop misquoting me. This is what I actually posted.

I didn't misquote you. You said that preventative care can prevent the diseases caused by being fat. It can't. That's false. It can reduce them, limit their impact, but if a person is obese it WILL eventually make them sick, and our current science is simply not capable of preventing it.

No. This is a raving madman. If you can't tell the difference then you need mental help.

I was unaware that only one person in the world could be a raving madman at any given time.

Logical fallacy. You lose.

Also, how much do you actually listen to Glenn Beck? Not to montages of him, but to his actual show?

I never watch his TV show, but his radio show is on when I drive home. He's really pretty placid. He certainly has strong, sometimes insane opinions, but his presentation is generally placid, humorous, or boo-hoo emotional. There's really very little anger and yelling, if any at all.

Limbaugh is similar, mostly placid, some humor, the occasional rant. Similar to Olbermann but less vitriolic, more "aw shucks." Hannity is much less capable of humor. He just sorta drums home talking points in stacatto, but also, not really a yeller.

Olbermann is a fuming yeller. He gets REAL angry (or at least portrays it as part of his act). He also has a lot of humor as well in his show, but he seems to feel that portraying anger is a valid means of getting his point across.

Yes. I'm the one.

Right, because even though I have support from journalism.org, the Pew Reasearch Center, and any number of other polling organizations, I'm the one that doesn't get it.

Nobody agrees with you, except for the far left fringe, people like Noam Chomsky.

NUMEROUS non-partisan organizations also DISAGREE with you

What, like MediaMatters? They're "non-partisan?" Are you trolling now?

If conservatives see themselves represented in such villainous events thats on them.

Please, dude. Do you WATCH movies? It's not just the events in the film, there's always a little dig thrown in to make sure the viewer knows who the badguy is. Even in movies you'd think were just plain old movies, no politics at all, they find a way.

I just watched "Edge of Darkness" the other night. Pretty generic "government/corporations are evil" conspiracy movie, but there's also an evil Senator in it. He's a snobbish, effete sort of guy from Massachusetts. What party is he? Why a Republican, of course. A Republican Senator from Massachusetts. Cause, you know, if you're just trying to pick a logical party for "Massachusetts Senator" the one that jumps out is "Republican."

How, exactly, is that "on me?" The movie specifically told me that the villain was a Republican. I didn't have to guess, based on his tie color. It TOLD me he was a Republican.

And that's a MEL GIBSON movie...

Frazzled wrote:No in is in that state in the US. You're talking about not being able to survive. There are far too many programs insuring that is not the case.

Thats assuming people have access to those programs, but that is beside the point.

But earlier you said that minimum wage shouldn't be enough to survive on. Also, this gets back to what you mentioned about comparing apples and oranges. I'm sure that there isn't any comparison between poverty on a worldwide scale and poverty in the United States. It also costs more to get by here than in, say, Chad, so the definitions of poverty are completely different.

I think we should be shooting a little higher than bare survival. Sure, if you are uninsured and you have to have medical care, they'll treat you. You'll just be broke the rest of your life. People who are poor tend to stay poor because of the self perpetuating nature of poverty. If you're poor, you probably came from a poor family, which means you'll probably have other things to deal with growing up than staying in school. You might well have to drop out of high school to care for a child or relative. If you have a mental illness, which are highly overrepresented in the homeless, you probably won't receive effective care for it. This all compounds into a cycle.

Lets set aside the utterly destitute for a moment and talk about the middle income range. College is getting more and more expensive, which means its harder to save up for. So much spending in the past few years was generated from debt, not wealth, so I question if real incomes were ever increasing at all over the years.

How can people improve themselves when they're unemployed and the jobs just aren't there?

How can you work harder when your hours are cut?

Phryxis wrote:

Please stop misquoting me. This is what I actually posted.

I didn't misquote you. You said that preventative care can prevent the diseases caused by being fat. It can't. That's false. It can reduce them, limit their impact, but if a person is obese it WILL eventually make them sick, and our current science is simply not capable of preventing it.

No. This is a raving madman. If you can't tell the difference then you need mental help.

I was unaware that only one person in the world could be a raving madman at any given time.

Logical fallacy. You lose.

Also, how much do you actually listen to Glenn Beck? Not to montages of him, but to his actual show?

I never watch his TV show, but his radio show is on when I drive home. He's really pretty placid. He certainly has strong, sometimes insane opinions, but his presentation is generally placid, humorous, or boo-hoo emotional. There's really very little anger and yelling, if any at all.

Limbaugh is similar, mostly placid, some humor, the occasional rant. Similar to Olbermann but less vitriolic, more "aw shucks." Hannity is much less capable of humor. He just sorta drums home talking points in stacatto, but also, not really a yeller.

Olbermann is a fuming yeller. He gets REAL angry (or at least portrays it as part of his act). He also has a lot of humor as well in his show, but he seems to feel that portraying anger is a valid means of getting his point across.

Yes. I'm the one.

Right, because even though I have support from journalism.org, the Pew Reasearch Center, and any number of other polling organizations, I'm the one that doesn't get it.

Nobody agrees with you, except for the far left fringe, people like Noam Chomsky.

NUMEROUS non-partisan organizations also DISAGREE with you

What, like MediaMatters? They're "non-partisan?" Are you trolling now?

If conservatives see themselves represented in such villainous events thats on them.

Please, dude. Do you WATCH movies? It's not just the events in the film, there's always a little dig thrown in to make sure the viewer knows who the badguy is. Even in movies you'd think were just plain old movies, no politics at all, they find a way.

I just watched "Edge of Darkness" the other night. Pretty generic "government/corporations are evil" conspiracy movie, but there's also an evil Senator in it. He's a snobbish, effete sort of guy from Massachusetts. What party is he? Why a Republican, of course. A Republican Senator from Massachusetts. Cause, you know, if you're just trying to pick a logical party for "Massachusetts Senator" the one that jumps out is "Republican."

How, exactly, is that "on me?" The movie specifically told me that the villain was a Republican. I didn't have to guess, based on his tie color. It TOLD me he was a Republican.

And that's a MEL GIBSON movie...

I think i might have jumped onto too powerful of a crazy grenade.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I think its that they view what seems to them a constant outpouring of films where corporate executives are evil by their own nature as an assault on the idea of free market capitalism and liberal propaganda, and that films portraying US troops doing bad things as unpatriotic and an assault on the troops.

What movies are showing u.s. troops as evil? In the vast majority they are the heros of the films (in transformers for instance they save the day despite a limp wristed democratic leadership attempting to hold them back). Corporations have always been a pretty good target for films though, populism tends to sell tickets and there is no time in history where america wasn't willing to demonize big business. I wouldn't really consider it a leftist slant, corporate business is just a punching bag for the little guy.

It's part of the storm of rhetoric that is overwhelming US politics where one side automatically reacts to what the other one does even without thinking. Whether or not that is the case isn't really registering to them as they live in a country that is slowly moving away from the ideals the beliefs they hold true, leaving them with a feeling of isolation and that the government doesn't care about them. It's probably one of the factors that contributes to how well Fox does in the ratings. Conservatives feel as if all these factors are being stacked against them, and Fox tells them that it's true in a very fantastic manner.

Kind of like a group think daddy doesn't love me complex that's been building over the past 20 years.

I've never really understood the mindset of people that believe American values are under assault. A fairly casual historical look will show that we're doing better than we were during many of the darker times of the last 100 years. I kind of like Fight Clubs take on the issue, this generation has no great war or great depression, it's war is a spiritual one, and its fought in the mind between the haves and the have nots. America always needs some great enemy to rally against, and when we have no great enemy we become it ourselves.

Hence why it's too early to make any statements. They haven't reached a level of organization to have a Tea Part platform. They're at the stage where they're going back and forth with each other about what the problems are and natural selection will gradually cut everything is bad down to an actually platform. The movement has to last for that to happen, and independent voters are very fickle

I don't really think thats true. They've already made a significant impact on local elections and come the lower elections I suspect that they will grab a few seats even without a sensical platform. Being outside the establishment is enough to garner votes in this political environment, even without a platform.

Grignard wrote:How can people improve themselves when they're unemployed and the jobs just aren't there?

Last I heard, libraries allow free access to books for self improvement and learning. Also just because a desired job that allows a person the quality of life that they think they deserve or are conditioned to believe they are entitled to are unavailable, doesn't mean that one can't downgrade to lower wager jobs or multiple jobs.

I find the disregard for entrepenuership and creativity disturbing. I paid for my first year of college by walking to every house asking for any work, be it basic "handyman" (move my furnature, hang this pictures, patch a hole in my drywall, paint this room, etc), lawn mowing, snow shoveling, or any other bits of scrap jobs. Did it suck? Yup. Did I get to enjoy anything fun other than a few hours of TV or games, or a night out with the friends once every other week? Nope. Did I get by? Yup. (Yes I did file all of that earned cash on my taxes)

Grignard wrote:How can you work harder when your hours are cut?

Get another job.

Last I heard, libraries allow free access to books for self improvement and learning. Also just because a desired job that allows a person the quality of life that they think they deserve or are conditioned to believe they are entitled to are unavailable, doesn't mean that one can't downgrade to lower wager jobs or multiple jobs.

Self training programs don't typically give degrees or marks of completion that are required for better paying jobs. They're great for self motivation or preparation for training, but they are a poor substitute for actual schooling.

Grignard wrote:Lets set aside the utterly destitute for a moment and talk about the middle income range. College is getting more and more expensive, which means its harder to save up for. So much spending in the past few years was generated from debt, not wealth, so I question if real incomes were ever increasing at all over the years.

And, as I tried to point out (and you caught onto), that debt is becoming harder and harder to pay off, what with graduates getting pitiful wages.

Edit:
Oh, and Frazzled, there's something I can do about it. I can go to a more prosperous country. But, there's a problem with that for the US as a whole, brain drain. I've already contributed to it in my home state of Michigan because there was absolutely nothing there, and Michigan is having serious problems with educated people leaving. It's good for me, it's good for the country I move to, but bad for the US.

Vene wrote:

Grignard wrote:Lets set aside the utterly destitute for a moment and talk about the middle income range. College is getting more and more expensive, which means its harder to save up for. So much spending in the past few years was generated from debt, not wealth, so I question if real incomes were ever increasing at all over the years.

And, as I tried to point out (and you caught onto), that debt is becoming harder and harder to pay off, what with graduates getting pitiful wages.

Edit:
Oh, and Frazzled, there's something I can do about it. I can go to a more prosperous country. But, there's a problem with that for the US as a whole, brain drain. I've already contributed to it in my home state of Michigan because there was absolutely nothing there, and Michigan is having serious problems with educated people leaving. It's good for me, it's good for the country I move to, but bad for the US.

Average wages in RPB in the U.S. are higher than in most western countries, we're renowned for it. You could go to Oman or switzerland, but you're going to have a learn a new language.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Last I heard, libraries allow free access to books for self improvement and learning. Also just because a desired job that allows a person the quality of life that they think they deserve or are conditioned to believe they are entitled to are unavailable, doesn't mean that one can't downgrade to lower wager jobs or multiple jobs.

Self training programs don't typically give degrees or marks of completion that are required for better paying jobs. They're great for self motivation or preparation for training, but they are a poor substitute for actual schooling.

True, and it leads to CLEPing a class towards a college degree, look it up. Now combine self taught knowledge with starting your own enterprise, where does it say, anywhere , that you have to have a degree to start your own business.

EDIT: grammar/spelling

Red9 wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Last I heard, libraries allow free access to books for self improvement and learning. Also just because a desired job that allows a person the quality of life that they think they deserve or are conditioned to believe they are entitled to are unavailable, doesn't mean that one can't downgrade to lower wager jobs or multiple jobs.

Self training programs don't typically give degrees or marks of completion that are required for better paying jobs. They're great for self motivation or preparation for training, but they are a poor substitute for actual schooling.

True, and it leads to CLEPing a class towards a college degree, look it up. Now combine self taught knowledge with starting your own enterprise, where does it say, anywhere , that you have to have a degree to start your own business.

EDIT: grammar/spelling

A CLEP test, which you have to pay for. As for starting a business, not everyone has talent for it. So if you don't have the people skills or knowledge to start a business then you just deserve to be poor?

Red9 wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Last I heard, libraries allow free access to books for self improvement and learning. Also just because a desired job that allows a person the quality of life that they think they deserve or are conditioned to believe they are entitled to are unavailable, doesn't mean that one can't downgrade to lower wager jobs or multiple jobs.

Self training programs don't typically give degrees or marks of completion that are required for better paying jobs. They're great for self motivation or preparation for training, but they are a poor substitute for actual schooling.

True, and it leads to CLEPing a class towards a college degree, look it up. Now combine self taught knowledge with starting your own enterprise, where does it say, anywhere , that you have to have a degree to start your own business.

EDIT: grammar/spelling

Businesses require startup capital, and thats hard to attain without relevant degrees or certifications. Banks are stingy these days for obvious reasons.

Grignard wrote:A CLEP test, which you have to pay for.

I didn't say it was free, however it is cheaper than for the equivalent of a semester of CLEPs than a semester's worth of tuition.

Grignard wrote:As for starting a business, not everyone has talent for it. So if you don't have the people skills or knowledge to start a business then you just deserve to be poor?

A lack of talent hasn't stopped anyone from being successful. If you don't have the initiative or will to provide for yourself or the foresight to plan ahead, then you deserve what you get.

To preempt the inevitable "What about handicaps, elderly, etc.." Since they are no longer apart of the workforce, they do not apply here.

ShumaGorath wrote: Businesses require startup capital, and that's hard to attain without relevant degrees or certifications. Banks are stingy these days for obvious reasons.

For the example I've listed from my personal experience it cost me $10 for a basic tool set from Salvation Army, and $40 for a push mower, gas, oil and a gas can.

For an official business:

bizlaw wrote:What is the cost to form an LLC?
You will need to pay a fee for filing your Articles of Organization/Certificate of Organization. This fee varies by state, but it is usually between $50 and $200. If you have an attorney do this filing, it can cost you an additional $500 or more. If the attorney prepares the Operating Agreement, that will be another cost, probably $1000 or more.

Pulled from here.

For the example I've listed from my personal experience it cost me $10 for a basic tool set from Salvation Army, and $40 for a push mower, gas, oil and a gas can.

You're not seriously going to say that you put yourself through college by being the town lawnboy... Did you deliver newspapers too?

Grignard wrote:
A CLEP test, which you have to pay for. As for starting a business, not everyone has talent for it. So if you don't have the people skills or knowledge to start a business then you just deserve to be poor?

They don't deserve anything. they don't deserve to be poor. They don't deserve to be rich. There is no judgement of what should be.

ShumaGorath wrote:

For the example I've listed from my personal experience it cost me $10 for a basic tool set from Salvation Army, and $40 for a push mower, gas, oil and a gas can.

You're not seriously going to say that you put yourself through college by being the town lawnboy... Did you deliver newspapers too?

Uhhhh theres a 17 year old in our neighborhood (he does my lawn to) charges 25 bucks a lawn, does 4 lawns a day, mon-friday...

500 bucks a week is not bad considering.

1) he is 17
2) it takes him about 90 minutes per lawn, tops, so lets say 5 hours per day... (some lawns take him no more than 45 minutes)

So he is probably making around 20 dollars per hour, consider gas for all the equipment... so minus 1 dollar per lawn, he is making like 475 dollars a week, and its not taxed...

ShivanAngel wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

For the example I've listed from my personal experience it cost me $10 for a basic tool set from Salvation Army, and $40 for a push mower, gas, oil and a gas can.

You're not seriously going to say that you put yourself through college by being the town lawnboy... Did you deliver newspapers too?

Uhhhh theres a 17 year old in our neighborhood (he does my lawn to) charges 25 bucks a lawn, does 4 lawns a day, mon-friday...

500 bucks a week is not bad considering.

1) he is 17
2) it takes him about 90 minutes per lawn, tops, so lets say 5 hours per day... (some lawns take him no more than 45 minutes)

So he is probably making around 20 dollars per hour, consider gas for all the equipment... so minus 1 dollar per lawn, he is making like 475 dollars a week, and its not taxed...

Damn. I only got 10 when I was working the lawns.

ShumaGorath wrote:

ShivanAngel wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

For the example I've listed from my personal experience it cost me $10 for a basic tool set from Salvation Army, and $40 for a push mower, gas, oil and a gas can.

You're not seriously going to say that you put yourself through college by being the town lawnboy... Did you deliver newspapers too?

Uhhhh theres a 17 year old in our neighborhood (he does my lawn to) charges 25 bucks a lawn, does 4 lawns a day, mon-friday...

500 bucks a week is not bad considering.

1) he is 17
2) it takes him about 90 minutes per lawn, tops, so lets say 5 hours per day... (some lawns take him no more than 45 minutes)

So he is probably making around 20 dollars per hour, consider gas for all the equipment... so minus 1 dollar per lawn, he is making like 475 dollars a week, and its not taxed...

Damn. I only got 10 when I was working the lawns.

yeah my dad only gave me 10 bucks to do the lawn...

ShumaGorath wrote:

For the example I've listed from my personal experience it cost me $10 for a basic tool set from Salvation Army, and $40 for a push mower, gas, oil and a gas can.

You're not seriously going to say that you put yourself through college by being the town lawnboy... Did you deliver newspapers too?

No to the newspapers, but I did minor landscaping, int/ext painting and what I pitched as "Handymaning" (spring cleaning of the garage, heavy moving for frail old people, general maintainance, yard work, etc). It wasn't fabulous pay that allowed for that many luxuries, but it worked for what I needed to do.

Red9 wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

For the example I've listed from my personal experience it cost me $10 for a basic tool set from Salvation Army, and $40 for a push mower, gas, oil and a gas can.

You're not seriously going to say that you put yourself through college by being the town lawnboy... Did you deliver newspapers too?

No to the newspapers, but I did minor landscaping, int/ext painting and what I pitched as "Handymaning" (spring cleaning of the garage, heavy moving for frail old people, general maintainance, yard work, etc). It wasn't fabulous pay that allowed for that many luxuries, but it worked for what I needed to do.

And you should be proud of that, but you can't expect your experiences to apply for everyone else.

I'm willing to bet you didn't have health insurance. What if you'd gotten very sick during that period. All of that money would have been gone, and you'd be in debt too. It still gets back to the fact that people who aren't natural entrepreneurs can contribute to society. In fact, the vast majority of the work being done isn't being done by self employed go getters like yourself, its done by people who work.

The problem is that the argument is built to be unfalsifiable. If you work hard you'll succeed, therefore if you don't succeed you didn't work hard enough. You're defining the second part by the first, so it has to be true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

Grignard wrote:
A CLEP test, which you have to pay for. As for starting a business, not everyone has talent for it. So if you don't have the people skills or knowledge to start a business then you just deserve to be poor?

They don't deserve anything. they don't deserve to be poor. They don't deserve to be rich. There is no judgement of what should be.

Are you morally ok with living in a society of great wealth that just allows people to slip through the cracks?

Morality is irrelevant. Its life. You play the hand you're dealt.

Frazzled wrote:Morality is irrelevant. Its life. You play the hand you're dealt.

Except unlike cards, you can do a lot to change the odds... Either for good or for bad... There are some things you have no control over, but many you do....

You cant say slacking off in school and then dropping out was a hand dealt to you, you looked through the deck and chose a gakky hand in that case.

ShivanAngel wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Morality is irrelevant. Its life. You play the hand you're dealt.

Except unlike cards, you can do a lot to change the odds... Either for good or for bad... There are some things you have no control over, but many you do....

You cant say slacking off in school and then dropping out was a hand dealt to you, you looked through the deck and chose a gakky hand in that case.

Thats is true. As noted, you can only improve or fall from where you start, not where you wished you started or deserved to start. Is it fair (define fair)? yes, no, its still irrelevant.

Frazzled wrote:

ShivanAngel wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Morality is irrelevant. Its life. You play the hand you're dealt.

Except unlike cards, you can do a lot to change the odds... Either for good or for bad... There are some things you have no control over, but many you do....

You cant say slacking off in school and then dropping out was a hand dealt to you, you looked through the deck and chose a gakky hand in that case.

Thats is true. As noted, you can only improve or fall from where you start, not where you wished you started or deserved to start. Is it fair (define fair)? yes, no, its still irrelevant.

Yeah you get dealt one hand, when your born....

Through hard work and what not you can improve that hand.... Or through stupid decisions you can make it worse....

Every now and then you get thrown a joker (some idiot slams into the side of your car)

Grignard wrote:And you should be proud of that, but you can't expect your experiences to apply for everyone else.

It's repeatable, measureable and I'm not the first to do it. So I can expect that it will apply for everyone else provided they put in the same effort as I did or those who have done it before me.

Grignard wrote:I'm willing to bet you didn't have health insurance. What if you'd gotten very sick during that period. All of that money would have been gone, and you'd be in debt too.

What if, what if, what if, I also didn't say that it was risk free either.

Grignard wrote:It still gets back to the fact that people who aren't natural entrepreneurs can contribute to society.

I never said that they couldn't.

Grignard wrote:.... the work being done....[is]....done by people who work.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Grignard wrote:The problem is that the argument is built to be unfalsifiable. If you work hard you'll succeed, therefore if you don't succeed you didn't work hard enough. You're defining the second part by the first, so it has to be true.

Just because you work hard doesn't mean you will succeed. If you put in the effort and go about it in a way that doesn't allow failure then you will succeed. Out of a city of about 25,000 people, I did work for 3 out of the 5 local subdivisions, I didn't get a damn bite from anyone in the first 2 I visited, then I went to the richer side of town and door-to-doored it there. I worked just as hard selling myself to the first 2 subs as I did the last 3. The difference was how I went about it. The richer folks had money to spare, and thus my bread and butter. You get out of it what you put into it, but that doesn't mean you can do it without a plan.

Wealth and job placement aren't inherently moral things. If they were (and people acted on it) parents giving their wealth to their children would be illegal and we would all go to equally capable schools. Conservatives hate communism though.

Don't worry, communists hate conservatives, so it all works out in the end.

ShumaGorath wrote:Wealth and job placement aren't inherently moral things. If they were (and people acted on it) parents giving their wealth to their children would be illegal and we would all go to equally capable schools. Conservatives hate communism though.

I fail to see the relevency of this.

Frazzled wrote:
To the topic. You can't compare salaries across countries (or regions for that matter-technical tip guys!) unless you compare costs of living. It has to be an apples to apples comparison.

That's what purchasing power parity is for.

Frazzled wrote:
but assume thats correct. So what? Again what are you going to do about it? You have two options: 1) Whine and bitch, or 2) improve your condition. No one is going to help you. Baby Jebus loves you but no else cares.

If the issue is being considered from the standpoint of policy, then the question of what any given individual will do with respect to his situation is irrelevant; meaning that your argument from 'you can improve your condition, so the minimum wage is unimportant' holds no water.