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.

Games Workshop makes everybody's lives better!!! :-)

Seasonal work like farming tends to have massive swings though. There will be weeks when you basically need to be there almost 24/7. There will be others where you aren't needed at all.

Of course jobs like that actually pay fairly high wages when you are working. Most farm workers make $15-20 an hour, some jobs though are piece rate so your pay is directly related to how productive you are. You might get paid $3 per bushel you harvest, so if you do 5 bushels an hour you are getting paid $15 an hour, and could theoretically get paid even more. But a particular job may only last for 6 weeks so you gotta keep moving.

 Compel wrote:
That's a little hostile...

Well you did just insult the entire US because of some very minor, and non-representative incidents.

Personally, I feel like, if we're looking for describing a hypothetical place that has a high standard of living, they wouldn't be 'minor' incidents.

And just to try to ease you all, in case you're thinking I'm a "Britain is the best, yay, go Britain" type of person, I came across this fun image on twitter.

 Compel wrote:
Personally, I feel like, if we're looking for describing a hypothetical place that has a high standard of living, they wouldn't be 'minor' incidents.

And just to try to ease you all, in case you're thinking I'm a "Britain is the best, yay, go Britain" type of person, I came across this fun image on twitter.

What's the context of the picture? It looks like a couple of drunks got rowdy and the cops restrained them.

The context is pretty much a perfect slice of life of the UK at New Years Eve.

Nothing particularly traumatic or anything.

 Compel wrote:
The context is pretty much a perfect slice of life of the UK at New Years Eve.

Nothing particularly traumatic or anything.

It's a slice of Manchester on pretty much any Friday/Saturday night.

As for me
Good cheap food - Ukraine
Shelter - free shelter for everyone? I can't remember any. But I'm sure, it should be somewhere without cold winter as in my current city Yakutsk
Clothing - same, somewhere without killing cold weather
Medicine? Germany?
Education, freedom of thought, expressions,and religion, employment?

1) There should be no class stratification
In Russia we don't even have a middle class
2) Religion should not influence the country's politics
As we can see where it is significant, there is always a religious conflict or not the choice of religion
3) The country should not be the enemy of anyone (which is not feasible). Otherwise, all these "freedom of speech" turned into an instrument for the destruction of the country, as it was in the Soviet Union / Russia.
4) People have to enjoy the work. And do not suffer at work, so you enjoy shopping consumption. Because of this, they are looking for ways to get money out of nothing. And they themselves earn those scammers who offer "ways to make money out of nothing" (Forex club).

 Compel wrote:
The context is pretty much a perfect slice of life of the UK at New Years Eve.

Nothing particularly traumatic or anything.

Are we supposed to look at that photo and conclude that the UK's standard of living is "pretty terrible" for most people, similar to the conclusion you came to about the United States based on what you've heard about a couple places in California?

 Hordini wrote:

 Compel wrote:
The context is pretty much a perfect slice of life of the UK at New Years Eve.

Nothing particularly traumatic or anything.

Are we supposed to look at that photo and conclude that the UK's standard of living is "pretty terrible" for most people, similar to the conclusion you came to about the United States based on what you've heard about a couple places in California?

Indeed. For all we know the guy getting restrained could be an investment banker and the lady is his wife scolding him for having one nip too many

 Compel wrote:
I've always thought that some place like Vancouver would be the place to be.

Well maybe somewhere else in Canada that's warmer but dodges the whole French debate complications.

But then, my knowledge of Canada is kinda like, "America, but crossed with the nicer elements of living in the UK.

Not quite. There is a marked cultural difference between your average Canuck and Yank.

Good news, old chap, there's not much in Canada that's warmer, on average, than Vancouver. The cost of living is pretty much the highest in Canada, though. Entry level housing is around a quarter million pounds. There's lots to see and do, especially if you are an outdoorsy type. Plus we are still about fifteen years from our next Stanley Cup Riot.

Gameswise, there is the usual clubs and stores that any metropolitan area has to offer, as well as the annual Spike! Blood Bowl tournament that is an international event for players of the Brutalful Game.

 feeder wrote:

 Compel wrote:
I've always thought that some place like Vancouver would be the place to be.

Well maybe somewhere else in Canada that's warmer but dodges the whole French debate complications.

But then, my knowledge of Canada is kinda like, "America, but crossed with the nicer elements of living in the UK.

Not quite. There is a marked cultural difference between your average Canuck and Yank.

Good news, old chap, there's not much in Canada that's warmer, on average, than Vancouver. The cost of living is pretty much the highest in Canada, though. Entry level housing is around a quarter million pounds. There's lots to see and do, especially if you are an outdoorsy type. Plus we are still about fifteen years from our next Stanley Cup Riot.

Gameswise, there is the usual clubs and stores that any metropolitan area has to offer, as well as the annual Spike! Blood Bowl tournament that is an international event for players of the Brutalful Game.

I always liked New Brunswick myself. Gorgeous country and good people.

 Hordini wrote:

Are we supposed to look at that photo and conclude that the UK's standard of living is "pretty terrible" for most people, similar to the conclusion you came to about the United States based on what you've heard about a couple places in California?

Nope, just demonstrating that the UK has its faults too.

and, I didn't just talk about California, there was that story about Texas as well and so many other people I've spoken to over the course of my life who despite being (and this is my Britishness coming through), 'middle class' seem to be acutely aware of how tenuous their position is, if a big unexpected medical bill comes along. Or, a number of people who were 'middle class' who have had those expenses.

Or student loanswise. Unless you're Scottish (who are probably in the best case for this, but does come with its own problems relating to sustainability etc), paying back your student loans end up basically being a 'tax' on you. Which is kind of an issue, and yeah, sure can be something on peoples minds. Now, I may very well be wrong in this, but I've never heard of a British student loan being a major factor in influencing the course of someones life.
Again, this contrasts with the experiences I know of in America where the debt from student loans really does end up being a driving factor in peoples decision making.

Of course, the student loans are always being tinkered with and you never know quite how long these various advantages / disadvantages will last.


As for the other posters, I suppose that comes to the difficulty of it all, the higher the standard of living of a place, the more it ends up costing to live there. Or, if it doesn't cost much, the cost will end up rising to meet it, or, the standard of living will end up going down.

It does seem I have strongly offended a lot of people with the 'pretty terrible' comment, I clearly did not choose my words well and for that, I apologise.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Compel wrote:
The context is pretty much a perfect slice of life of the UK at New Years Eve.

Nothing particularly traumatic or anything.

Are we supposed to look at that photo and conclude that the UK's standard of living is "pretty terrible" for most people, similar to the conclusion you came to about the United States based on what you've heard about a couple places in California?

Indeed. For all we know the guy getting restrained could be an investment banker and the lady is his wife scolding him for having one nip too many

wait, you're saying he kills people with a golden gun ?

To be honest, it could very well be. Acting like a fool on a night out drinking is something all stratas of the UK indulge in

 Compel wrote:
To be honest, it could very well be. Acting like a fool on a night out drinking is something all stratas of the UK indulge in

Worldwide, a common sight.

Relapse wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Personally, I feel like, if we're looking for describing a hypothetical place that has a high standard of living, they wouldn't be 'minor' incidents.

And just to try to ease you all, in case you're thinking I'm a "Britain is the best, yay, go Britain" type of person, I came across this fun image on twitter.

What's the context of the picture? It looks like a couple of drunks got rowdy and the cops restrained them.

Wait wait wait.
The Chub Scout Master seems to trying to save the can of beer......or is that a can of Fish n Chips.....

 Jihadin wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Personally, I feel like, if we're looking for describing a hypothetical place that has a high standard of living, they wouldn't be 'minor' incidents.

And just to try to ease you all, in case you're thinking I'm a "Britain is the best, yay, go Britain" type of person, I came across this fun image on twitter.

What's the context of the picture? It looks like a couple of drunks got rowdy and the cops restrained them.

Wait wait wait.
The Chub Scout Master seems to trying to save the can of beer......or is that a can of Fish n Chips.....

The guy in the blue is like, "Don't mind me, I'll just have another nip or two while you gents see to my friend's needs".

I think reducing the gap between rich and poor is the most important thing, and that is probably best achieved by reducing corruption. I think this is summed up best by one of my favourite quotes:

"With deregulation, privatisation, free trade, what we're seeing is yet another enclosure and, if you like, private taking of the commons. One of the things I find very interesting in our current debates is this concept of who creates wealth. That wealth is only created when it's owned privately. What would you call clean water, fresh air, a safe environment? Are they not a form of wealth? And why does it only become wealth when some entity puts a fence around it and declares it private property? Well, you know, that's not wealth creation. That's wealth usurpation." -- Elaine Bernard

So inhibiting the ability of powerful entities to usurp "freedoms" (which includes wealth) will, IMO, lead to a better standard of living. The socio-economic benefits would reverberate through every facet of society, from crime to education, from wages to innovation. It all begins with preventing private interests from purchasing political power.

The gap between Rich and Poor doesn't really mean anything, unless you believe in the outdated Mercantilism view that "wealth" is a finite thing and there is only so much to go around. In reality, what should be focused on is increasing production and maximizing the number of jobs available. It doesn't matter how much the Rich are making or have, thats just a Red Herring the left likes to trot out because it generates outrage, but the issues don't get fixed so they can continue milking the outrage machine.

I think we should get rid of money and go to the barter system

In an environment where productivity is rising faster than demand can keep up due to advancements in technology and cheap out-sourced labor, "job creation" as the holy grail for social prosperity is quickly ceasing to be viable. Something like 50% of jobs are projected to be automated within the next half-century. The "muh boostraps" ideology needs to come to terms with that reality.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
In an environment where productivity is rising faster than demand can keep up due to advancements in technology and cheap out-sourced labor, "job creation" as the holy grail for social prosperity is quickly ceasing to be viable. Something like 50% of jobs are projected to be automated within the next half-century. The "muh boostraps" ideology needs to come to terms with that reality.

The push to make minimum wage absurdly high, like the recent $15 hikes that passed in several areas, is what is pushing automation. The recent labor demands for inflated wages is why automation is becoming more attractive and why these jobs will cease to exist. These measures which are sold to the public as helping workers are actually going to directly harm them.

Automation is inevitable, but if it happens too quickly due to artificially inflating the cost of labor we are going to have tons of unemployed workers.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
In an environment where productivity is rising faster than demand can keep up due to advancements in technology and cheap out-sourced labor, "job creation" as the holy grail for social prosperity is quickly ceasing to be viable. Something like 50% of jobs are projected to be automated within the next half-century. The "muh boostraps" ideology needs to come to terms with that reality.

I'd argue the "muh bootstraps" ideology, is so patently out of touch with reality already, that'll never happen. I bet you in 50 or so years when over half the American workforce is out of work (as we know it anyway) for no reason other than human labor being technologically obsolete, we'll still have that corner of politics that does nothing but complain about how we need more jobs to save the economy and that everyone who is poor and jobless just didn't work hard enough.

Good times. They be acoming

 Grey Templar wrote:

The push to make minimum wage absurdly high, like the recent $15 hikes that passed in several areas, is what is pushing automation.

bs. Greed is what is pushing automation. Even if wages had been static for the past 20 years, companies would still be pushing to automate jobs because robots are cheaper and more efficient workers in the long run. Companies only care about their bottom-line, and automation will do a lot more to help that then even the most diligent person.

And if minimum wage actually followed the rate of inflation it would be around $20 an hour, so spare me the "absurdly high" song and dance.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Automation is inevitable, but if it happens too quickly due to artificially inflating the cost of labor we are going to have tons of unemployed workers.

To quote someone, "Did the horse get put out of work because it asked for too much, didn't work hard enough, or simply because the internal combustion engine rendered the horse's abilities so meaningless that nothing that horse could ever do would matter?"

"The machines will come slower if we treat other people like crap and leave them in poverty" is a bad argument, and a rather self serving one for people who are so rich now they'll own the automation when that time comes

Never mind of course that automation replacing human labor essentially kills capitalism as we know it, and then we're all scrambling to figure out what we're going to do with all these people who exist but have no economic value. EDIT: And I'd add, this is an issue that gets worse and worse as time goes on. Theoretically, there is no job a sophisticated enough machine can't do, so we could reach the point eventually where no human labor is needed at all, including skilled labor.

Poverty with a job is better than poverty with no job because a robot replaced you is it not?

 Grey Templar wrote:
Poverty with a job is better than poverty with no job because a robot replaced you is it not?

You can repeat the same bad argument however you want, but it'll still be bad

 LordofHats wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Poverty with a job is better than poverty with no job because a robot replaced you is it not?

You can repeat the same bad argument however you want, but it'll still be bad

So you are saying that having most of workforce be unemployed is better than them at least having some source of income? How does that even make sense to you?

 Grey Templar wrote:
So you are saying that having most of workforce be unemployed is better than them at least having some source of income?

I'm saying that trying to pretend like we can stop what's coming (or at this point even slow it down), is foolish. It only makes the future problem worse (unemployable poor), while worsening a current problem (working poor). Further, your argument does nothing to resolve the future problem, which we will then be tackling alongside the current problem cause we just going to keep lowering wages to stave off the advance of automation until no one but owners (already a preposterously small % of the population) are being paid anything. It simply throws up the hollow, and I'd argue completely unsupported by evidence, notion that we can delay it by ironically, doing what we're already doing. Wages have not kept pace with inflation, the middle class is shrinking (mostly into the under class), and the wealth gap that you say doesn't matter is going going to matter a hell of a lot when it's the gap between 'owns everything' and 'owns nothing.' Not that that wealth will mean much at that point, because who the hell is going to be the consumer of goods and services in this new economic landscape?

We're at the point where we realize Karl Marx was right about something; Capitalism is doomed to kill itself. I.E. Your argument not only doesn't address the issue, it's based in a value system that the problem tears asunder.

How does that even make sense to you?

Because I actually thought it through instead of steadfastly sticking to partisan idealogues

All I am saying is we shouldn't be taking unnecessary actions which only hasten the arrival of this approaching problem. Hiking minimum wage does nothing to help the working poor(as the costs of what they buy go up), directly harms everyone who doesn't get a wage increase but still have to pay the increased prices it causes, and it makes automation arrive that much sooner.

The more time we have between now and when that happens is time we can find a solution to this problem. Hastening its arrival is just asking for total economic collapse.