NYT Expose On Chinese Working Conditions In Apple Factories - Microeconomic Help Please

[onlyrp]

You tell me, how are we better off than 1912?

I never said we're worse off than 1912. I said we are not significantly better than 1912. In 1912 a full days worth got you just enough of the basics for you to afford to make it back to work the next day.

It doesn't matter how much you cut back, you can't go back to 1912. You still need a home, car, food, and clothes nomatter what.

"just enough to get back" is not the same as "I get to save 20% of my salary".
And why 80%/20%? Why not 99/1?
Like I said, I know people who lived and still live on less than $1500 a month. That is, less than $20,000 a year.
So I don't know what you're talking about when you say you need $40,000 a year just for basics.
Unless you have a major medical problem or a great amount of debt, which is not common or average anyway, I'd love to see what you're talking about.

In both cases, NOT WORKING IS ALWAYS WORSE, so that's your motivation. The only exception may be, that today's world we reward people free food and possibly free housing if they don't work, but feel free to do that. You have yet to offer me ONE EXAMPLE OF ONE COMMUNIST COUNTRY which provides the $40,000 a year "basic living" you allegedly spent. Of course, even you could concede that if you didn't go to school or didn't spend the luxuries on cable, internet, you might have you expense down by another $5,000. So, find me ONE COMMUNIST COUNTRY which provides the $30,000 a year quality of life without having to work.

[tttppp]

"just enough to get back" is not the same as "I get to save 20% of my salary".
And why 80%/20%? Why not 99/1?
Like I said, I know people who lived and still live on less than $1500 a month. That is, less than $20,000 a year.
So I don't know what you're talking about when you say you need $40,000 a year just for basics.
Unless you have a major medical problem or a great amount of debt, which is not common or average anyway, I'd love to see what you're talking about.

In both cases, NOT WORKING IS ALWAYS WORSE, so that's your motivation. The only exception may be, that today's world we reward people free food and possibly free housing if they don't work, but feel free to do that. You have yet to offer me ONE EXAMPLE OF ONE COMMUNIST COUNTRY which provides the $40,000 a year "basic living" you allegedly spent. Of course, even you could concede that if you didn't go to school or didn't spend the luxuries on cable, internet, you might have you expense down by another $5,000. So, find me ONE COMMUNIST COUNTRY which provides the $30,000 a year quality of life without having to work.

Of the people I know making $20,000, almost all of them live with their parents. You can't afford a place in Connecticut on $20,000. I used to make $20,000-$30,000 when I went to college, lived with my parents, and I had no car payments. Still that money didn't last me long. The only person I know who makes that little money and has my own place is my bother who lives in L.A. And he needs help periodically from my parents to pay his bills.

[onlyrp]

Of the people I know making $20,000, almost all of them live with their parents. You can't afford a place in Connecticut on $20,000. I used to make $20,000-$30,000 when I went to college, lived with my parents, and I had no car payments. Still that money didn't last me long. The only person I know who makes that little money and has my own place is my bother who lives in L.A. And he needs help periodically from my parents to pay his bills.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I appreciate it.
Car payment is for people who chose to buy a $20,000 car.
I chose to buy a car less than $5,000. And it lasted me 5 years. I did this twice.
So over a period of 10 years, I spend $10,000 on cars. And need to buy another one.
But a person who chose to buy a $20,000 car, would've paid $25,000 or more in 6 years. I hope they keep the same car for 20 years. Again, it's all about the choices you make. Some even chose to lease cars if they want to switch one every 3 years.
Can you think of anybody who doesn't live with parents and lives on $20,000?
Are they debt free, independently wealthy?

When you say your brother "has his own place" you mean just not living with parents , but he probably still shares a room, right?

Now, back to the communists. Which communist country gives every child a free place to live once they hit 18 years old, and food?

[tttppp]

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I appreciate it.
Car payment is for people who chose to buy a $20,000 car.
I chose to buy a car less than $5,000. And it lasted me 5 years. I did this twice.
So over a period of 10 years, I spend $10,000 on cars. And need to buy another one.
But a person who chose to buy a $20,000 car, would've paid $25,000 or more in 6 years. I hope they keep the same car for 20 years. Again, it's all about the choices you make. Some even chose to lease cars if they want to switch one every 3 years.
Can you think of anybody who doesn't live with parents and lives on $20,000?
Are they debt free, independently wealthy?

When you say your brother "has his own place" you mean just not living with parents , but he probably still shares a room, right?

Now, back to the communists. Which communist country gives every child a free place to live once they hit 18 years old, and food?

My brother has his own studio. He works a lot out of home too, so he can't have a bad roommate if he had one. He makes roughly $20,000 a year. But needs help to pay the bills. Get this, he still pays over $3,000 in taxes. Why is the government taking money from someone who makes only $20,000 year and works long hours?

You made good deals on cars but that is difficult to do. Many people who buy cheap used cars end up having it break down on them.

My brother is the only one I can think of that lives on his own on $20,000. The only reason he does is because he is in the entertainment industry and has to be in L.A. He has a lot of student loan debt I believe.

[libertybrewcity]

The country has an insane amount of manufacturing. There are more than a billion people. They have something like 20 cities with more than 10 million people. I wonder why they don't leave and find something else? Are they actually slaves, or are they just desperate?

[onlyrp]

My brother has his own studio. He works a lot out of home too, so he can't have a bad roommate if he had one. He makes roughly $20,000 a year. But needs help to pay the bills. Get this, he still pays over $3,000 in taxes. Why is the government taking money from someone who makes only $20,000 year and works long hours?

You made good deals on cars but that is difficult to do. Many people who buy cheap used cars end up having it break down on them.

My brother is the only one I can think of that lives on his own on $20,000. The only reason he does is because he is in the entertainment industry and has to be in L.A. He has a lot of student loan debt I believe.

The government isn't purposely singling out his income, everybody is taxed 10% minimum, and between 10-25% overall.
I had to repair my cars, which was inconvenient, but not fatal or dangerous. If you don't want a used car, just try to keep your car as long as you can, which still means keep it until it breaks down, typically that's 10 years minimum.

I can see why Connecticut's living is expensive, the whole state's population density is comparable to King County, WA (700 vs 900 per sq mi)
I beleive you when you say he has student loan debt, that's just another choice he made. The same is true for people who buy houses, when you do something that costs a lot of money with expectation of making money, you're taking risk, and that goes beyond "basics" and "necessities".

If he doesn't like what he does, how much he's paid, he can try to find a better occupation, that's capitalism, he's paid what he's worth on the market. He can ask for more if he's less replaceable, but they better not know of his weaknesses and vulnerabilities. At his income, he might even qualify for low-income houses (this is not section 8), they're small one room apartments with a bathroom for $500-600 a month. They're located in downtown LA (they call them lofts).

You do make a good point, that he's basically just getting by and still not making enough to pay his expenses, if he gets money from parents to pay bills, why not just move back home? If your parents are sending money to him for bills anyway, might as well pay for his food and let him live at home. I know why this isnt considered, because he doesn't want it, your parents don't want it, and he thinks he can make more later, and he's probably right. These are choices you make.

[onlyrp]

The country has an insane amount of manufacturing. There are more than a billion people. They have something like 20 cities with more than 10 million people. I wonder why they don't leave and find something else? Are they actually slaves, or are they just desperate?

they can be slaves BECAUSE they were desperate, and this is why they have a 1 child policy (I am guessing), imagine how much worse the situation would be if they didn't!

[tttppp]

The government isn't purposely singling out his income, everybody is taxed 10% minimum, and between 10-25% overall.
I had to repair my cars, which was inconvenient, but not fatal or dangerous. If you don't want a used car, just try to keep your car as long as you can, which still means keep it until it breaks down, typically that's 10 years minimum.

I can see why Connecticut's living is expensive, the whole state's population density is comparable to King County, WA (700 vs 900 per sq mi)
I beleive you when you say he has student loan debt, that's just another choice he made. The same is true for people who buy houses, when you do something that costs a lot of money with expectation of making money, you're taking risk, and that goes beyond "basics" and "necessities".

If he doesn't like what he does, how much he's paid, he can try to find a better occupation, that's capitalism, he's paid what he's worth on the market. He can ask for more if he's less replaceable, but they better not know of his weaknesses and vulnerabilities. At his income, he might even qualify for low-income houses (this is not section 8), they're small one room apartments with a bathroom for $500-600 a month. They're located in downtown LA (they call them lofts).

You do make a good point, that he's basically just getting by and still not making enough to pay his expenses, if he gets money from parents to pay bills, why not just move back home? If your parents are sending money to him for bills anyway, might as well pay for his food and let him live at home. I know why this isnt considered, because he doesn't want it, your parents don't want it, and he thinks he can make more later, and he's probably right. These are choices you make.

The entertainment industry is in L.A. If he moves back home he has to give up his career and probably go back to college...and chose a less enjoyable career.

His financial situation is pretty much standard for anyone just starting in the entertainment industry. They pay the stars big bucks, and everyone else gets peanuts. I don't think you can doubt anyone in his situation is basically a slave.

A couple years ago when he first started, he understood the financial situation because he just started. But now he is experienced, and can do his job better than almost anyone, including his boss. So now its just a matter of getting an opportunity of getting a movie where he is in charge. Anyone who's started out in an industry knows its tough to get work when you don't have big time experience listed on your resume. People always want to hire people who have done it before. Most people don't like to take chances.

I'm sorry but nobody making under $30,000 should be paying any taxes. I don't understand why the government needs money from poor people so bad.

[cubical]

So just because something was OK 200 years ago it's OK now?
Show your disdain by not giving Apple any cash , if you do want apple products just buy second hand - theres a flood of second hand sales every 6 months when the sheep run off to buy the latest thingamabob.

What are you talking about? Unless someone is putting a gun to their head, they don't have to be working for Apple. Ask yourself, "why do they?".

[onlyrp]

The entertainment industry is in L.A. If he moves back home he has to give up his career and probably go back to college...and chose a less enjoyable career.

His financial situation is pretty much standard for anyone just starting in the entertainment industry. They pay the stars big bucks, and everyone else gets peanuts. I don't think you can doubt anyone in his situation is basically a slave.

A couple years ago when he first started, he understood the financial situation because he just started. But now he is experienced, and can do his job better than almost anyone, including his boss. So now its just a matter of getting an opportunity of getting a movie where he is in charge. Anyone who's started out in an industry knows its tough to get work when you don't have big time experience listed on your resume. People always want to hire people who have done it before. Most people don't like to take chances.

I'm sorry but nobody making under $30,000 should be paying any taxes. I don't understand why the government needs money from poor people so bad.

If he's a slave, he's one by choice, because like you said, he has options, he just enjoys what he's doing.
I meant he can move back home and stop working, for which he'll only require a room and food, no transportation, your parents would pay less and he'd spend less.
You are right, that his industry is high risk and everybody starts low, he nonetheless chose it, so that's the price you pay for choosing one job over the other.

hey, did you find that communist country that'll give him or you a roof and food yet?