The fourth pizza delivery guy in a row.....

[Patranus]

I know a few high school teachers here who work night jobs at the supermarkets or convenience stores. In my area, if you want a middle class style home, chances are both you and your spouses have to find 2nd or 3rd jobs.

I am going to stop you right there.

The people who bitch and moan about the middle class not being able to buy a home are the same people WHO FUCKING CAUSE HOUSING TO BE UNAFFORDABLE - IE Progressives.


Take the Bay Area for example, there is this thing called One Bay Area which is essentially a regionally planning commission (IE CA SB375 IE UN Agenda 21) which essentially forces communities to build 'stack and pack' housing along major transportation corders. It is/is going to be almost impossible to build a single family home. The progressives don't want people in single family homes because 'stack and pack' promotes social and environmental justice.

Housing is very affordable in the Bay Area HOWEVER single family housing is not.

On top of that if you want to build a house say out in Danville, San Ramon, Alamo, Livermore, or anywhere else with available land. you are looking at least 10% of your construction costs being eaten by 'fees' and 'permits' before you can even break ground. Project in San Ramon had a $40,000 sewer hookup fee and a $25,000 'school' fee plus a ton of other fees. That was before ground was even broken on the project. Builders are not going to construct housing on low margins when there are high up front fees, especially with high land cost thus new construction is generally expensive.

Then you have the local planning commissions. Want to build a 250 house subdivision? Ok, well you have to build (IE eat the cost) of 50 units of section 8 housing. So on top of paying for a home, someone who buys new construction is paying for construction of section 8 housing in the price of the home THEY are paying for, not some free loader.

There are just 3 things that contribute to high housing prices in many areas like the Bay Area. I can go on if you want.

There are really 2 issues, the sense of entitlement to live where you want. Using the Bay Area as an example again there are plenty of affordable communities like Richmond where lower income people can afford to purchase housing.

The second issue is you are confusing housing with a house. They are no one in the same and like I said, the government is pushing 'stack and pack' so that is what you are going to get and 'stack and pack' is very affordable.

 

[Engineer]

Hold up. So a corporation is generating 'ridiculous' profits yet somehow the executives who generate said profits are overpaid?

Sounds like they are being underpaid if profits are the measuring stick for compensation.

By the reasoning, the employees who also are part of the profit generation are underpaid, no?

(I suspect that I know the answer but will wait and see....)

 

[Patranus]

By the reasoning, the employees who also are part of the profit generation are underpaid, no?

(I suspect that I know the answer but will wait and see....)

Employees are one worth what their skills demand on an open market. That is what an employee is, an asset - man hours - to be bought and sold on the open market.

One the other side a CEO has one job, generate revenue for a companies shareholders. They are also an asset compensated by a board of directors elected by the owners - shareholders - to manage a company.

Employees are more than welcome to find other employment at a job where they feel they are fairly compensated or start their own company.

 

[Engineer]

Employees are one worth what their skills demand on an open market. That is what an employee is, an asset - man hours - to be bought and sold on the open market.

One the other side a CEO has one job, generate revenue for a companies shareholders. They are also an asset compensated by a board of directors elected by the owners - shareholders - to manage a company.

Employees are more than welcome to find other employment at a job where they feel they are fairly compensated or start their own company.

I suspected right the first time....

 

[jpiniero]

There are really 2 issues, the sense of entitlement to live where you want. Using the Bay Area as an example again there are plenty of affordable communities like Richmond where lower income people can afford to purchase housing.

Could you actually live in Richmond and commute to SF? I'm guessing the answer is no.

 

[Red Squirrel]

So what's a fake job then? Something you deem to be not up to your level?

A job that pays enough to survive without making huge compromises like giving up the house. There is nothing wrong with the job itself, but nobody thinks to themselves "I want to be a pizza delivery guy!". No, it's "I need a job badly, there's a job to deliver pizzas, I'll go apply, till I can find a better paying job". I do not look down upon people who do those types of jobs, and it's not what I meant, in fact I honor them as they could easily just go on welfare, make more money and suck on the government's tit using our tax dollars. Instead they choose to at least try. Kudos to those people.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Hold up. So a corporation is generating 'ridiculous' profits yet somehow the executives who generate said profits are overpaid?

Sounds like they are being underpaid if profits are the measuring stick for compensation.

The productivity workers are the ones that should actually be getting raises and be getting credit. Sure the execs make decisions that may impact the company's ability to make money and they have a big responsibility, so they should be making close to 100k or even 100k, but not millions. The workers are the ones actually doing the leg work. The execs can go on vacation for a month, but productivity will continue. The entire productivity team can't go on vacation all at the same time, because well, production would stop.

Say I wanted to start a manufacturing company, I don't know much about machining and other skills that would be required, but I can hire someone. That person (well probably more than one) will build the whole factory according to my plan, and then I'll hire people to run those machines. I may be doing lot of logistic work, but without the people I hired, nothing would get done. Since it's my company, sure I'll take lot of the profits, but the workers deserve a really good amount of those profits too.

If I ran a company, there would be much more profit sharing among employees. If we had a huge increase in profit this year, then everyone gets a huge lump sum bonus. If the general trend is that our profits are keeping up, then perhaps a raise instead of a bonus. The employees would be treated more like part of the team, and the reason why the profits are better, not just a cost that we have to figure out how to decrease.

 

[Patranus]

Could you actually live in Richmond and commute to SF? I'm guessing the answer is no.

Richmond? (El Cerrito/San Pablo/Albany/El Sobrante/Pinole/ect.)

BART. According to their website it takes ~30 minutes.

So yes.

 

[alkemyst]

Richmond? (El Cerrito/San Pablo/Albany/El Sobrante/Pinole/ect.)

BART. According to their website it takes ~30 minutes.

So yes.

They say Palm Beach to Miami is 1 hour. Good luck with that on normal commutes.

 

[Patranus]

Say I wanted to start a manufacturing company, I don't know much about machining and other skills that would be required, but I can hire someone. That person (well probably more than one) will build the whole factory according to my plan, and then I'll hire people to run those machines. I may be doing lot of logistic work, but without the people I hired, nothing would get done. Since it's my company, sure I'll take lot of the profits, but the workers deserve a really good amount of those profits too.

Usually when you start a company the key first employees who are doing work for below industry compensation demand equity thus eliminating the problem.

 

[brianmanahan]

If I ran a company, there would be much more profit sharing among employees. If we had a huge increase in profit this year, then everyone gets a huge lump sum bonus. If the general trend is that our profits are keeping up, then perhaps a raise instead of a bonus. The employees would be treated more like part of the team, and the reason why the profits are better, not just a cost that we have to figure out how to decrease.

the company i work for is sort of like that - it was set up over 100 years ago as "owned by employees", which is pretty rare. so even though there over 1000 people working there, the exec only makes 500-600$k or so, and profit is shared every year up to %30 of your pay. so yeah, sometimes the bonus checks can be huge.

 

[Chaotic42]

Employees are more than welcome to find other employment at a job where they feel they are fairly compensated or start their own company.

Unfortunately politics and corruption stifle a lot of that. That's why those two need to be policed so much more than they are now.

 

[Patranus]

Unfortunately politics and corruption stifle a lot of that. That's why those two need to be policed so much more than they are now.

Please tell me how politics and/or corruption stifles business creation.

Per the OP, absolutely nothing would stop the pizza delivery guys from quitting and starting their own pizza delivery company.

 

[T9D]

I am going to stop you right there.

The people who bitch and moan about the middle class not being able to buy a home are the same people WHO FUCKING CAUSE HOUSING TO BE UNAFFORDABLE - IE Progressives.


Take the Bay Area for example, there is this thing called One Bay Area which is essentially a regionally planning commission (IE CA SB375 IE UN Agenda 21) which essentially forces communities to build 'stack and pack' housing along major transportation corders. It is/is going to be almost impossible to build a single family home. The progressives don't want people in single family homes because 'stack and pack' promotes social and environmental justice.

Housing is very affordable in the Bay Area HOWEVER single family housing is not.

On top of that if you want to build a house say out in Danville, San Ramon, Alamo, Livermore, or anywhere else with available land. you are looking at least 10% of your construction costs being eaten by 'fees' and 'permits' before you can even break ground. Project in San Ramon had a $40,000 sewer hookup fee and a $25,000 'school' fee plus a ton of other fees. That was before ground was even broken on the project. Builders are not going to construct housing on low margins when there are high up front fees, especially with high land cost thus new construction is generally expensive.

Then you have the local planning commissions. Want to build a 250 house subdivision? Ok, well you have to build (IE eat the cost) of 50 units of section 8 housing. So on top of paying for a home, someone who buys new construction is paying for construction of section 8 housing in the price of the home THEY are paying for, not some free loader.

There are just 3 things that contribute to high housing prices in many areas like the Bay Area. I can go on if you want.

There are really 2 issues, the sense of entitlement to live where you want. Using the Bay Area as an example again there are plenty of affordable communities like Richmond where lower income people can afford to purchase housing.

The second issue is you are confusing housing with a house. They are no one in the same and like I said, the government is pushing 'stack and pack' so that is what you are going to get and 'stack and pack' is very affordable.

While you are right in those areas you are leaving out sooooo many other reasons. California is home to an incredible amount of businesses. You have the entire Hollywood and movie industry there. Which brings in an insane amount of money and rich people. That spreads throughout the State.

Then you have Silicone valley. With an insane amount of the worlds high tech industry there. Apple and Google are both there too.

There is also still oil coming out of California.

You have San Francisco which is a massive tourist attraction. Huge amount of money.

Then you got California collecting all those taxes from all that. And spending like crazy. Paying higher wages so people can actually live there. Even though a lot of people have to commute an hour or more each way just to live.

California also has a tax deal where the property taxes barely ever go up. So poor people stay and NEVER leave a house until they die. They have no money and pay almost no property tax. So you have all these people staying put who would never be able to afford to move in normally. But they are tying up all the housing and the lack of available houses drives the price way to high. When they do die that run down crappy house is worth a million dollars and the kids just roll it over into their family and home. Thereby keeping prices way to high unless you inherit or got in decades and decades ago and can roll your equity into another home in California.

And then yeah add red tape and fees to everything. It all adds up to extremely expensive land and housing for the majority of people.

 

[VirtualLarry]

The problem, in my opinion, is RIDICULOUS profits by the large corporations and way overpaid top executives and CEO's. Spread that pay around the bottom a little bit and you don't have to run skeleton crews to make 10% year over year profits. More jobs for more people. And don't tell me you people haven't noticed this. A LOT of jobs are expecting a lot more out of people than before, while cutting staff. It's most evident in retail environments. But I'm sure its true of many professions. People should be able to make a fair wage working 40 hours a week. Expecting employees (low end managers especially) to work 60+ hours a week while paying them shit compared to what they should be getting paid is a huge problem.


I could go on and on, but until we start putting PEOPLE ahead of CORPORATIONS we will continue to have more and more of a problem. There is a reason why the concentration of wealth in this country has drastically changed in the last 25 years. It's not a good thing either.

I really don't understand why more of us don't have a problem with this.

I agree 100%. The era of the global megacorp, and slave-labor industries, is destroying the middle-class.

Jaron Lanier wrote a piece on that.

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/12/jaron_lanier_the_internet_destroyed_the_middle_class/

It's pretty depressing.

 

[VirtualLarry]

but arguing is against the "anti-violence" policy so out the door I went

WTH?
Is that a standard policy? I can understand arguing with your boss being considered insubordination, and get termed by that, but a co-worker?

 

[BUTCH1]

WTH?
Is that a standard policy? I can understand arguing with your boss being considered insubordination, and get termed by that, but a co-worker?

Yup, FL unemployment laws have been changed, the old standard for getting fired was "gross misconduct", now it's "knowingly violated any company policy". This has led to Co's writing up all kinds of "policies" so they can fire someone without them collecting. Didn't work for them as I hired a lawyer and I wound up getting my benefits. FL leads the US in the amount of people unemployed not getting benefits, leads the US in first-time claim denials. One can only file a claim online, no phone or walk-in anywhere, then you have to take a 3 part "skills assessment" test which is flash-driven and hangs up easily. It's all clearly aimed at denying benefits people deserve thanks to our tea-bagger Gov. Rick Scott.

 

[Svnla]

I agree that it is extremely important to have that. But guess what, a lot of people don't have that. The single mom raising two kids making $9 an hour will probably NEVER have that.


And even if you do. One medical bill can wipe that all out in an instant. A few months back my wife had to go to the hospital for something that turned out to be fairly minor. It cost us $3000. That's with insurance. Without insurance the bill would have been about $12,000.

There goes that 6 months savings. Now what?

I don't want to sound like a prick or pretentious butthole but the single mom with $9/hr salary should not have any kid, let alone 2 of them. When I was a poor college student, I did not go around knock off chicks left and right even I had plenty of opportunities. Why? Because I know if I had kid(s), my plan for a better future will be ruined, financially.

While I agree medical bills are devasted for anyone budget but not all of finance troubles are due to them.

People are spending way beyond their means with new stuffs, new cars, new phones, new TVs, new everything as long as they can take care the monthly payments, consequences be damn. Budget? What the hell is that? That's for losers. Let live for today and have fun, pay the minimum for now = their mantra.

In your case with $3K is gone, cut back on other areas and restock the emergency fund asap. That's what I would do. No, it will not be fun or easy but being broke is even worse.

 

[Red Squirrel]

the company i work for is sort of like that - it was set up over 100 years ago as "owned by employees", which is pretty rare. so even though there over 1000 people working there, the exec only makes 500-600$k or so, and profit is shared every year up to %30 of your pay. so yeah, sometimes the bonus checks can be huge.

That's pretty cool, always nice to know there are some companies that do care about their employees.

 

[BUTCH1]

the company i work for is sort of like that - it was set up over 100 years ago as "owned by employees", which is pretty rare. so even though there over 1000 people working there, the exec only makes 500-600$k or so, and profit is shared every year up to %30 of your pay. so yeah, sometimes the bonus checks can be huge.

Consider yourself lucky. very few Co's these days have this kind of insight, that type of setup is what drives people, I'd be willing to bet the employee's at your Co are more motivated and less of "I'm just a disposable, replaceable item" attitude that permeates most larger Co's. They wind up with a group who will just do enough work to avoid getting fired or in trouble and no more.

 

[Exterous]

Education is bullshit. I know a ton of college graduates who are underemployed or unemployed. Education is important for doctors, lawyers, engineers and a few other specific fields. And even then, the cost of it is outrageous that it isn't really a viable option for many people.

I would be careful about this observation. Georgetown University regularly releases studies about education and their most recent releases show that jobs requiring a bachelors degree have gained 2 million since the recession while jobs requiring no degree are down 5 million. A 7 million job swing is hardly 'bullshit'. You could make the argument that they are under-employed but the expected earning ratio of bachelors vs no degree has only fallen from 2.0x to 1.7x which is well above historical norms

Cost is getting to be a serious concern but education still often plays a very critical role in life and earnings

I managed pizza shops for Pizza Hut, Little Caesars, and Papa Johns.

Drivers are a very high turnaround job. Out of ten drivers, eight of them would be replaced twice a year. From the smell of their car after a few months, to noticing dings, bad customers, having to fill up their gas more often, and working to 11:30PM or midnight on weekdays; it isn't the job they imagined.

The older drivers almost always have driving as a second job, to help pay the bills, or to save for things like Christmas or a wedding. They could do something else, but driving allows a lot of freedom, and the tips can be very good. These are often the drivers that keep the job the longest.

Now you might have seen a guy really down on his luck and hating his job, but more likely you got guilt tripped into a bigger tip. Just like waiting tables, how you appear to be working has a major effect on your tips (and surprise, drivers know this) - if I look like I'm frazzled and always running, I'll get 20% more tips. If I look down on my luck while delivering pizzas, I'll make more tips.

My best drivers made $200+ in tips every Friday and Saturday night. I would say don't feel sorry for them, but then I'd be hurting their tips. A customer might look at them and wonder how they fell so low, to need to deliver pizzas, never realizing they can make an extra $400 on the two days they have off from their regular job.

Very interesting post. Thank you.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/30/ceo-to-worker-pay-ratio_n_3184623.html

"The ratio of CEO-to-worker pay has increased 1,000 percent since 1950, according to data from Bloomberg. Today Fortune 500 CEOs make 204 times regular workers on average, Bloomberg found. The ratio is up from 120-to-1 in 2000, 42-to-1 in 1980 and 20-to-1 in 1950."



If you aren't born wealthy, start busting your ass and make no mistakes while you are still a child and make 100% of the best decisions always, or not incredibly lucky (like lottery winning lucky) in this country, you are fucked.

Nowadays average kids have to be fucking Rudy to get anywhere, it sucks. You have to overachieve like crazy just to not starve in the streets.

So the economy is cyclical right? I am wondering if mega-corps are cyclical as well? We've been here before - actually much worse. Back in the days of Carnegie and Rockerfeller. Shit Carnegie was paid 4% of the entire US wealth for US Steel. Thanks to the repeal of banking regulatory laws we are headed back to when a few people get paid outrageous sums of money to run outrageously large firms.

I am also curious about the % CEO salary to employee wage\company capitalization. CEOs are making the most since the 1950s but it also looks like the companies are the largest since before the 1950 (maybe even to 1900s). Has there been a drastic rise in CEO payouts as a percentage of capitalization or is this just the result of CEO and company consolidation? For example: 2 companies. Each has a CEOs that is paid $2 million. The companies merge. One CEO leaves, the other gets paid $ 4 million for a net change of $0. An over simplification in many cases but I think its important to the discussion and the finding of a solution. I suspect both play a role but that the merger of companies has had a huge factor in CEO pay increases

 

[Cuda1447]

I would be careful about this observation. Georgetown University regularly releases studies about education and their most recent releases show that jobs requiring a bachelors degree have gained 2 million since the recession while jobs requiring no degree are down 5 million. A 7 million job swing is hardly 'bullshit'. You could make the argument that they are under-employed but the expected earning ratio of bachelors vs no degree has only fallen from 2.0x to 1.7x which is well above historical norms

A lot of jobs 'require' a bachelors degree. But not a lot of these jobs 'require' a bachelors degree. If you know what I mean. They just want one because they are so prevalent and weed out some of the lower quality people, or so they think.

And it's in Georgetowns best interest to show that education is important for employment. If they didnt, people would stop going to college. That wouldn't be good for business. And Higher Education is most certainly a big business now. A REAL Big Business.

 

[rsutoratosu]

i have a regular job and make decent cash and i thought about doing delivery at night also or weekends.. maybe when retire

 

[Cuda1447]

Hold up. So a corporation is generating 'ridiculous' profits yet somehow the executives who generate said profits are overpaid?

Sounds like they are being underpaid if profits are the measuring stick for compensation.

Yes. The profits are to high and the CEO's are overpaid. Just because someone can take advantage of a shitty labor market, doesn't mean they should.


Let's take a look at an industry. I'm going to pick the cell phone industry since it is one we should all be somewhat familiar with. There are 4 main companies. Sprint, Tmobile, ATT and Verizon.

If I want to work in the cell phone industry, I have 4 options. Now all four of these companies show healthy profits, for the most part. Especially the major two. Yet, if you look at the wages of the vast majority of employees, they are not very good. Let's say you work for Verizon. You don't like their pay, ok fine a new employer. But ATT is JUST AS BAD.


The point being, it's the evil you know or the evil you don't, but there aren't very many major corporations that pay their employees fair wages. That is a very rare thing.

So you say the small businesses should attract the best talent right? Well, they might. Until they get put out of business. But they shouldn't be put out of business if they have more talented employees right? Wrong again. They are put out of business because the large megacorps get the politicians to make rules that favor them and hurt the little guy. Or they just use their money to lean on the small guy, or worst case scenario buy them out.


Let's say 100 of us got together and wanted to start a new Amazon. And let's pretend for a moment that we had 20 of the best programmers on Earth. We also had some great PR guys, a few very good marketing guys and even had a few rich guys to bank roll us (all huge assumptions). We get started and start carving out a nice little niche. Until amazon decides to undercut our prices very aggressively, taking a short term loss and forcing us to do the same (and lose money) or to sell out to them, close business or lose customers to a lower price.

If we have an infinite amount of money we can survive this. But if we aren't close to the size of Amazon, we really don't have much of a chance if Amazon decides they want to put us down.


And that's the most moral way of Amazon doing it. A lot of other businesses just call up their politicians and say "hey, no don't let that new start up cable company offer business here. Only comcast should be allowed to serve these people".


Megacorps have us all by the balls and the ONLY thing we could do to get out of it right now is to stop shopping there (aka most everywhere) or go on mass strikes. Well we can't really afford that can we? So we are up a creek without a paddle it seems. Hopefully our politicians will start to be fair.... haha ya right.

 

[Cappuccino]

McDonalds
Under 16 £4.50
18+ £5.25

Source: My friend.

Pizza Boy
£20 just to come in and £1 for every delivery.
They earn good money on the weekends. They can rack up £50-80 (inc tips)

Source: My friend

It's good money if your a teen. It's good money if your working in a busy takeaway shop. It's shit money if your working in a snoozey takeaway.

100% Accurate.
Correct me if I'm wrong.