OT: Corona virus

[Cap Mandrake]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

ORIGINAL: mind_messing



In theory. In practice, quite different as there's someone desperate enough to work under poor conditions. As others have stated, it's not as if corporate interests were strongly interested in working conditions prior to all this...

No, in this case there IS a shortage of workers willing to take the job for the pay offered, given the risk. That is exactly why they are "euthanizing" millions of chickens. To fill those jobs you would have to take an idle Disney cruise ship down to Honduras or Guatemala, promise tall blonde dancer girls and salsa picante on the cruise AND a green card and you could fill the thing up...and then after 3 or 4 weeks, they would all have $15 an hour jobs at Pollo Loco

The United Food and Commercial Workers union reports that more than 70% of all beef and 60% of all pork consumed in the US is processed by UFCW workers. They have 1.3 million workers. To date they have had 73 deaths.

60% Unionized? ICU nurses are working WAAAY harder than UFCW pork processors. Still, I can see how the deaths would seriously hurt morale

[Lowpe]

Push For Supply Chain Resilience, Reshoring Likely To Boost Industrial CRE

https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/in ... cre-104369

Nearly two-thirds of North American manufacturers say they are likely to bring production and sourcing back to the continent, a new survey by industrial data and tech company Thomas shows.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Well, I just went to a store and I did not wear a mask. I saw no one wearing a mask either. As far as wearing a tight fitting mask, I have a furry face.

As posted above;

One recent research paper found that if 80% of Americans wore masks, Covid-19 infections rates would drop to approximately one twelfth the number of infections.

I have posted before that the closest known case is at least 20 driving miles away. I walked a block and a half. There weren't too many people in the store. Slow but steady business as they have a very good deli. I was too late for their BBQ ribs. [:(]I think things will pick up as more summer people arrive. I took some sausages that they make there, brought them someplace a three and a half hour away. They really enjoyed them as they can't get such good stuff in the major metropolitan area. [:D]

Edited for: the 2 in the 20 did not show up. One reason for getting a new computer. [:@]

[jdsrae]

Restrictions are being lifted down here and lots of people are getting back to their old behaviours.
I for one am not rushing to roll the dice on bringing germs back into my house, but am comfortable going out for essentials.
A good saying I just heard that sums up the state of play down here: the virus hasn’t been eradicated, there’s just a bit of spare capacity in an Intensive Care Unit if you need it.

[RangerJoe]

A report from Florida. Apparently what may be called elective surgeries are being performed again. Check out the thread and wish him well:

MrsWargamer and a loose kidney
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... 1&#4814802

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

There is a price for which I would work at Chicken plant. The thigh would have exactly one half of the joint capsule and the rest the other half. I would demand a fresh #15 blade for every beast and air conditioning and the Mozart Oboe Concerto in C Major on the headphones....and I would would have authority to pause the line on the most sublime parts (of the Concerto, not the chicken)

Alas, nobody could afford the chicken but there would NEVER be a femur chopped off 1.5 cm from the joint.

Aye, headphones for chickens are expensive.

[fcooke]

Plenty of upward mobility in the US. I'm first generation, my Dad had an 8th grade education and my Mom left school at 16. They both worked hard and didn't spend money on things they couldn't afford. I started working when I was 8. A paper route and working with my Dad's roofing company when I wasn't in school. Actually shingled my first roof (a garage) when I was 8. Child labor laws would not let that happen today. I took school seriously, while my brother did not. I went to college and he struggled to get his GED. I am now retired but never saw the need to replace/upgrade my car every 4 years. I still have my first new car bought over 30 years ago. Or my phone every 2 years. Seems many people choose to live close to their total means or think it is a good idea to spend 50 bucks a week on Lotto tickets. When I was working I would see many CVs where candidates had never earned a dime as they went through school. There are people who are dealt tough hands. But a tough hand in the US is far easier to overcome than many other places in the world. A little travel to places like India, China, Egypt, etc would be an eye opener for many US citizens.

[RangerJoe]

I know someone who had a 4th grade education. One of his sons did not graduate high school but his graduating class kept asking him to return for the class reunion because he was the richest one of the bunch. One of his sons graduated college, worked for others for awhile, then started his own business. Later on, he would have his jet fly him to see his father every month. All of his siblings have done well, some have their own businesses as well.

Me, I just had to buy a new phone because it was not working properly. It would help if a phone rings. Now this computer . . .

The next project is a vehicle.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

I'm just trying to say that pursuit is important - it's what America was built on. A belief that I can be or do anything with the gifts of mind and body that my Higher Power granted to me. I'm white. Are there additional hurdles for the non-white in America? My experience and observation say "Yes" to that question. Is it better to be a male than a female when it comes to most careers in America? Again I would say yes. But I've met a lot of men and women of all shapes, sizes, and colors. Those that climbed up to a status of middle-class and higher here in America, for the most part, have had a dream that they pursued.

Working for something is important, but socioeconomic mobility in the US is much lower than is commonly mythologized - especially in modern times.

The wiki page on this actually has quite a bit of information with several citations. Synopsis: there is some bad news and some neutral news, with basically only 1 piece of news that could be called vaguely good (the part I underlined in the quote below).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioecon ... ted_States

In recent years, several studies have found that vertical intergenerational mobility is lower in the US than in some European countries.[3] US social mobility has either remained unchanged or decreased since the 1970s.[4][5][6][7] A study conducted by the Pew Charitable Trusts found that the bottom quintile is 57% likely to experience upward mobility and only 7% to experience downward mobility.[8]

A study published in 2008 showed that economic mobility in the U.S. increased from 1950 to 1980, but has declined sharply since 1980.[9]

A 2013 Brookings Institution study found income inequality was increasing and becoming more permanent, sharply reducing social mobility.[10]

A large academic study released in 2014 found US mobility overall has not changed appreciably in the last 25 years (for children born between 1971 and 1996), but a variety of up and down mobility changes were found in several different parts of the country. On average, American children entering the labor market today have the same chances of moving up in the income distribution (relative to their parents) as children born in the 1970s.[11][12]

However, because US income inequalities have increased substantially, the consequences of the "birth lottery"—the parents to whom a child is born—are larger today than in the past. US wealth is increasingly concentrated in the top 10% of American families, so children of the remaining 90% are more likely to be born at lower starting incomes today than the same children in the past. Even if they are equally mobile and climb the same distance up the US socioeconomic ladder as children born 25 years earlier, the bottom 90% of the ladder is worth less now, so they gain less income value from their climb, especially when compared to the top 10%.[11][12]

And that's just from the header... there's more, and I've could find plenty of other citations as well.

Again, that's not to say that it's impossible - just that it's harder than in the past, and also to point out that the mythologizing of "you can do anything if you only just work hard enough" as the common narrative sold to the American worker/workplace is nowhere close to the actual truth.

I could state some reasons why this is but that would get into murky areas for this thread.

It's a topic that is widely studied. Apolitical sources abound. Alas, the implications of the conclusions are always political - and how could they not be? Politics is the system for resolving conflict over scarce resources, after all.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

Like I said - it's OK to agree to disagree. I'm not saying it's easy. It wasn't easy for me. I still think a person can get ahead. [8D]

Edit - and I noted gifts I was born with as a factor. We each have a set of attributes that we need to play too. Maybe you are a "brainy" kind of guy. Maybe you are really good at drawing. Or playing music. Or learning languages comes easy for you. Or taking things apart and putting them back together. I had to keep things real. It's ok to want and dream but at the end of the day I went down a road that catered to my strengths and I didn't spend too much time wringing my hands over could-have-bens. I believe that if you can find a job that you like, where you don't watch the clock 5 minutes before quitting time and you take the time to become really-really good at, I think a person will do just fine.

Your position (that a person can still get ahead) is not mutually exclusive from mine (that empirical reality shows that it is unlikelier now (especially post-Reagan) than it has been previously (New Deal/Great Society era).

In a perfectly meritocratic society (also assuming all humans have the same chance for the same talents from conception/birth), there would be a 20% chance for an individual to end up in a given economic quintile.

For the 5th (bottom) quintile, being born there results in a 42% chance that you will remain there. Compare to 20% if it were truly random. Likewise, 39% of those born in the top quintile remain in the top. Numbers from that same 2011 Brookings report.

I was able to find a 2019 update from Brookings, complete with mouseover infographic: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front ... -mobility/. It hasn't changed much since 2011. The only quintile where the "you can be anything" mantra is actually true is the middle quintile; that's only 20% of the population, by definition. Those born in the 4th quintile have a 50% chance of remaining there or ending up in the bottom quintile. Those born in the top quintile have over a 60% chance of remaining in the top 2 quintiles. Clearly, economic status is much more static than the myth would have us believe.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Plenty of upward mobility in the US. I'm first generation, my Dad had an 8th grade education and my Mom left school at 16. They both worked hard and didn't spend money on things they couldn't afford. I started working when I was 8. A paper route and working with my Dad's roofing company when I wasn't in school. Actually shingled my first roof (a garage) when I was 8. Child labor laws would not let that happen today. I took school seriously, while my brother did not. I went to college and he struggled to get his GED. I am now retired but never saw the need to replace/upgrade my car every 4 years. I still have my first new car bought over 30 years ago. Or my phone every 2 years. Seems many people choose to live close to their total means or think it is a good idea to spend 50 bucks a week on Lotto tickets. When I was working I would see many CVs where candidates had never earned a dime as they went through school. There are people who are dealt tough hands.

Can you please explain how "living close to total means" is related to lack of socioeconomic mobility?

Luck, not scrimping and saving, is far more important.

But a tough hand in the US is far easier to overcome than many other places in the world. A little travel to places like India, China, Egypt, etc would be an eye opener for many US citizens.

There's no denying this is true (and it's part of why we measure standards of living, per capita GDP, etc.), as it would be for any highly developed country when compared to a country that is not as far along in raising its citizens out of poverty and squalor, but it's not really relevant to whether it's possible for someone to improve their station within a particular country. It's more often used as a talking point to tell those who are being held down to stop being so uppity.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Plenty of upward mobility in the US. I'm first generation, my Dad had an 8th grade education and my Mom left school at 16. They both worked hard and didn't spend money on things they couldn't afford. I started working when I was 8. A paper route and working with my Dad's roofing company when I wasn't in school. Actually shingled my first roof (a garage) when I was 8. Child labor laws would not let that happen today. I took school seriously, while my brother did not. I went to college and he struggled to get his GED. I am now retired but never saw the need to replace/upgrade my car every 4 years. I still have my first new car bought over 30 years ago. Or my phone every 2 years. Seems many people choose to live close to their total means or think it is a good idea to spend 50 bucks a week on Lotto tickets. When I was working I would see many CVs where candidates had never earned a dime as they went through school. There are people who are dealt tough hands. But a tough hand in the US is far easier to overcome than many other places in the world. A little travel to places like India, China, Egypt, etc would be an eye opener for many US citizens.

This line of the thread is completely OT but related to the affects of Covid on workplaces and disadvantaged communities, so I guess I'll chip in.

We can all trade personal anecdotes and come up with the idea that there a lot of opportunities for up mobility. Being in a position to spend upwards of several hours a day playing a computer war-game probably puts us in a category where we've all achieved some measure of success in our life.

I am a teacher. If students do well they all get an A. There is no curve, there are no restrictions on success. By ensuring that results are based on standards and performance we hope to instill that everyone can be successful, that skills are learned, not genetic.

When it comes to the working world this isn't true. Careers have limits. If everyone wanted to go out and become a coder, or a structural engineer, or a nurse practitioner, or a certified accountant, or any number of other professional positions, at some point those jobs would no longer be available and only the top of the range of trained people would get them.

What do the others do?

Statistics help more than anecdotes here, because we know statistically there are limits. There are a lot more McDonalds in the world than there are accounting offices, engineering firms, or hospitals. We assume that those who end up at the end of the grill line are there because they aren't trained to do anything else, don't have the mental capacity to do anything else, or don't have the motivation/dreams to do anything else. That isn't true.

Not everyone can succeed in a free market system. It's built in. When you have success or comfort you're happy to say it's possible for everyone. It actually isn't.

[Lowpe]

African countries need to challenge the idea of a homogenous approach to Covid-19

https://qz.com/africa/1858008/africa-ne ... -covid-19/

[Lowpe]

SCIENCE & TECH SPOTLIGHT:
Social Distancing During Pandemics

https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-20-545SP

Where does the six-foot guideline for social distancing come from?

https://qz.com/1831100/where-does-the-s ... come-from/

[Lowpe]

Stores Stress Over How to Handle Mask-Less Customers

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/store ... d=msedgdhp

Wisconsin Business Bans Wearing Masks After Stay-At-Home Order Overturned


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/wisco ... d=msedgdhp

[fcooke]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: durnedwolf

Like I said - it's OK to agree to disagree. I'm not saying it's easy. It wasn't easy for me. I still think a person can get ahead. [8D]

Edit - and I noted gifts I was born with as a factor. We each have a set of attributes that we need to play too. Maybe you are a "brainy" kind of guy. Maybe you are really good at drawing. Or playing music. Or learning languages comes easy for you. Or taking things apart and putting them back together. I had to keep things real. It's ok to want and dream but at the end of the day I went down a road that catered to my strengths and I didn't spend too much time wringing my hands over could-have-bens. I believe that if you can find a job that you like, where you don't watch the clock 5 minutes before quitting time and you take the time to become really-really good at, I think a person will do just fine.

Your position (that a person can still get ahead) is not mutually exclusive from mine (that empirical reality shows that it is unlikelier now (especially post-Reagan) than it has been previously (New Deal/Great Society era).

In a perfectly meritocratic society (also assuming all humans have the same chance for the same talents from conception/birth), there would be a 20% chance for an individual to end up in a given economic quintile.

For the 5th (bottom) quintile, being born there results in a 42% chance that you will remain there. Compare to 20% if it were truly random. Likewise, 39% of those born in the top quintile remain in the top. Numbers from that same 2011 Brookings report.

I was able to find a 2019 update from Brookings, complete with mouseover infographic: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front ... -mobility/. It hasn't changed much since 2011. The only quintile where the "you can be anything" mantra is actually true is the middle quintile; that's only 20% of the population, by definition. Those born in the 4th quintile have a 50% chance of remaining there or ending up in the bottom quintile. Those born in the top quintile have over a 60% chance of remaining in the top 2 quintiles. Clearly, economic status is much more static than the myth would have us believe.

Hi Lok,

There seems to be a fair bit of movement in those numbers to me. 40% of the top quintile falling out of the top to one of the bottom 3 shows a whole lot of economic 'mobility'. And 50% of those starting in the 4th quintile and moving up is fairly significant too. While not everyone is going to 'move up', clearly with that data a lot of people are moving up and down the economic spectrum.

[Orm]

Can we please focus on the main topic only?

[fcooke]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Plenty of upward mobility in the US. I'm first generation, my Dad had an 8th grade education and my Mom left school at 16. They both worked hard and didn't spend money on things they couldn't afford. I started working when I was 8. A paper route and working with my Dad's roofing company when I wasn't in school. Actually shingled my first roof (a garage) when I was 8. Child labor laws would not let that happen today. I took school seriously, while my brother did not. I went to college and he struggled to get his GED. I am now retired but never saw the need to replace/upgrade my car every 4 years. I still have my first new car bought over 30 years ago. Or my phone every 2 years. Seems many people choose to live close to their total means or think it is a good idea to spend 50 bucks a week on Lotto tickets. When I was working I would see many CVs where candidates had never earned a dime as they went through school. There are people who are dealt tough hands.

Can you please explain how "living close to total means" is related to lack of socioeconomic mobility?
Sure - some folks just are not good at NOT spending money. If they have any it gets spent, not saved for a rainy day or to save up to buy a house. Whether it is a poorer person who wants jewelry but doesn't even have a savings acct, or the managing director in London who just needs to have the new car every year (status thing in the UK, you can tell the year of the car by first digit or two on the registration plate) and then have to ask his employer for an advance on his year end bonus. I actually saw that when I worked in London.

Luck, not scrimping and saving, is far more important.

I think we will disagree on this one. Luck is important. I think scrimping and saving is more important.

But a tough hand in the US is far easier to overcome than many other places in the world. A little travel to places like India, China, Egypt, etc would be an eye opener for many US citizens.

There's no denying this is true (and it's part of why we measure standards of living, per capita GDP, etc.), as it would be for any highly developed country when compared to a country that is not as far along in raising its citizens out of poverty and squalor, but it's not really relevant to whether it's possible for someone to improve their station within a particular country. It's more often used as a talking point to tell those who are being held down to stop being so uppity.

Held down and uppity is probably a place we don't want to get into. Lots of immigrants come to the US with pretty much nothing. They work their tails off, scrimp and save, use common sense and move up the ladder. A lot has to do with work ethic and being structured.

[fcooke]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Plenty of upward mobility in the US. I'm first generation, my Dad had an 8th grade education and my Mom left school at 16. They both worked hard and didn't spend money on things they couldn't afford. I started working when I was 8. A paper route and working with my Dad's roofing company when I wasn't in school. Actually shingled my first roof (a garage) when I was 8. Child labor laws would not let that happen today. I took school seriously, while my brother did not. I went to college and he struggled to get his GED. I am now retired but never saw the need to replace/upgrade my car every 4 years. I still have my first new car bought over 30 years ago. Or my phone every 2 years. Seems many people choose to live close to their total means or think it is a good idea to spend 50 bucks a week on Lotto tickets. When I was working I would see many CVs where candidates had never earned a dime as they went through school. There are people who are dealt tough hands. But a tough hand in the US is far easier to overcome than many other places in the world. A little travel to places like India, China, Egypt, etc would be an eye opener for many US citizens.

This line of the thread is completely OT but related to the affects of Covid on workplaces and disadvantaged communities, so I guess I'll chip in.

We can all trade personal anecdotes and come up with the idea that there a lot of opportunities for up mobility. Being in a position to spend upwards of several hours a day playing a computer war-game probably puts us in a category where we've all achieved some measure of success in our life.

I am a teacher. If students do well they all get an A. There is no curve, there are no restrictions on success. By ensuring that results are based on standards and performance we hope to instill that everyone can be successful, that skills are learned, not genetic.

When it comes to the working world this isn't true. Careers have limits. If everyone wanted to go out and become a coder, or a structural engineer, or a nurse practitioner, or a certified accountant, or any number of other professional positions, at some point those jobs would no longer be available and only the top of the range of trained people would get them.

What do the others do?

Statistics help more than anecdotes here, because we know statistically there are limits. There are a lot more McDonalds in the world than there are accounting offices, engineering firms, or hospitals. We assume that those who end up at the end of the grill line are there because they aren't trained to do anything else, don't have the mental capacity to do anything else, or don't have the motivation/dreams to do anything else. That isn't true.

IMO there are too many McDonalds in the world, getting rid of some would be a good start [:)]

Not everyone can succeed in a free market system. It's built in. When you have success or comfort you're happy to say it's possible for everyone. It actually isn't.

I think a lot more people can succeed than currently are. I think a big part of that comes down to a quality education, which not enough people are getting for various reasons which I will leave alone to avoid going completely OT on the OT. Until recently in the US there was always a shortage of coders, nurses, etc.

[fcooke]

ORIGINAL: Orm

Can we please focus on the main topic only?

It's related but I take your point.