Servants - yes or no?

[LongGe123]

Whoa whoa whoa now. Aren't you the one who was going on earlier about how servants are "trapped" in their jobs because it's too hard to just go out and find other jobs? Now suddenly you casually throw out that they "will just have to do other jobs instead"??? But...but...I thought finding other jobs was too hard according to you. Where are all these other jobs that are just going to magically open up for all the displaced maids, butlers, groundskeepers and so on when their jobs are destroyed that weren't there before for them to have? If people are doing these jobs because there are no other jobs to do (according to you) then what magical jobs will get created just for them when you take away the jobs they have now?

An excellent question

 

[nnmartin]

Whoa whoa whoa now. Aren't you the one who was going on earlier about how servants are "trapped" in their jobs because it's too hard to just go out and find other jobs? Now suddenly you casually throw out that they "will just have to do other jobs instead"??? But...but...I thought finding other jobs was too hard according to you. Where are all these other jobs that are just going to magically open up for all the displaced maids, butlers, groundskeepers and so on when their jobs are destroyed that weren't there before for them to have? If people are doing these jobs because there are no other jobs to do (according to you) then what magical jobs will get created just for them when you take away the jobs they have now?

the abolition of domestic staff is only a small part of the grand design.

When we nationalise a large percentage of the privately owned companies we will create more useful forms of employment - much of this will be funded by taxing those rich enough to have servants to think again!

 

[Draka]

the abolition of domestic staff is only a small part of the grand design.

When we nationalise a large percentage of the privately owned companies we will create more useful forms of employment - much of this will be funded by taxing those rich enough to have servants to think again!

That makes absolutely no sense and I really doubt it does to you either. Do you have any clue what you are talking about? Because it really doesn't appear so.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Doctors and nurses serve people. Police and fire serve people. I guess we cut their jobs too?

 

[Reverend Rick]

I think Martin is advocating reverse slavery. Rich folks pay for everything.

Seriously Martin, when you take away a persons money, you act like they will not do anything about it. You expect them to continue to invest and make more money? You just took away their capital dude. Continue to invest with what? Make payroll with what?

Your system takes the money, spends the money and then the money is gone never to return.

Everyone ends up poor, end of story.

 

[Penumbra]

does that mean you don't support the notion of a minimum wage then?

I'm skeptical that a minimum wage helps more people than it harms. I'm not sure that, for most jobs, it actually increases pay. Rather, I think it just assists in moving jobs away or promoting under-the-table jobs. The only area I think it may be beneficial is in a non-tip service industry (like fast food), where they can't move the jobs away.

I'm in favor of raising living standards and economic mobility, but a minimum wage seems to me to be a band-aid solution rather than a real solution.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I'm skeptical that a minimum wage helps more people than it harms. I'm not sure that, for most jobs, it actually increases pay. Rather, I think it just assists in moving jobs away or promoting under-the-table jobs. The only area I think it may be beneficial is in a non-tip service industry (like fast food), where they can't move the jobs away.

I'm in favor of raising living standards and economic mobility, but a minimum wage seems to me to be a band-aid solution rather than a real solution.

I agree, only a fool thinks a minimum wage job is enough to support one's self.

It's a Junior job. People have to start somewhere and get some experience.

Many people work for nothing as interns to get valuable experience.

 

[4consideration]

a touch of sensationalism there I think.

I wish it was just sensationalism. The term "King of the World" was intended in a playful sort of way, but I really think that perspective is where your idea is coming from. I was actually taking that idea from something we had already discussed earlier in this thread.

It seems that you think there is some ideal of how things should be that supercedes what actually works well for the parties involved. Is that right?

(Part of my post #24.)

Yes, that is correct!

(The response to that question in your post #25.)

Martin, I think that you know what the word “supercedes” means (can also be spelled supersedes) – but just in case:
Definition of SUPERSEDE
transitive verb

1a: to cause to be set aside b: to force out of use as inferior
2: to take the place or position of
3: to displace in favor of another

As I understand your position, you responded to me that an ideal ought to replace what actually works. In other words you seem to be indicating that you think we ought to replace reality with what seems like it ought to be better – even if it actually makes things worse.

I can support making positive changes and following ideals and principles that make things better for everyone – in real life. But, I cannot support sweeping changes that have a great degree of potential for causing harm, because that “ideal” requires huge segments of reality to be set aside – as if they don’t actually exist, when they actually do. Not only do they exist, but they will interfere with the realization of this Grand Plan that you are envisioning imposing upon the world. There are real people, and each person has somewhat different circumstances (even though there is commonality as well among people). Unless your plan can anticipate and effectively customize itself to the needs of each individual for optimum performance -- you are advocating some other entity assuming control of individual decisions in individual lives -- and making it worse for all -- for the purpose of supporting an ideal that you consider to be more valuable than reality. It is a fantasy world.

Hey, I think that fantasy can be a great and creative endeavor. It can allow for all kinds of interesting experience without having to commit things to form and where we can play with ideas and predict possible outcomes without having to actually experience the harshness of reality when ideas don't actually work well in reality. But, remember that in fantasy thinking you can choose to eliminate everything that doesn't suit your mood in the moment, and can switch around and select only what you want -- in an instant.

LIFE DOESN"T WORK THAT WAY. There are actual principles at work in reality, and amongst people that have to be intelligently considered and worked with -- not wished away.

 

[Kathryn]

Those who are now servants will just have to do other jobs instead.

Who is going to create these jobs? Keep in mind that these new jobs will need to have flexible hours, be part time, allow for all sorts of personal leave and many "vacation hours," and pay well above minimum wage, usually with no taxes or deductions taken out.

Oh, and the worker gets to set their own hours and pretty much come and go as they please.

Sounds like a pretty good job, especially for someone who only needs to work part time, huh?

 

[Kathryn]

I think Martin is advocating reverse slavery. Rich folks pay for everything.

With only 50 percent of US citizens even paying income tax, we're headed in that direction. The percentage drops every year. Last year it was 52 percent paying, and I believe the year before it was 54 percent.

Meanwhile, I don't know about anyone else on this forum (probably you, though, Rev for sure) - but I just sent a very large check to the IRS. I was discussing taxes with my daughter and when I told her what we sent in, she gasped and absolutely could not believe it. She's young - and has honestly never really thought about taxes. She just gets her tax refund every year and I guess she thought that's how it works for everyone.

I laughed and told her, "Baby, SOMEONE has to actually PAY taxes in order for us to have a military, and roads, and any other government service. When you get your tax refund back next year, think of me and just send a little Thank You our way under your breath!"

You know what gets me? That instead of a Thank You, or just a nod of acknowledgement in our direction, we're targeted with class warfare rhetoric.

I'm tempted to put up a poll asking who actually paid more taxes IN and who got a tax refund in 2012, but I doubt I'd get much participation.

 

[Kathryn]

Did it - here's the poll!

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...555-poll-check-passed-through-your-hands.html

 

[Penumbra]

With only 50 percent of US citizens even paying income tax, we're headed in that direction. The percentage drops every year. Last year it was 52 percent paying, and I believe the year before it was 54 percent.

People that don't pay income tax often pay payroll tax. The percentage of total government revenue that comes from payroll tax has substantially increased over the last few decades, and it's a regressive tax.

Isolating individual taxes without addressing the larger tax picture does not form an effective argument. Overall federal tax revenue compared to wealth distribution shows a flat or mildly regressive tax structure. This is compounded by the problem that states often use sales taxes which, without some sort of prebate or something, are usually regressive as well.

 

[Kathryn]

People that don't pay income tax often pay payroll tax. The percentage of total government revenue that comes from payroll tax has substantially increased over the last few decades, and it's a regressive tax.

Isolating individual taxes without addressing the larger tax picture does not form an effective argument. Overall federal tax revenue compared to wealth distribution shows a flat or mildly regressive tax structure. This is compounded by the problem that states often use sales taxes which, without some sort of prebate or something, are usually regressive as well.

I was only addressing the issue of federal income taxes. Of course we all pay a wide variety of taxes. For instance, I live in Texas and we have zero state income tax - but our property taxes are high.

 

[Nashitheki]

the abolition of domestic staff is only a small part of the grand design.

When we nationalise a large percentage of the privately owned companies we will create more useful forms of employment - much of this will be funded by taxing those rich enough to have servants to think again!

You could very well be upsetting some good folk who may bear pyschological freezer burns having lived through the coldest part of the cold war. A childhood in a particular time when 'commie hating' hula hoops and 'Jim Crow' were the popular trends.

The mere hint of red flags and peasant uprisings could induce an unpleasant shivering fit :cold:

 

[Revoltingest]

People that don't pay income tax often pay payroll tax. The percentage of total government revenue that comes from payroll tax has substantially increased over the last few decades, and it's a regressive tax.
Isolating individual taxes without addressing the larger tax picture does not form an effective argument. Overall federal tax revenue compared to wealth distribution shows a flat or mildly regressive tax structure. This is compounded by the problem that states often use sales taxes which, without some sort of prebate or something, are usually regressive as well.

When considering the total effect of government on income, it would be useful to add in benefits to offset payroll & sales taxes paid
by those who don't pay income tax. Then, I'd wager that the net effect is much more progressive. It's still bad though, because the
high marginal cost of taxes & benefit loss discourage working. Examples: Two single (formerly) mothers I know were counseled by
social workers to quit their jobs because they'd have a higher income were they unemployed. What a bizarre....nay, evil system, eh?

 

[Penumbra]

When considering the total effect of government on income, it would be useful to add in benefits to offset payroll & sales taxes paid
by those who don't pay income tax. Then, I'd wager that the net effect is much more progressive.

By "benefits" do you mean benefits from the government (basically use of those taxes), or like, health insurance benefits from an employer?

I'd say having a substantial chunk of one's income being forced into low-returning investments is not a huge benefit.

It's still bad though, because the
high marginal cost of taxes & benefit loss discourage working. Examples: Two single (formerly) mothers I know were counseled by
social workers to quit their jobs because they'd have a higher income were they unemployed. What a bizarre....nay, evil system, eh?

That's a separate issue from taxation, and one I agree with. I have family members in that situation, and I find the system that constructs it that way to be highly problematic.

 

[blackout]

Who is going to create these jobs? Keep in mind that these new jobs will need to have flexible hours, be part time, allow for all sorts of personal leave and many "vacation hours," and pay well above minimum wage, usually with no taxes or deductions taken out.

Oh, and the worker gets to set their own hours and pretty much come and go as they please.

Sounds like a pretty good job, especially for someone who only needs to work part time, huh?

What nnmartin does not seem to understand
is that domestic housekeeping jobs
afford the housekeepers themselves
more time with their own children-
as they can work part time, primarily during school hours
at a pay rate that equals 40 hours at many other full time jobs.

That's what happens when you can make almost double the income
in half the time.

I would be completely ****** as a housekeeper
if someone suddenly announced
I could no longer continue in my line of work,
so that I could be 'emancipated' to work some other 'approved' job
for twice as many hours
at the same pay.

duh.

 

[blackout]

I might also add that not everyone who lives in a home
is good at managing domestic affairs.

Domestic management is a skill,
and even an art.
There is no reason to keep people from making a business of their skills.
As well, there is no reason to keep people in need of services
from hiring someone who is qualified to fill them.

nnmartin, YOU are the one who is belittling the profession of the domestic worker.
In a backhanded way also,
you are belittling parents who stay home primarily to raise their children
and handle the domestic side of their family's life.
In an even more backhanded way
you are primarily belittling women,
who are usually the ones to manage the domestic affairs of their family.

 

[Nashitheki]

Perhaps there are some who can't possibly know the gentry mindset when it comes to such issues.

It's probably safe to assume that these domestic workers do these kind of jobs not for a hobby or for the sake of knowing their place in society. They are not all part time workers doing these jobs for extra spending cash and I doubt they get to spend more time with their own families. However I can see some of the 'out of touch with reality' gentry class entertaining these falsehoods when regarding domestic workers. I'm really expecting one of them to say - 'Let them eat cake'

 

[blackout]

I might also add that not everyone who lives in a home
is good at managing domestic affairs.

Domestic management is a skill,
and even an art.
There is no reason to keep people from making a business of their skills.
As well, there is no reason to keep people in need of services
from hiring someone who is qualified to fill them.

nnmartin, YOU are the one who is belittling the profession of the domestic worker.
In a backhanded way also,
you are belittling parents who stay home primarily to raise their children
and handle the domestic side of their family's life.
In an even more backhanded way
you are primarily belittling women,
who are usually the ones to manage the domestic affairs of their family.

Not to mention that these are the VERY (usually) WOMEN
who succeed as professional domestic workers
specifically because of their excellent management and efficiency
in this area.

These women can run a highly professional domestic services business
during school hours,
and still kick butt in their own home
as parent, chef, chauffer, interior decorator, housekeeper and finance manager
afternoons, evenings and weekends.