New York Times, December 11th, 2014
"The share of prime-age men — those 25 to 54 years old — who are not working has more than tripled since the late 1960s, to 16 percent"
From Breadwinner to McJobber in one generation
This NYT story is a case study into why unemployment is so high among men compared to past history. The stories are all different, with many reasons given for why unemployment remains high, however, they all have one feature in common - everyone is reluctant to trade down to a McJob. Because they know that once they do, the odds of trading up to a better job are the same odds as getting adopted by Angelina Jolie.
The Mayor McJob Economy
aka. Shock Doctrine on Steroids
aka. Shock Doctrine on Steroids
This is the Obama pseudo-recovery in a nutshell, except it doesn't show that every one of these McJobs cost $1 million in national debt since 2007:
Why are people reluctant to embrace below poverty-line wages?
This will be the gripping subject of a future lamestream article. Personally, I just assume it's because they are all lazy, because as long as I have a good job, then fuck everyone else.
Remember this post above with the catchy title? That rage-fest was fueled by the assertion that a higher minimum wage was harmful to "low skilled" workers who would like every opportunity to compete with the Third World at $.80/hour. It gets better, because the first line of the article states that the primary reason NOT to raise the minimum wage is because:
Wages versus Productivity:
ALL LIES. ALL THE TIME
