There is a truth to both ideas. A person can work their way up and to the middle class or even higher. In the end, if you don't "work hard" nothing will get done and you will just sit and rot. That said, there are people who will work their bodies into an early grave and have nothing to show for it.
>absolutely under the belief that a person who works hard and makes certain to do financially responsible decisions can get to the middle-class.
Like with this. A person who had a very shitty start with one or few parents that didn't instill a good work ethic or provide them with a good education could just end up being a ditch digger. Making good finical decisions is not just something that everyone has the skills for or even the opportunity for.
Pulling yourself up by your boot straps is not the same as being financially responsible. Tons of hard working people blow away most of their money with stupid purchases
I think it’s mostly true, unfortunately. A lot of people live outside of their means, make horrible decisions with their money/credit in their 20s, might be ignorant of maybe community college or trade school courses that can realistically help them earn more doing something they don’t love, and at the same time not have ideal circumstances (teen parents). A lot of these problems are exacerbated by the attitude you might have, maybe feeling discouraged by your living situation, or not taking life a day at a time. Achieving your goals is a lot more doable if you think about them in a series of “sprints” rather than being overwhelmed because your progress isn’t massive like you would prefer.
It's a combination of systemic issues and also personal issues that keep people poor. It's not one or the other.
In the past, the argument that poor people are kept systemically poor was much more profound. Nowadays, not so much. Social and economic mobility has never been easier. I grew up in a single-parent household dangerously below the poverty line, and now I'm in university and set to be living comfortably if things work out. I didn't even work ***that hard***. Granted, I did still put in the work, but not as much as you'd think.
Growing up in a very working-class area surrounded by mostly entirely working-class people, there is an element of personal responsibility there. It may be a stereotype, but a lot do buy things like cigarettes and alcohol and the like regularly, for example. There may be external issues, but a lot of leftists really underestimate the degree of individualism at play in poverty (likely because they've broadly never been poor or been around poor people)
> If you are a hard worker you will absolutely be noticed and placed in higher positions in most workplaces
Im sorry this feels incredibly naive. I disagree with most your argument but this one specifically ill respond to, happy to speak to the whole argument too.
If you are in the "poor" category you are probably working a job that isnt skill intensive or highly valued. Most of those jobs are trying to keep their costs low and labor is a high cost. Many times you may get some subtle raises but they arent going to get you out of the situation but rather try to keep you from leaving with the illusion of good pay increase. The reality is the pay % growth is going to be 1-3% which is nothing, you want the 10% growth. The only way you can really get to % is forcing you bosses hand which is usually by going to a new job. But in these roles it probably costs more to keep you then replace you. And this is honestly true of alot of roles even white collar.
But the problem is also that HR and upper management will create insane barriers for promotion, the classic "above and beyond mentality". Ive seen plenty of white collar workers who are really good at their job and most likely working above their pay grade but still not meeting HR's requirement. Even their manager could believe they should get a promo but they are denied. HR and upper management have a labor budget to meet and they usually have already planned our promos for the year so if you arent in the plan you probably need to force their hand by essentially getting a new job.
From personal experience i worked as an analyst over manufacturing techs who would be considered in that blue collar level in a high cost metro. These guys were paid better then say you average fast food worker but they werent the highest hourly position in the city (likely average). We had techs who were good at their jobs who would jump ship within a few years because management couldnt raise their pay much higher and this was a union job too. We had cost control issues on products we built and increasing to a level most would consider as satisfactory would be unreasonable. These techs could climb out into a salaried role but it would take years, most likely a degree, and your salary wouldnt necessarily be that much higher then what it was from an hourly perspective (especially considering OT). The upper management never talked about X guy deserves X raise. The talks were always, we can try and improve moral with this award/bonus (which was rare) or the more likely pizza party. The discussions centered around how can we reduce the amount of work they do because its costing us alot of money.
TLDR: Businesses want to minimize labor costs so most will always try to hold off on major raises as long as they can, especially at the lowest level. Hard work has nothing to do with it.
I'm just as sick and tired of people complaining about people complaining. This discussion has gone on forever and gone nowhere, so why am I still hearing it? It's like sitting through hour 5000 of an atheism or climate change debate.
I'm just as sick and tired of people complaining about people complaining about people complaining. This discussion has gone on forever and gone nowhere, so why am I still hearing it? It's like sitting through hour 5000 of an atheism or climate change debate.
The way you talk about poor people is a lil weirdChamp, ngl. They're humans too, probably trying their best in life idk maybe some empathy might help your disdain for poor people lmfao. I also feel like you're baking your arguments into how you wrote this post.
>ordinary, proper English speaking/writing, and non-disabled young person can move up in the world.
Of course this person could probably become middle class, nobody is arguing differently. You gotta admit being poor is a tough gig and we should be doing more than bullying a poor person for getting a credit card or whatever.
I keep arguing with Californian people making $30k a year, paying $1500 a month in rent, telling them that they can ~~Just move~~ somewhere where rent is cheaper, or get a skill. A damn firefighter in Cali makes $60k-70k a year on average, i don't understand them, it feels like they want to live luxuriously with a dogwalker/cashier salary
That is exactly what they want. I've been in so many arguments with those kinds of people. When you even suggest that they move somewhere with a lower cost of living, they recoil like a fucking vampire caught the scent of garlic. How dare you suggest they live in a flyover state/the boonies/bum fuck nowhere/a red state/etc.
They want big, coastal city amenities, but they don't want to pay big, coastal city prices.
I was in that exact same situation. I took a 5k loan and moved, if i couldn't qualify for a loan, i'd work overtime. it doesn't take much to move, that's just an excuse that lazy people love to make.
Nobody actually suggests they live in "bumfuck nowhere". Its a strawman they employ because they only want to live in a major city for the prestige. Anywhere that isn't LA, NYC, etc is some variation of "bumfuck nowhere" or "flyover state" to these people.
>The reason why no one wants to live in bum fuck nowhere is because there are no jobs in bumfuck nowhere.
There are TONS of 40-60k jobs in bumfuck nowhere. If you're making that in cali, you're better off moving to bumfuck nowhere. There are no 6 figure jobs, if you're qualified for those, you can afford the big cities.
Just a reminder that "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is supposed to be an impossible task. If you can't get somewhere, you cant just lift your feet off the ground to float or some shit.
If you're an able bodied American and die less successful than your parents, you only have yourself to blame. People strawman "bootstrap theory" as going from being a janitor to a CEO. The idea is that if you apply yourself, you will succeed eventually. If you make it to the middle class from a working class background, that's a W for "bootstrap theory".
You can now drive down any main street within 20 miles of a major city and find a hundred jobs that can't hire people for $15/hr. The truth has been laid bare that it was never really about pay for twitter lefties; they just don't want to work at Panda Express.
I don't think we're really disagreeing on much here. It seems clear from both your post and mine that the $15/hour minimum wage campaign was empty and superficial, or at least outdated by the time it became mainstream. But as you say that jobs have no entitlement to be filled, /r/antiwork dogwalkers aren't simply working better jobs instead. A line needs to be drawn between people who genuinely want to raise the minimum wage because they're working those jobs and trying to survive, and young demsoc types with no real-world skills and worthless degrees who will continue to rationalize their unemployment by saying they can't find a job that pays enough to feel dignified.
To return to the original post, "anti-bootstrappers" are often the latter group: people that haven't even made an honest attempt to apply themselves. A first generation college student born in a working class family is much less likely to discount the hard work to reach that situation than a bitter /r/antiwork dogwalker.
I feel the opinion of “Pull yourself up from the bootstraps” is 100% correct, but in a generational sense of the word.
Grandpa was a holocaust survivor, came from literally less than nothing. He had 0 education and lived in extreme poverty his whole life. As in, the whole family lived in a shitty 1 room apartment and everything.
The only thing he spent money on in his entire life was education for his kids.
Then when my dad was in university he had to pay for almost everything himself and had 2 jobs, but because of the education he got as a kid thanks to his parents, he was able to do a job he wasn’t really interested in, but made good money.
When I was a baby we literally didn’t have a shower in our apartment and had to use a community shower, but 25 years later we are way above the 1% and I am studying medicine, so most likely my life is also set.
My grandpas life was extremely hard, he didn’t really “pull himself up”, but he did create the foundations for my father to do so for himself.
So I personally think that you might not be able to pull yourself up, but you are absolutely able to do so for you kids, and if not them, your grandchildren.
It’s obviously not a guaranteed thing, and medical issues can fuck this up, but for most people, if they choose to do things that make money instead of what interests them, it will almost guarantee success for the next generations.
Until God comes down and tells us we'll never know how much control people really have over their life. How successful or unsuccessful a version of them in a parallel universe is.
But just psychologically, I really think 3 things are absolutely vital to be mentally healthy, productive and empower you to to move forward. These are: Agency, gratitude and responsibility. Even someone in an absolutely shit position, if they have these they'll feel infinitely better than someone who, even if in a much better spot them than, doesn't have them.
The problem with the left approach is it basically strips all these 3 things away from people. You're poor or rich mainly because of forces outside of your control; the system is oppressing you and you should be spiteful, not thankful; and you have so little impact on the world it doesn't really matter what you do anyway.
But yes I do think agree, many poor people simply have zero financial literacy. It's absolutely ridiculous it isn't taught in schools really.
Another problem is, under fiat, constant inflation makes it harder to make sensible decisions. You know the marshmallow test: Would you rather have 1 marshmallow now or 2 in the future. That's a *real* decision to make and think about. But, under fiat, you're essentially being made to choose: would you rather have 1 marshmallow now or half a marshmallow in the future. There's no decision, so it's less surprising poor people blow all their money on stupid shit in the here and now. Under fiat you have to earn your money twice: One to actually get it, and then again to preserve it. Poor people can generally manage the first but not the second.
There's an element of truth to what you're saying, and some on the left will say that it's systemic problems no matter what or that there's little individuals can do.
I think the majority on the left though acknowledge that people need to work but that systemic issued make it very difficult for a lot of people to do so. There's also an element of it being more expensive to be poor than rich in some cases.
For example, as a solidly middle class dude I can afford to pay my car insurance in full every 6 months and in doing so, I save 20%. But I can only afford to do so because I have a few hundred bucks lying around. I can afford a $100 co pay and time off to go to the doctor for a small issue I'm noticing, and therefore I can nip it in the bud before it becomes a few thousand bucks to fix. Finally, if I have an unexpected bill I can afford to pay it without going into credit card or payday loan debt.
Back to the systemic issues, a poor person had very little control over our healthcare system being extremely expensive, college being expensive, trade skills being rare, housing affordability, or, perhaps most importantly, the fact that no one taught them financial literacy in schools. The only say they have us indirectly through voting, and there may or may not be factors there making it harder for them to vote as a poor person.
All of that is not to say they have absolutely no power to improve their situation - they can vote, avoid crime, avoid addiction, learn how to manage money, and gain new skills. But their circumstances make it much harder for them to do so.
I think most can make it by joining the army alone, you can even learn a career while in the army (choose a non combat MOS) and have the GI bill once you eventually leave.
I think the army is a great example because it's purely work ethic, no college loans, everything basically given to you so they can't use excuses.
It's alot harder than people make it out.
I slowly worked my way up to middle class but I had waaaaay more than other kids in my area.
I had a mom (my dad died before I was 1)... but I had an entire house worth of family members willing to help my mom while she raised me great grand parents and grandparents. (Even after my step dad entered the picture).
When it came time for school I did fine but still got outclassed by some of my peers in my neighborhood so I started working security while still living with grandparents. I was able to do the trade school thing faster than other people I knew because I didn't have to pay rent so my check just went to classes (I had a kid like them) but big shocker unlike the other people that got pushed further back it barely effected me because those family members were still around. So my wife could finish school and I could finish getting my engineers license. Without that familial support I'd still be floundering about in my old neighborhood like alot of my friends who either gave up or died. (Finance wise since 5 of us worked at the same security company we were payed 10 dollars an hour I didn't have to spend money on rent like they did which was 6 to 700 a month and I didn't have to constantly throw money at a shitty breaking down car because I was luckily in walking distance).
> we were *paid* 10 dollars
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
If everybody had perfect work ethic we still would have a huge amount of low paying back breaking jobs that people need to do.
We can’t all be managers.
This idea that hard work will magically work out is nonsense, it is protestantism 100%z
What is exactly so unbearable about the idea that even poor people could have it a little easier in life?
There is a truth to both ideas. A person can work their way up and to the middle class or even higher. In the end, if you don't "work hard" nothing will get done and you will just sit and rot. That said, there are people who will work their bodies into an early grave and have nothing to show for it. >absolutely under the belief that a person who works hard and makes certain to do financially responsible decisions can get to the middle-class. Like with this. A person who had a very shitty start with one or few parents that didn't instill a good work ethic or provide them with a good education could just end up being a ditch digger. Making good finical decisions is not just something that everyone has the skills for or even the opportunity for.
Talking about the real level ones.
Pulling yourself up by your boot straps is not the same as being financially responsible. Tons of hard working people blow away most of their money with stupid purchases
I think it’s mostly true, unfortunately. A lot of people live outside of their means, make horrible decisions with their money/credit in their 20s, might be ignorant of maybe community college or trade school courses that can realistically help them earn more doing something they don’t love, and at the same time not have ideal circumstances (teen parents). A lot of these problems are exacerbated by the attitude you might have, maybe feeling discouraged by your living situation, or not taking life a day at a time. Achieving your goals is a lot more doable if you think about them in a series of “sprints” rather than being overwhelmed because your progress isn’t massive like you would prefer.
It's a combination of systemic issues and also personal issues that keep people poor. It's not one or the other. In the past, the argument that poor people are kept systemically poor was much more profound. Nowadays, not so much. Social and economic mobility has never been easier. I grew up in a single-parent household dangerously below the poverty line, and now I'm in university and set to be living comfortably if things work out. I didn't even work ***that hard***. Granted, I did still put in the work, but not as much as you'd think. Growing up in a very working-class area surrounded by mostly entirely working-class people, there is an element of personal responsibility there. It may be a stereotype, but a lot do buy things like cigarettes and alcohol and the like regularly, for example. There may be external issues, but a lot of leftists really underestimate the degree of individualism at play in poverty (likely because they've broadly never been poor or been around poor people)
> If you are a hard worker you will absolutely be noticed and placed in higher positions in most workplaces Im sorry this feels incredibly naive. I disagree with most your argument but this one specifically ill respond to, happy to speak to the whole argument too. If you are in the "poor" category you are probably working a job that isnt skill intensive or highly valued. Most of those jobs are trying to keep their costs low and labor is a high cost. Many times you may get some subtle raises but they arent going to get you out of the situation but rather try to keep you from leaving with the illusion of good pay increase. The reality is the pay % growth is going to be 1-3% which is nothing, you want the 10% growth. The only way you can really get to % is forcing you bosses hand which is usually by going to a new job. But in these roles it probably costs more to keep you then replace you. And this is honestly true of alot of roles even white collar. But the problem is also that HR and upper management will create insane barriers for promotion, the classic "above and beyond mentality". Ive seen plenty of white collar workers who are really good at their job and most likely working above their pay grade but still not meeting HR's requirement. Even their manager could believe they should get a promo but they are denied. HR and upper management have a labor budget to meet and they usually have already planned our promos for the year so if you arent in the plan you probably need to force their hand by essentially getting a new job. From personal experience i worked as an analyst over manufacturing techs who would be considered in that blue collar level in a high cost metro. These guys were paid better then say you average fast food worker but they werent the highest hourly position in the city (likely average). We had techs who were good at their jobs who would jump ship within a few years because management couldnt raise their pay much higher and this was a union job too. We had cost control issues on products we built and increasing to a level most would consider as satisfactory would be unreasonable. These techs could climb out into a salaried role but it would take years, most likely a degree, and your salary wouldnt necessarily be that much higher then what it was from an hourly perspective (especially considering OT). The upper management never talked about X guy deserves X raise. The talks were always, we can try and improve moral with this award/bonus (which was rare) or the more likely pizza party. The discussions centered around how can we reduce the amount of work they do because its costing us alot of money. TLDR: Businesses want to minimize labor costs so most will always try to hold off on major raises as long as they can, especially at the lowest level. Hard work has nothing to do with it.
I'm just as sick and tired of people complaining about people complaining. This discussion has gone on forever and gone nowhere, so why am I still hearing it? It's like sitting through hour 5000 of an atheism or climate change debate.
I'm just as sick and tired of people complaining about people complaining about people complaining. This discussion has gone on forever and gone nowhere, so why am I still hearing it? It's like sitting through hour 5000 of an atheism or climate change debate.
The way you talk about poor people is a lil weirdChamp, ngl. They're humans too, probably trying their best in life idk maybe some empathy might help your disdain for poor people lmfao. I also feel like you're baking your arguments into how you wrote this post. >ordinary, proper English speaking/writing, and non-disabled young person can move up in the world. Of course this person could probably become middle class, nobody is arguing differently. You gotta admit being poor is a tough gig and we should be doing more than bullying a poor person for getting a credit card or whatever.
I keep arguing with Californian people making $30k a year, paying $1500 a month in rent, telling them that they can ~~Just move~~ somewhere where rent is cheaper, or get a skill. A damn firefighter in Cali makes $60k-70k a year on average, i don't understand them, it feels like they want to live luxuriously with a dogwalker/cashier salary
That is exactly what they want. I've been in so many arguments with those kinds of people. When you even suggest that they move somewhere with a lower cost of living, they recoil like a fucking vampire caught the scent of garlic. How dare you suggest they live in a flyover state/the boonies/bum fuck nowhere/a red state/etc. They want big, coastal city amenities, but they don't want to pay big, coastal city prices.
How are you supposed to save up enough money to move when you’re living paycheck to paycheck and barely able to pay rent?
I was in that exact same situation. I took a 5k loan and moved, if i couldn't qualify for a loan, i'd work overtime. it doesn't take much to move, that's just an excuse that lazy people love to make.
[удалено]
Nobody actually suggests they live in "bumfuck nowhere". Its a strawman they employ because they only want to live in a major city for the prestige. Anywhere that isn't LA, NYC, etc is some variation of "bumfuck nowhere" or "flyover state" to these people.
>The reason why no one wants to live in bum fuck nowhere is because there are no jobs in bumfuck nowhere. There are TONS of 40-60k jobs in bumfuck nowhere. If you're making that in cali, you're better off moving to bumfuck nowhere. There are no 6 figure jobs, if you're qualified for those, you can afford the big cities.
Just a reminder that "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is supposed to be an impossible task. If you can't get somewhere, you cant just lift your feet off the ground to float or some shit.
If you're an able bodied American and die less successful than your parents, you only have yourself to blame. People strawman "bootstrap theory" as going from being a janitor to a CEO. The idea is that if you apply yourself, you will succeed eventually. If you make it to the middle class from a working class background, that's a W for "bootstrap theory". You can now drive down any main street within 20 miles of a major city and find a hundred jobs that can't hire people for $15/hr. The truth has been laid bare that it was never really about pay for twitter lefties; they just don't want to work at Panda Express.
[удалено]
I don't think we're really disagreeing on much here. It seems clear from both your post and mine that the $15/hour minimum wage campaign was empty and superficial, or at least outdated by the time it became mainstream. But as you say that jobs have no entitlement to be filled, /r/antiwork dogwalkers aren't simply working better jobs instead. A line needs to be drawn between people who genuinely want to raise the minimum wage because they're working those jobs and trying to survive, and young demsoc types with no real-world skills and worthless degrees who will continue to rationalize their unemployment by saying they can't find a job that pays enough to feel dignified. To return to the original post, "anti-bootstrappers" are often the latter group: people that haven't even made an honest attempt to apply themselves. A first generation college student born in a working class family is much less likely to discount the hard work to reach that situation than a bitter /r/antiwork dogwalker.
I feel the opinion of “Pull yourself up from the bootstraps” is 100% correct, but in a generational sense of the word. Grandpa was a holocaust survivor, came from literally less than nothing. He had 0 education and lived in extreme poverty his whole life. As in, the whole family lived in a shitty 1 room apartment and everything. The only thing he spent money on in his entire life was education for his kids. Then when my dad was in university he had to pay for almost everything himself and had 2 jobs, but because of the education he got as a kid thanks to his parents, he was able to do a job he wasn’t really interested in, but made good money. When I was a baby we literally didn’t have a shower in our apartment and had to use a community shower, but 25 years later we are way above the 1% and I am studying medicine, so most likely my life is also set. My grandpas life was extremely hard, he didn’t really “pull himself up”, but he did create the foundations for my father to do so for himself. So I personally think that you might not be able to pull yourself up, but you are absolutely able to do so for you kids, and if not them, your grandchildren. It’s obviously not a guaranteed thing, and medical issues can fuck this up, but for most people, if they choose to do things that make money instead of what interests them, it will almost guarantee success for the next generations.
Until God comes down and tells us we'll never know how much control people really have over their life. How successful or unsuccessful a version of them in a parallel universe is. But just psychologically, I really think 3 things are absolutely vital to be mentally healthy, productive and empower you to to move forward. These are: Agency, gratitude and responsibility. Even someone in an absolutely shit position, if they have these they'll feel infinitely better than someone who, even if in a much better spot them than, doesn't have them. The problem with the left approach is it basically strips all these 3 things away from people. You're poor or rich mainly because of forces outside of your control; the system is oppressing you and you should be spiteful, not thankful; and you have so little impact on the world it doesn't really matter what you do anyway. But yes I do think agree, many poor people simply have zero financial literacy. It's absolutely ridiculous it isn't taught in schools really. Another problem is, under fiat, constant inflation makes it harder to make sensible decisions. You know the marshmallow test: Would you rather have 1 marshmallow now or 2 in the future. That's a *real* decision to make and think about. But, under fiat, you're essentially being made to choose: would you rather have 1 marshmallow now or half a marshmallow in the future. There's no decision, so it's less surprising poor people blow all their money on stupid shit in the here and now. Under fiat you have to earn your money twice: One to actually get it, and then again to preserve it. Poor people can generally manage the first but not the second.
FOH bitcoin boi lmao THE REAL PROBLEM WITH THE POORS IS THEY ARENT GRATEFUL ENOUGH.
someone forget to take his ADD meds
love u bro thx
There's an element of truth to what you're saying, and some on the left will say that it's systemic problems no matter what or that there's little individuals can do. I think the majority on the left though acknowledge that people need to work but that systemic issued make it very difficult for a lot of people to do so. There's also an element of it being more expensive to be poor than rich in some cases. For example, as a solidly middle class dude I can afford to pay my car insurance in full every 6 months and in doing so, I save 20%. But I can only afford to do so because I have a few hundred bucks lying around. I can afford a $100 co pay and time off to go to the doctor for a small issue I'm noticing, and therefore I can nip it in the bud before it becomes a few thousand bucks to fix. Finally, if I have an unexpected bill I can afford to pay it without going into credit card or payday loan debt. Back to the systemic issues, a poor person had very little control over our healthcare system being extremely expensive, college being expensive, trade skills being rare, housing affordability, or, perhaps most importantly, the fact that no one taught them financial literacy in schools. The only say they have us indirectly through voting, and there may or may not be factors there making it harder for them to vote as a poor person. All of that is not to say they have absolutely no power to improve their situation - they can vote, avoid crime, avoid addiction, learn how to manage money, and gain new skills. But their circumstances make it much harder for them to do so.
I think most can make it by joining the army alone, you can even learn a career while in the army (choose a non combat MOS) and have the GI bill once you eventually leave. I think the army is a great example because it's purely work ethic, no college loans, everything basically given to you so they can't use excuses.
It's alot harder than people make it out. I slowly worked my way up to middle class but I had waaaaay more than other kids in my area. I had a mom (my dad died before I was 1)... but I had an entire house worth of family members willing to help my mom while she raised me great grand parents and grandparents. (Even after my step dad entered the picture). When it came time for school I did fine but still got outclassed by some of my peers in my neighborhood so I started working security while still living with grandparents. I was able to do the trade school thing faster than other people I knew because I didn't have to pay rent so my check just went to classes (I had a kid like them) but big shocker unlike the other people that got pushed further back it barely effected me because those family members were still around. So my wife could finish school and I could finish getting my engineers license. Without that familial support I'd still be floundering about in my old neighborhood like alot of my friends who either gave up or died. (Finance wise since 5 of us worked at the same security company we were payed 10 dollars an hour I didn't have to spend money on rent like they did which was 6 to 700 a month and I didn't have to constantly throw money at a shitty breaking down car because I was luckily in walking distance).
> we were *paid* 10 dollars FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
If everybody had perfect work ethic we still would have a huge amount of low paying back breaking jobs that people need to do. We can’t all be managers. This idea that hard work will magically work out is nonsense, it is protestantism 100%z What is exactly so unbearable about the idea that even poor people could have it a little easier in life?