If you would only experience how hard rich people work.

1. 59

   mio cidposted 11 years ago

   Mike Huckabee ended his show with these words the other day.He said rich people should live with poor people for a few days so they would experience how hard their life is and poor people should live with rich people for a few days so they would see how hard they work.                                                                                                     This man is currently leading the pack on the republican side for 2016,that doesn't mean much because we are so far away, but it does tell us the way some conservatives see the world.And many don't see anything wrong with this kind of analysis.

   replyreport
   1. 46

      Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I am a lucky guy. I have been real rich and real poor. Huckabee's point is pretty strong. I never have met a rich man that because he was rich he was happy. And I never met a poor man that became happy because he became rich. "walk a mile in my shoes" is righteous.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         The righteous thing is to walk in the shoes of the other person, not demand they walk in yours.

         replyreport
      2. 59

         mio cidposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         You are correct ,but it is also implicit in his remark the fact that the rich are rich solely because they are hard working people and  only if the poor worked just as hard they would be rich too and therefore their life would be easier.And this way of thinking is natural to many conservatives and they see nothing wrong with it

         replyreport
         1. 94

            wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I think it is more likely the liberals that are "assigning" meaning to conservative remarks that was never intended.  An effort, perhaps, to denigrate the rich, or conservatives, or simply different attitudes or thoughts.
            
            I highly doubt that every rich person (or even very many) would believe that the poor will always become rich if they work hard.  There is far more to it than that and anyone that has accumulated wealth through their own efforts knows it.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               mio cidposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I agree with you that most rich people don't believe poor people are lazy,but that is a stereotype promoted by the right wing nut talking heads to convince the simpleton to vote against their own best interest,and in favor of extremist candidates and policies.And as far as the LBRLS are concerned  they are not as successful to get their own ideas and         points clearly understood by most of the people , if they were there would be one party rule in this country because the GOP in its current state would have made itself irrelevant.Which is a good thing because there being two or even three viable political parties is not only  desirable but necessary.

               replyreport
               1. 94

                  wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  No - poor people being lazy is a stereotype promoted by the far left and assigned to the right in an effort (often successful) to disgust the poor and convince them to vote against the countries best interest.
                  
                  Liberals are VERY successful at getting their ideas across:  you can have whatever you want if you only have the power to take it away from the people that have worked for it and the left can give you that power.  Thank goodness that there are still some that understand that the good of the country is not found by stealing from one to give to another, Robin Hood style. 
                  
                  Do you get the idea that we vary a tiny bit on how we view the two primary parties of the country?

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Which explains the 47% comment perfectly

                     replyreport
         2. 46

            Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            No MioCid it is not implied in his words.

            replyreport
2. 84

   psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago

   He should try working as a hotel maid or fruit harvester for a day or two.

   replyreport
3. 94

   wildernessposted 11 years ago

   Have you swallowed the common image of a rich man in his mansion, getting up at 10AM and sitting all day in his robe while the maid, butler, gardner and chef wait on his every command?  Bringing him drinks and the newspaper at the snap of a finger?
   
   Most entrepeneurs, rich OR poor, work long hours. Relaxation is as foreign to them as family life is.  Or real vacations, or weekends and evenings off to play with the kids.  How many rich people actually have the time to see the kids play the flute in the school band?
   
   Sure, you have a few rich playboys who do little but play, but those rich that actually earned their wealth did it with work, not by sitting by the fire bouncing the baby on their knee.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Wilderness,  I concur with your premise.  Rich people work long and hard hours.   They are not merely 9-5 workers.   Many of them own their companies, corporations, if not, they have established a brand and/or a name.   They have developed the skills necessary to demand compensation whether it is a CEO, entrepreneur, businessperson, and/or entertainer.    Rich and affluent people OWN it!   They are in demand regarding their services and talents.
      
      Poor people, on the other hand, are OWNED.  They are often at the mercy of other people.   Many poor people have been inculcated with the victim mentality.   They have been told that the world is not theirs and that they have to work to survive.   They have been told that life is totally against them and they have nothing significant to contribute to society.     
      
      Those poor people who want to better themselves are often discouraged by their parents, relatives, and peers who tell them NOT TO DREAM BIG because they are poor.     Even at work, poor people have a vicitim mentality.   They do not want to advance themselves although there are myriad opportunities to do so.   They make excuses and discourage other poor people who want to advance.   I have seen this at my job.     They have the crab in the barrel mentality-since they do not want to advance themselves in anyway, they do not want others who are the same to advance.       In America, many poor people are poor by their own volition, no one else's, pure and simple.   
      
      The poor people who want to advance have done so-my parents, my schoolmates in elementary, high school, and college, and some on the job.     If one wants something, organize, strategize, and work smart for it!     Many poor people, especially in the United States, are content being poor.   They would rather whine and want others to lift them out of their poverty than to be proactive regarding the situation at hand.

      replyreport
      1. 94

         wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Very true, although I would add risk aversion as a large part of why many don't do better financially than they do. 
         
         I understand that once poor, taking financial risks becomes very scary - I, too, have a lot of that.  Security, or at least the illusion of security, is important to most people.  Nevertheless, unless a person is willing to risk it all a few times they will never be rich.

         replyreport
         1. 84

            gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Wilderness, hey you are  so on target when you stated risk aversion.    I was listening to a cd by Keith Cameron Smith which stated that rich people take risks and view failure as a lesson whereas the poor and middle class, especially the middle class, are totally risk aversive, are obsessive with job security, and view failure as something to be avoided.     People who value security will never be rich and/or affluent.   They will chose security and boredom over risk and growth every time!

            replyreport
            1. 60

               tammybarnetteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Both of you make good points. When I was younger and unattached without children, I was a risk taker, but now I will choose security everytime. I did want to make a point here though, not everyone wants to be wealthy. I don't, I want to be comfortable, I want to not worry, but mostly I pray for good health for me and mine, not wealth, I pray for happiness, I have raised and I am raising children that I have taught and am teaching that the important things in life and happiness, can not be bought in stores; Too shoot for the stars, too go after your dreams despite the wage, etc...Being "rich" and being "wealthy" are two very different things

               replyreport
               1. 94

                  wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I concur, Tammy.  I left a decent paying job to move back to my extended family and a lower paying, blue collar job.  From a fortune 500 company (read security) to a tiny, 10 person shop (read layoffs and instability) and couldn't be happier.  I'm far wealthier than I was even though I have less income.
                  
                  It has made risk less palatable, though - the older I get the less risk I can tolerate as there is less time to recoup losses.  Now, I'm satisfied with what I have and will risk little for higher income.  It just isn't important anymore.
                  
                  I'll risk a few hours of time writing a hub, but that's about it.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     tammybarnetteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Wilderness, LOL...I spend way too much time playing here and do not make money here   Now, that's not risky, it's crazy

                     replyreport
                     1. 94

                        wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                          Me too, Tammy, me too.

                        replyreport
   2. 93

      habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Too true. I married into a wealthy family the first time I tied the knot, and they all worked as if they didn't know where their next meal was coming from. They RARELY took vacations. They worked 365 days a year - cattle have to be fed on Christmas Day, Sundays, and other holidays. They worked 12-16 hours a day, depending on the season. They got a new car and a new truck every ten years. My ex-in laws used to wash bread bags and use them for freezing veggies. They grew almost all their food. My father-in-law worked even when he was over 80 and was on IV drip - he carried it with him in a basket. They had one old TV in their home, no cell phones, and no computer.
      
      I'm not saying all wealthy people live such a life. Some are pampered snobs. Many poor people work hard, too. I don't think it's a bad idea for people to see how the other side lives.

      replyreport
4. 0

   Sarra Garrettposted 11 years ago

   Yes, the rich work hard for their money and empire.  Yes, the poor work hard for their money as well.  The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. 
   
   My question is:  How much money do you really need?  You can't take it with you when you die.  The rich really aren't helping the poor, they aren't creating jobs and they aren't teaching their children any values as they 'hand' their money down to them.  I don't see a rich kid busting his butt to make his millions.  Do you really need to purchase a $1,000 tie or a lamborgini?  Really?  Do you really need expensive stuff to live a good and decent life?
   
   Liberal or conservative it all comes down to the same thing:  GREED

   replyreport
   1. 94

      wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree; it comes down to greed.  The greedy of the rich, always wanting more than they currently have, and the greedy of the poor, always wanting more than they currently have.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         mio cidposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I have a little discrepancy here because as long as any rich person is taxed  a fair amount and by that I mean he contributes with a fair share of taxation according to the benefits he receives for being part of the richest society on earth and as a result the whole country is better off,he should be able to do whatever he wants with his wealth,buy or not buy whatever he wants and it should be nobody's business.Everyone of us if we had the chance would like to have stuff others may deem superfluous .

         replyreport
   2. 46

      Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Sara, Look at your comment. The way rich people help poor people is by spending their money so that there are jobs for poor people. So if you criticize for spending money ---- can you seriously object to them not sharing more?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Sarra Garrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Really?  So then why has the 40 hour work week disappeared along with health benefits?  If the rich are spending for the benefit of the poor I certainly don't see how they are helping the poor.  The rich can't think about surviving on $7.25/hour wages on a less than 30 hour work week.  They walk around with expensive clothes driving expensive cars and living in expensive houses.  I bet if you went through each rich mans house in America you wouldn't find one item that was Made in America.  Rich people outsource American  jobs creating more of a homeless problem wherein there isn't even a middle class anymore.  Huge Corporations outsource jobs to other countries in order for their bottom line to increase.  Ha!  I'm sorry I don't buy it.  It all comes out to the same thing GREED.  The rich want more and the poor just want something.
         Maybe if we didn't have self check out stands there would be a few more people with a job.   I would love to have one rich person stand up to one poor person busting their butt for mininmum wage and tell that poor person that they spend their riches for the betterment of the poor.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            tammybarnetteposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Sara, I agree. I believe there are many who have built up wealth and have actually walked in a poor man's shoes, who do try to give back. However, may donate to charities for tax write offs. And as you say, greed is the underlying problem. If I were to become wealthy, I would have no need for many homes, cars, clothes (junk, trinkets, things you can't take with you). I would do a lot of giving. I have knowm many poor persons who work there fingers to the bone and come home stinky and tired. I would believe that the wealthy, who work the 80hrs and miss the important moments of life have a greed problem, the stinky, tired, and bone tired guy is just trying to keep his head above water and feed his family.

            replyreport
         2. 46

            Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Sarah,
            The anger shows through in your writing. Shifting and sharing of wealth is not an emotional construct. You are playing on heart strings and pity all the while arguing for more for one and less for another on sheer holistic gravamen. Not all poor people work their fingers to the bone and not all wealthy people are slaves to greed. How much more should Gates and Buffet give.  And how much more should any man take? This is not simple math and a blame game. Communism sucks. I know, I have live under it.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               mio cidposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Contrary to the simpleton's belief, the safety net and a society that takes care of providing the least fortunate of its members with basic human needs is not conducive to communism ,it is the exact opposite it is what prevents communism  from having any credibility as a system of government.It is not the right wing extremists who have been more successful in defeating communism,it is those who understood that capital needs to operate within certain boundaries to the benefit of society as a whole who are most successful in demonstrating the  economic and social superiority of a capitalist economy over a communist regime.

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  galleryofgraceposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  The rich are only rich becuase they exploit the poor! Ask any internet marketer out there where they get their money. It's from poor people- they feed them hope with one hand and take their money with the other hand. The governments the same way.

                  replyreport
         3. 84

            gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Ms. Garrett,  the poor work at unskilled jobs.   Jobs that do not require skill oftentimes do not pay much.    The jobs that have a commeasurate level of payment require education and skills.  Jobs that pay well require a high amount of education and skills.   Everyone cannot earn the same even though many pundits are in essence advocating this!   
            
            A doctor earns more than a cook at McDonalds.   The doctor went to college and medical school in addition to that, he/she underwant further training through internships and residencies.    If he/she becomes more specialized, that will amount to higher earnings.   See where I am going with this.    The cook at McDonalds often has a high school and/or other minimum sort of education.    While being a doctor requires specialized skills, almost anyone can be a cook at McDonalds.   Sara, what I am presenting here is simple mathematics and logic.    Specialized jobs=$$$$$money.    Unskilled jobs= - monies.
            
            
            The affluent, wealthy, and/or rich develop skills, have the prerequisite education, and/or developed an in demand talent or brand.   If a person has devloped a sufficient brand name and is in demand, he/she will earn a lot of money because people want that brand.   Oprah is a celebrity and a brand.   She is in demand, people want to hear what she has to say and will often buy what she recommends.    The name of the game is brand, talent, and education.   If one develops all three, one can become wealthy.
            
            Besides all of that, one must be proficient in networking and selling oneself.   One cannot be wealthy being a wallflower, can one.    One must do what one has to do(albeit ethically and legally, of course) to succeed.   One also must have the passion, drive, and hunger to succeed.   One can have all the credentials but if one does not have passion, drive, and hunger, it is all for naught!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Sarra Garrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               The poor do not necessarily work at unskilled jobs!  All it takes is one accident (like mine) to loose your job, your car and your home rendering you poor and homeless.  Not everyone can afford to go to college to further their education and some have to continue to work on farms to continue providing food on everyone elses tables.  Farmers are't rich you know, they work from sun up to sun down don't have any money in their pocket but are rich in family values and work ethics.  We need farmers and ranchers in order to eat. 
               
               Don't 'label' poor people if you haven't been there.  Try living on a fixed income or loosing your retirement from the Enron disaster and Wall Street disaster.  Now you are old and have to work until the day you die.
               
               What I am saying is how much does one really need in order to live and be happy?  A simple roof over your head and food on the table not to mention a comfy bed and clothes and a car that works.  You don't need to 'flaunt' your wealth and spit on the hard working blue collar workers.  I had an employer one time tell me that being a secretary wasn't a career.  UH excuse me, yes it is most certainly a career and a good one.  Without the secretary there wouldn't be a company. 
               
               The corporate people who sit in expensive high backed leather chairs and pad their pockets with fat bonuses each year and pay raises need to remember where they came from........hard working roots.  This current economy isn't a recession, it's a depression! There used to be a chicken in every pot, now you are lucky to get a neck bone to suck on.  Give me a job in a factory and I would be the happiest person in the world.  People put too much emphasis on 'how much' they need to have when you only need to live simply to be happy.  Simple people help each other, the rich just sit back and look out the window.

               replyreport
               1. 84

                  gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I am sorry for your homelessness and want you to do better.    However, you should not have low expectations regarding life and achievement.    Many people are poor because they have low expectations.   If more people have higher expectations, maybe they would be more socioeconomically successful.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Sarra Garrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     My friend.  I do not have low expectations regarding life or achievement.  There are no jobs out there and if there are, you have to be bilingual.  There is also a thing called age discrimation of which I am running into.  I once was able to out work any man on the planet.  I've slowed down but I can still work my butt off and work all day long, I have just simply slowed down.  I am a survivor and sometimes I just don't know how I do it but by the Grace of God.  Yes, there are some poor people out there who have simply given up and I totally understand why.  But it still doesn't give anyone who is more prosperous the right to spit on the poor.  I live in Rural Nebraska where there is no public transportation and the closest house is at least 3 miles from each other.  All I want is a job.  We were once a prosperous country and we helped each other and there were fewer poor and homeless.  Now, factories stand like ghosts with their only inhabitants are pidgeons.  Large companies are learning to survive with fewer employees in order to cut down on benefits.  There are no more 40 hour work weeks and you can't live on minimum wage especially if you are a single person.  Before I left my home to live in a tent I asked for heat assistance.......I still have the form and it states that I have to be living 135% below the poverty level in order to get help.  Does that make any sense?  I had a simple accident: I broke my ankle severly.  I lost everything and I'm single and 50.  All I ask is that everyone band together and help each other.  I don't want money handed to me, I want a job! It's a simple request.  I want to be able to put my own roof over my head once again.  I don't need the rich rubbing their greed in my face.

                     replyreport
                     1. 84

                        gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Agreed.  As one gets older, it is more difficult to find employment.  Although it is illegal to discriminate against those 40 years of age and older(ADEA laws), corporations have a surreptitious way to do it.   Older and experienced employees are routinely terminated and/or downsized to be replaced by younger, less experienced employees for less monies and little or no benefits.   Yes, the work world is becoming fiercer and more predatory; however, we must reinvent ourselves in order to be marketable- if you can, obtain a marketable skills and get further training.    One must do this if he/she wants to survive in a future work world.

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           Sarra Garrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Thank you.

                           replyreport
                        2. 0

                           Sarra Garrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           I would love to start making and selling my jewelry once again as I made good money doing that.  However, without a job you have no money and no money equals no fastenings.  It's a vicious cycle.  This is something that I have to figure out myself whether it be to collect cans out of the trash.  Another is clothing.  I have 2 sets of clothes right now and neither one are for work.  Thrift stores want money for clothes, here we go again........there needs to be more places for donated clothes so people like me can get work clothes for free.  There are in large cities where they have seperate mens and womans shelters.  Work clothes are donated so these folks can obtain work.  In rural areas this doesn't exhist.  I used to sew a lot of my clothes however sold my sewing machine.  It wouldn't matter anyway because there is no $ to purchase material. 
                           
                           So many stores throw out good clothes and shoes on a daily basis.  These same stores actually deliberately ruin the clothes so dumpster divers (not unlike myself) don't get clothes to wear or shoes for their feet.  Why not donate these clothes to shelters and get a tax right off? 
                           
                           I do believe there is a solution to everything as well as there is a compromise to every argument.  We need to move forward with our ways of thinking.  We need to be a country of people who care about each other and you know what, we could be the leaders of a new movement.  A movement of caring and not of greed.  See my article on Baby Boomers.  Did we, as a generation, forget what it was like to help our neighbor?  If we know of a coworker who has a sick child or spouse what's wrong with sending them a crockpot meal or a bag of dry goods to help them out.  What's wrong with taking an elderly neighbor or a single parent to the food pantry once a month to help supplement their food?  There is nothing wrong with it.  We got so tied up in being married to our careers that we let our own people down to include our families through divorce, etc. 
                           
                           I see that you have quite the educational background and I applaud you for it.  So, with all the 'extra knowledge' you have what happened to compassion? There is no compassion anymore, not all homeless people are evil or sick, not all poor people are bad. Why not take an extra dollar you have in your pocket or in your change jar and buy a cold homeless person a cup of coffee to warm their hands if only for a moment.  Sit down and talk to the homeless and learn their story.  Yes, some have given up but sometimes people need to have their hand held if only for a moment in order to reinstill their faith in humanity.

                           replyreport
      2. 84

         gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Spot on!

         replyreport
         1. 46

            Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Emotional sophist socialist rhetoric. Please read Marx and appreciate the failure of the USSR.
            gmwilliams what do you make a living at that allows your comments here?
            Galleryofgrace -- are you so poor you cannot spare time to write here? Hippocrits I say. A plea for the poor most often comes from those with plenty.

            replyreport
            1. 84

               gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I was agreeing with your statement to Ms. Garrett.   The rich are the major contributors to society in more ways than one.   I am FAR from a socialist.   In fact, I utterly despise socialism.   I believe in capitalism and free enterprise.

               replyreport
               1. 46

                  Ericdierkerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Oops I should have addressed my directly to Ms. Garret -- my bad.

                  replyreport
5. 84

   justateacherposted 11 years ago

   I think it depends on the rich person to see if I would walk in his/her shoes. Those who have inherited their riches from parents or grandparents who have worked hard (Paris Hilton, for example) wouldn't know hard work if it bit them on the ankle. Others still work hard to maintain the wealth their forefathers have brought to them. These people still work hard - and many of them do much for the people who aren't as fortunate as them. They provide jobs, job training and other help for the poor. They work hard to help others and do not just sit on their laurels. I would love to walk in their shoes to see how they do it and what they must sacrifice to live the life they live. Like someone else posted, the wealthy must often sacrifice family life in order to be where they are.
   But I would also like them to walk in my shoes for awhile. I want them to see that I work hard, as hard or even harder, than they do. I want them to walk in my shoes at the end of the month when the money runs out but there are still groceries and gas to buy and bills to pay. I want them to see the struggle I have to put food on the table and keep my vehicle running, even though I am working ten to twelve hour days. I want them to see how it feels to try and decide how sick you are before you go to see the doctor - is the illness bad enough that its worth the copay or the deductible that I have to pay. I want them to feel the struggle of trying to decide whether to pay the gas bill or buying a child or grandchild a gift for a birthday or Christmas.
   I know that the world isn't fair and that some people work harder than others. I know that in many cases, luck plays into wealth as much as hard work does. I also know that some people can work hard all of their lives and not experience the wealth of others. And that some people don't work at all and enjoy their wealth. I also know of people who expect to be handed everything and don't want to work for any of it.
   I think the only thing that needs to be changed is that everyone - rich, poor, and in between - need to be taxed fairly. I have said before that a flat tax across the board would be the most fair way to handle things. Then those taxes should be used fairly and responsibly to the best of society and not just a few pet projects for a select few.

   replyreport
6. 59

   HLPhoenixposted 11 years ago

   I read the quote and then read a number of the responses... then I got P'd off.  Went back and read the quote again.  Now I have no use for Mike Huckabee, but I see nothing wrong with his quote.  Maybe it is out of context but the words themselves are plain and not loaded.  We are re-fighting an election that is over or is 4 years away.
   
   I have been both an Ayn Rand junkie (until American Capitalism defected) and was a Reagan supporter... until nothing trickled down. Then I became a doubter. Watching the Deficit balloon through Reagan and both Bush's and go to nothing with a surplus after Clinton, (and anyone can find those statistics who is willing to look) I have switched perspectives.  I think I used my logical mind and looked at the results. Folks, I think you have been had... mio cid, you are a true wonder at stirring up a conversation and more power to you.

   replyreport
7. 61

   prettydarkhorseposted 11 years ago

   Wealth can be transferred, yes, even status from one generation to the next. To maintain it, you need hard work and the capability to know what makes you happy and when to say "this is enough'.
   
   To those who are struggling, there is no choice but to work hard.
   
   Choice is everything.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Sarra Garrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      True, but I didn't choose to break my ankle putting me out of work.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         prettydarkhorseposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Are you the one who posted you are homeless in Alaska?
         
         Don't be slighted by my comment, all I want to say is that in a capitalist mode of economy, if you are able, you can have a choice, and in your circumstance I wish you are near here, you can have a home! :-)

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Sarra Garrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I'm not slighted at all.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinions that's what makes people invididuals.  Nebraska actually.  Yes, we all have choices, but some people who are homeless don't have choices.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               prettydarkhorseposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               That is why I like to think that a society should always have a safety net for people who are struggling! It should be a priority. You take care there in Nebraska, from here, the East Coast!

               replyreport
8. 0

   LikaMarieposted 11 years ago

   *sigh*  hard work is really relative.
   
   I would like a rich person to work with me, and see if they could do my home care job and accept less than $10/hr for the hard work I do.
   
   On the other hand, I'm not saying that all rich people don't work hard, but, when you're well compensated for your job, it's not as difficult to perform, when you know that your reward is greater than the efforts put forth.
   
   My job, it's a labor of love, because after taxes, fica, and what ever else, I almost wonder why I have to make a trip to the bank, and I never have enough money.  yet if I'm going to get more, my already hurting body would have to perform more than what I'm capable.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      LikaMarieposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Then there are those such as the S.C. Johnson company, whose grandfather built the empire, and so while they may work at maintaining the wealth, they didn't have to work as hard for it, because it was an empire they inherited.
      
      And while they do give a lot to the local economy and more, they've also switched to using temp services so more people are either part time, or receiving no benefits because they are temps.  Once the assignment is done, the temps can't even collect unemployment because it was an accepted temp offer...  So, I'm just wondering why the workers aren't being compensated better for a more stable local workforce and economy?

      replyreport