[Ken Fry]

Ken,
This isn't about cultural issues, it's about people's expectations for jobs from which they'll receive a reasonable compensation. Benton Harbor is in Berrien Cty., Mi., and the living wage in that county is pegged at $8.14 for one adult. For one adult who has one child it's $16.45, two adults with no kids can 'get by' if their combined hourly wage is $13.00,  that total becomes $21.31 for two adults w/one child, and for two adults with two children it's $28.06.

Families are seen as the backbone of our country, yet why is there is such a lack of opportunities that provide them with the incomes they need to provide for themselves, i.e., jobs that pay living wages? It isn't necessarily the type of employment that working folks consider to be 'beneath' them, it's the wages, and that becomes very apparent when you look at the above info and see the cost of having kids. A single parent w/one child needs a tad over twice the hourly wage that a single person w/out children needs, and that cost continues on down the line. An $8.14 per hour job on the grounds crew might be "OK" for a single person, but add in the cost of one kid and the need rises to $16.45 per hour unless   there are assistance programs to help with the shortfall.

Jim,

This is a cultural issue.  You want jobs to magically appear in an area where there is no industry.  You believe the people there "deserve" a certain pay level.  How are you proposing to pay them?  That's correct, government programs.  That lifestyle has been in place in Benton Harbor for many years.  That's the cultural cycle that must be broken.  Through improved education and safety, this town can make a comeback.  People are there trying now.  Years of incompetent leadership has lead them to this point.  Government doesn't save towns, counties or states.  They need money to move forward.

People can throw stones all they want, but it's impressive to see how many of the home sites and neighborhoods are being purchased at Harbor Shores.  What all this will provide is something the town hasn't had in a while:  taxable property, hence income.

Ken

[Jim_Kennedy]

It's not magic Ken, all I'm saying is that the employers in Benton Harbor, or any other locale, need to pay workers a living wage. It's the absence of good paying jobs, those that pay enough for a family to be able to raise children and have the necessities of life, that needs to be addressed. If it was there would be little need for subsidies. I agree that education is necessary, but that doesn't happen overnight. In the meantime, subsidizing people is no different than programs of government subsidies to business, like farmers, high tech companies, exporters, oil companies, etc. It can help folks through the changing landscape and better prepare them for the future.

People who work for a living deserve to be paid an adequate wage, one that is in line with what it takes to live in a specific area.  

Jud,
The list of people who call families the backbone of our country spans all the known ideologies in the USA, and probably on the planet. The list for home-ownership is not far behind.  
 
p.s. the 'safest' environment is created when I, and all my neighbors, have a good job. We then go out and start to buy things, like cars, TVs, homes, and eventually get into some debt. We then see each other in the morning heading off to our respective jobs, cheerfully singing "I-owe, I owe, it's off to work I go". Good job + good pay = happy camper.    

[Ted Cahill]

Jim K- I agree with your assessment.  This is a pretty grim article to read, but it sheds a light on this depressed community.  An earlier poster described Rachel Maddow as a carnival barker for her reporting on Benton Harbors' struggles.  How would you describe the pitchman that sold Benton Harbor on a high end Jack Nicklaus Signature expensive daily fee golf course as the elixir for their economic malaise?  The Music Man?

[Jud_T]

Jim,

Given that only 51% of adults are now married, half of which will end in divorce, I'd say the backbone has either developed scoliosis or has had some unstable discs all along.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jud,

Census data from 2000 put the total number of households in the USA at 105,480,101.  
71,787,347 of that number are considered to be family households.
54,493,232 of that number are married couple households.

Call it as you see it, but 3/4 of all Americans live as families, quite a healthy majority. There are also 6,462,679 households that consist of two or more people, either roommates or unmarried partners, that are part of the total number of households.

[Tim Nugent]

I don't see it as an Black or White, Either - Or proposition.  I live close enough to Benton Harbor to knowall about it.  And YES, it does carry a stigma with it.  So, what I see is an effort to attempt to change that Stigma.  Will it work? Who knows, but at least give them credit for trying.  Jim K. wants good paying jobs in BH.  Well, if Jim was a CEO, what does BH have to offer to enduce or entice him to relocate his business there?  Is there a stable, highly educated work-force.  Is there low crime?  Is the community stable?  Is there a competitive (and stable) tax policy?  Will his managers and executives want to live there?  Are the schools safe and highly-rated?  Do a majority of the kids go on to college? 
Even if a company decided that, yes, it make sense to relocated to Benton Harbor, what would entice the employees to live in BH and not across the river in St. Joe?  I see Benton Shores as trying to offer an alternative.  Sure, it's easy to slam the Nicklaus name on the project but isn't that the Marquee Brand effect that they were going for? Who else would have garnered as much unpaid for press.  Especially several years out?
Sure, it's easy to sit in an Ivory Tower and wish for a better life for all but in the real world, cities and even states are fighting it out to try an attract and retain good paying companies.  And for companies to make it in our Global Economy, they have to be able to attract the best employees and produce the best product at the lowest cost.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Tim,
My 'seat' is more like a stool at a White Castle...    
 
..not an Ivory Tower.  

The issues that face the town of Benton Harbor are recognizable, they happen in many places to some extent or another.
You've raised a lot of questions and I can't say that I have the answers, but the town seems to be responding with educational programs, etc., for it's residents.

My definition of a 'good job' is one that not only pays an amount that uplifts one's bank account, it also pays interest to that person in the form of self esteem, outlook, and inclusion. A living wage is a neccessity for those things to happen.

Many of the jobs we've relied on in the past to provide Americans with living wages have moved south of the border or offshore because the owners or stockholders in those companies want to make more money. In some cases they may not have been able to survive if they hadn't relocated, but I think those are in the minority. In any case, common wisdom says we aren't getting them back anytime soon. I don't see how we will when companies can save 30 to 90% in labor costs overseas.

Re-educating our workforce for more hi-tech employment will take quite a while, and those jobs aren't going to appear overnight. Not in Benton Harbor or just about anywhere else. In the meantime we could look at re-valuing many of the jobs that do remain, like the ones that can only be done with boots-on-the-ground on-site.
 
The maintenance jobs in subdivisions like Benton Harbor are one example. It doesn't seem unrealistic to suggest that a second home owner, especially one who will be forking over 1/2 million or more to reside in a place like that, can't fork over a few more dollars an hour to pay the help a living wage. If that type of job has been looked on with disdain in the past it isn't because no one wants to mow grass or weed whack or rake bunkers, it's because they couldn't earn what they needed to be mostly self reliant. Move a job like that from minimum wage to living wage and it becomes attractive to a wider segment of the workforce. Benton Harbor has already taken advantage of several government programs, they could use some of the money they saved to increase the wages for what will be the lower paying jobs in their development.

Farm work is another historically low paying job in a sector that receives tons of federal subsidies. Maybe it's time to re-allocate some of the coin that's paid to large agri-businesses and offer it in the way of subsidies to smaller farmers so they can hire more workers and pay them a living wage.

Anyway, I don't discredit the whole idea of what Whirlpool, et al., are trying to do in BH, and I hope it works for the area. Mainly, I hope it works for the existing townsfolk. That would be impressive.



  

    


  

[Ken Fry]

Jim,

I can attest there are many people who work in some area of the golf industry that don't make a living wage.

Ken

[Jud_T]

Jim,

Why would anyone pay more than the market clearing price for any employee?  If I'm not paying enough to attract the level of employee I want or need I will have to pay more.  If folks are lined up around the block to get a job at minimum wage and I'm satisfied with the skillset and work ethic of those applying, then that's what they'll get.  It's called Economics 101...

[Tim Nugent]

Jim,

Why would anyone pay more than the market clearing price for any employee?  If I'm not paying enough to attract the level of employee I want or need I will have to pay more.  If folks are lined up around the block to get a job at minimum wage and I'm satisfied with the skillset and work ethic of those applying, then that's what they'll get.  It's called Economics 101...

Bingo!  Just because a wealthy homeowner pays a couple bucks more to the owner of a landscape service, what is there to insure that this windfall will trickle down to the workers?  Nothing.  It (that portion after the government takes their cut off the top) will go into the bamk account of the owner - the guy who took the risk of starting the business in the 1st place.  That is, if the homeowner doesn't go to the next cheaper purveyor of the same service. 

In a free market economy, you can't do social engineering without setting off a chain reaction of unintended consequences.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jud,

If there are folks lined up around the block for a minimum wage job then economics 101 isn't working for them. Henry Ford paid twice the going rate for employees because he understood that the success of his business was people who could afford to buy his product.

Perhaps it's time for business to forego the less selfish, short view when it comes to wages and think more about the long view, which starts with paying a living wage.

Tim,
A development like BH can set a minimum wage that must be paid for certain services performed on its property, one that an outside contractor would have to follow if he/she were bidding the job. That type of arrangement is found when contracting for some gov't. work and also in unions, where starting pay, etc. are set,  i.e. just like it's done on our major league sports teams.    

[Jud_T]

Jim,

Gov't subsidies, unions, price fixing.  Seriously?  Where are you pitching your tent for Occupy Benton Harbor?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jud,
I camped when I was young. Now, if they were occupying w/motorhomes....    

I'm not suggesting we add to the goverment's subsidies, just realign them toward wages in certain industries. Actually, if wages did increase by shifting some of the subsidies in agri-business (and the like) to wages it might just lift more folks off welfare, medicaid and other subsistance programs and turn them into tax-payers.    

As you well know, unions helped working people get the eight-hour day, they helped bring about child labor laws, they have been instrumental in protecting a  worker's’ job safety and they helped to create Social Security, along with minimum wage laws and unemployment insurance.  I'd imagine you could find out more info on your own if you so choose.

As you also know well, setting minimum wage standards in contracts is not price fixing.

Dave,
Not really.

All those manufacturing jobs, the type of work that raised people into the middle class, are almost gone and there doesn't seem to be any new ones on the horizon to replace them, not now or anytime soon. Re-valuing many of the low paying jobs, especially in sectors that receive a lot of gov't. subsidies already, into jobs that paid a living wage could lift many people out of poverty. A living wage will not give anyone a life of leisure, but the view forward from that plateau is visible, it's mainly hidden from view when you're living at or below the poverty line.  

[Scott Stearns]

Henry Ford did not pay $5.00 per day because "he understood that the success of his business was people who could afford to buy his product."

He did it because the work was so backbreaking, he had to pay a premium to keep people from working a few weeks and quitting because they couldn't take it.

Cessna doesn't pay its employees a gazillion dollars so they can each buy a jet--they pay the going rate and sell the jets to those who can afford them.

Any discussion of a "Living wage" betrays a lack of understanding of how the world works.  Employers pay the going are for labor because if they pay more, someone comes along and sells the product cheaper, and they go out of business. 

Creating "high paying" jobs is a matter of attracting industries that are required to pay them--these jobs typically require skills. 

Retaining Whirlpool's corp office in Benton Harbor was and is a miracle--an example
of a company that is trying to save its hometown, and its a good thing.  Providing a place where these workers want to live, instead of driving over to St. Joe, is another attempt at urban renewal. 

I'd have preferred a story on why the city was so poorly run the state had to move in and take it over.  But the litany of poor decisions that led to this is not as interesting as a jab at a golf clurse.   

[Jim_Kennedy]

Scott,
A living wage is not a high paying job, it just allows someone to earn more than the pittance that we call the minimum wage, and the MW should really be called the poverty wage as no one can afford to live on it.

All the low/medium/high skilled jobs that moved south of the border or offshore altogether left a big hole in the available pool of decent paying jobs. What do you suggest these workers (not laggards, workers ), especially the older ones, do until they can get re-trained for work in a new economy that doesn't even exist as yet?

So while we're waiting for all these new, higher paying jobs to appear I'm suggesting that there are lots of companies that could afford to pay their employees a living wage, right now, and still remain profitable. I think this is especially true in sectors to which we already give tremendous subsidies. Shifting some of that money towards paying a living wage could have the same effect as Henry Ford's move, it would lure and retain more workers to areas that they may have not thought about before, like farm work, and limit their need, or dependance, on other subsidies.

I ran my own small construction business for nearly 25 years and I was always able to pay above average wages to anyone I hired while still providing a comfortable existence for my two sons, my wife, and myself. If someone like me, who supposedly has "a lack of understanding of how the world works" can do it, then I'd say that the 'someones' who do understand how the world works have an even better chance of doing it.    

[PThomas]

lots of good points Jim..

I wonder ..check that, we are probably already there ...if in the US we are at a point where those good manufacturing jobs that people had 2 generations ago are gone and will never be replaced...and the only way to get them back is , i guess, if we limit imports of certain goods..

that stat you cited about almost half of the US being "poor"..i saw that when it came out and it scared the shit out of me.....but no one seems to be doing anything about it in this country...lots of companies now hire people as part time so they can avoid paying full time benefits

i guess there are fewer good jobs paying respectable wages than there was 40 years ago....lots of people work at McDonalds now and walmart etc for minimum type wages...the gap betwen the rich and the rest has been growing for 30 years now..

here's one gov job that we should hire a lot more of :  policemen...still way too much crime in this country, so why not double or even triple that workforce?  oh God I forgot:  no gov has the money to do so, esp since no one seems to realize that we should raise taxes to help pay down our debt...Clinton raised them, the  stock market responded favorably and we had a surplus for a year or two.....another could be people to help drug addicts , another is mental health professionals, etc..

no one wants to make the tough choices that need to be made...maybe the gov is the answer, maybe working more with the private sector in partnership, since the private sector alone doesnt appear to have the answers

end of rant

[Jud_T]

So let's raise taxes to 100%, pay everyone more than the market will bear and we'll be all set!

[JNC Lyon]

So let's raise taxes to 100%, pay everyone more than the market will bear and we'll be all set!

This isn't Russia, Danny.  Wait, is this Russia?  No, this isn't Russia.

[Jim_Kennedy]

So let's raise taxes to 100%, pay everyone more than the market will bear and we'll be all set!

That's a rather optimistic view.  

Living wages aren't luxury wages, they're 'just enough' income to keep a working person/family above the poverty line, and they have had positive effects on the well being of workers in cities and towns where they have already been implemented.
There was a study done at CUNY's Murphy Institute for Worker Education and Labor Studies that came to this conclusion: if Walmart were  to pay its 1.4 million U.S. workers a living wage of at least $12 per hour and pass every single penny of the costs onto consumers, the average Walmart customer would pay just 46 cents more per shopping trip, or around $12 extra dollars each year. It also found that those “who spend the most at the store are somewhat less likely to come from poor and low-income families.” As a result, only 28 percent of the additional costs would be paid by the poor and the near-poor.
A 2004 study by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce came to this conclusion about the effects of the low wages the company paid: it was estimated that just one Walmart store with 200 “associates” costs taxpayers over $420,000 per year in government assistance to those workers.  

Now really, do you think we're going to go broke paying living wages to workers? And to bring this back to Benton Harbor, do you really think that a 500 million dollar development that includes an upscale golf course, 1/2+ million dollar homes, upscale hotels and possibly high end retailers cannot afford to include living wage provisions in it's dealings with the various operators who will be part of it?

Merry Christmas.

 

[Jud_T]

Jim,

Given the volume of housing sales and golf rounds they've been experiencing it's likely that they won't be paying anyone much of anything  after a while, let alone a "living wage".  Good phrase though, you should offer it up to the Obama campaign.  He's gonna need all the help he can get...

[Jim_Kennedy]

"Living Wage" is not just a phrase, and the idea isn't new. As with most google searches, many of the hits aren't overly useful, but LW gets 6,790,000 of them.

You think Obama needs my help?, heck, the republicans are doing more than their fair share for him. 

Again, Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.
 

[Jud_T]

Jim,

Happy Holidays.:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-493es.html

[Sean_A]

It is upsetting when folks see a place like Benton Harbor (and a few other Michigan cities) as a cause rather than a symptom.  I know most Americans don't like the idea of the government getting involved business (though when was the last time it wasn't?), but if anything is true, it is the case that the government should have fought tooth and nail to save the car industry (among other industries).  The spill over effect of the car industry devestation is not something which can be repaired in a generation or two.  The repair is never going to happen.  What folks utterly fail to understand is that its far better to keep people working with government aid (of all sorts) than it is to pay unemployment.  Then again, if folks weren't so stupid as to buy foreign cars and other manufactured goods from abroad than we would never have had to invent such a daft thing as globalization.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that a country like the US (and Britain) needs to keep a circle economy.  Goods made by US workers who can afford and are happy to buy those goods.  That said, I think the initial Japanese incursion into the US market was very good, some competition always is.  However, once folks started to read consumer reports about which car to buy rather than to take a look around and see which product will in the long run help their family, neighbourhood, city, state, country - was the day that the US started its serious decline.  A decline, which only the government (this has already been proven with bank bailouts) has the power to reverse.  The governments goal should be to invest in folks who want to create medium size companies that supply high tech industries (yes, I include the car industry in that these days). 

It would have been much easier and cheaper if Americans and the government supported American industry starting back in the 70s.  In this case, hindsight has nothing to do with it.  We effectively have lost 35 years of planning and action because of globalization - a theory which for anybody with half a brain could see only half the country was going to be brought along as successful.  It couldn't be any other way when the central aspect of the theory was giving jobs away in exchange for cheaper foreign made products.  I don't know how many people in the car industry predicted what the outcome would be - only folks not directly connected with the industry didn't have a clue as to its importance (and manufacturing in general) to the economy.  Its was all guns ablazing for open market competition and one's neighbours be damned if they didn't have a job in a sensible industry.  This sort of thinking is most definitely one of the low points of US history.  Its even worse that Americans spend, after borrowing money from the Chinese (yes folks, that is where the money comes from - the Chinese are savers and are most happy to lend money to the West so the West can then buy Chinese products), like they are earning the wages that used to exist - even when they have jobs!  The government and companies can only do so much.  At some point Americans have to realize that debt is an economy killer and unlike Reaganomics, this killer virus does trickle down.

Ciao

Ciao       

[Jud_T]

Sean,

It's called freedom.  I suppose the government should have suppressed that newfangled internet thing as well.  When Detroit makes a car as good as my diesel BMW I will happily buy it.  A Chevy Volt for about the same money is a pretty piss poor substitute...

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jud,

Although the paper seems well researched I tend to believe its analysis was preordained, especially when it opens with...

For nearly a decade activists on the left...

...and closes with:

Organizations such as Acorn stand ready to exploit the discontent of the poor in recruiting them for political cadres. The larger the cadres, moreover, the easier it is for the living wage activists to intimidate and shame political opponents as "enemies of the poor".

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()