Apple Store Employees Soak Up the Atmosphere, But Not Much Cash

raque writes "The NYTimes is reporting on just how badly Apple Retail employees are being paid. Apple is exploiting its fan base for cheap labor. This is one reason I don't go to Apple Stores if I can avoid it. Stores like NY's Tekserve offer a great shopping experience without so exploiting their workers." Would you rather start at an Apple store for $11.91 an hour (average starting base pay, according to the linked article) and an employee discount, or at Tiffany for $15.60?

Comments

That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife works at an Apple store and pulls in $29.15 an hour working the genius bar. Which means that she would have been able to qualify for the mortgage we took out three months ago just on her salary. The 25% employee discount is nice also.

Methinks the poster has an axe to grind with his inflamatory language.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

All tech companies have high margins. A lot of the costs is R&D, so the manufacture price is a lot lower than the retail price.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Not true. The margins on almost every PC manufacturer are razor thin. That may change with the advent of Ultrabooks, but only for a short time.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[ThatsMyNick]

So how many employees usually last beyond the first few months? Or in other words, what the ratio of new employees to well established employees be, at any point of time, in the store?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[D'Sphitz]

Even for the non-genius bar employees, is $11.91/hour starting pay for retail supposed to be shocking or what? I worked many jobs just out of high school in the 90's for $5/hour, it's been a long time since I was paid hourly but am I really that disconnected that I think 12 bucks an hour seems fair?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Yosho-sama]

Your comment is based on your lack of understanding about how badly the dollar has devalued. $12/hour isn't a living wage in a lot of places.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[D'Sphitz]

A quick google shows fast food starting pay is right around $8/hour, retail at $9/hour, so I'm having trouble generating any outrage over Apple paying $12/hour.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[D'Sphitz]

I didn't earn a living wage working at Burger King in 1994 either. So what has changed exactly?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

And you aren't entitled to a "living wage," whatever that means in any given time and place. It's a term you made up.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MacTO]

In a lot of respects, I agree with that assessment. Yet I'd add a caveat: the value of an employee depends upon how much they contribute to the company's bottom line. This favours Apple employees: fast food involves a lot of labour for a low cost product.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

... (S)He did not make that up...

In public policy, a living wage is the minimum hourly income necessary for a worker to meet basic needs (for an extended period of time or for a lifetime). These needs include shelter (housing) and other incidentals such as clothing and nutrition. In some nations such as the United Kingdom and Switzerland, this standard generally means that a person working forty hours a week, with no additional income, should be able to afford a specified quality or quantity of housing, food, utilities, transport, health care, and recreation. In addition to this definition, living wage activists further define "living wage" as the wage equivalent to the poverty line for a family of four.

The living wage differs from the minimum wage in that the latter is set by law and can fail to meet the requirements of a living wage - or is so low that borrowing or application for top-up benefits is necessary. It differs somewhat from basic needs in that the basic needs model usually measures a minimum level of consumption, without regard for the source of the income.

The ILO uses various criteria to recommend minimum wage levels: the needs of workers and their families, the general level of wages in a county, the cost of living, social security benefits, the relative living standards of social groups and economic factors such as economic development and employment maintenance. The living wage focuses more on the needs of worker units, social security benefits and cost of living.

Living wage and minimum wage are two different things. Living wage is defined by the wage that needs to be met that can meet the basic needs to maintain a safe decent standard of living the their community and have the ability to save for future needs and goals.[1] To meet living wage people need to make about $12.50 an hour. Currently the minimum wage across the US is $7.25, which is well below living wage. In 1990 the first living wage campaigns were launched by community initiatives in US addressing increasing poverty faced by workers and their families. They argued that employee, employer, and the community win with a living wage. Employees would be more will work helping the employer reduce worker turnover ratio and it would help the community when the citizens have enough to have a decent life.[2]

Poverty threshold is the income necessary for a household to be able to consume a low cost, nutritious diet and purchase non-food necessities in a given country. Poverty lines and living wages are measured differently. Poverty lines are measured by household units and living wage is based on individual workers.

A related concept is that of a family wage – one sufficient to not only support oneself, but also to raise a family.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently your wife is the exception. Apple know who gets the cash: Those with the leverage.
They want customers to feel good about their products. They don't need employees or vendors to feel good about their own dough.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Yosho-sama]

Anonymous coward is anonymous.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

I admit, I'm a bit of an Apple hater sometimes. It's their attitude, towards thinking they own basic concepts, but I digress. I did a quick check to see what competing retailers are paying.

Best Buy sales associate $9.70: http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/Best-Buy-Hourly-Pay-E97.htm
Fry's Electronics sales associate $9.19: http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/Fry-s-Electronics-Hourly-Pay-E3186.htm

They are paying more than the going rate it seems. Though I'm sure it's worth it if your are trying to fill your store with hipsters that the apple fans can look up to as the apostles of apple...

Anyway, for me this story is doesn't seem to have any basis that I can clearly see.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

(Shrug) Who cares? It's still just a term somebody with an agenda made up.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[geoskd]

I admit, I'm a bit of an Apple hater sometimes. It's their attitude, towards thinking they own basic concepts, but I digress. I did a quick check to see what competing retailers are paying.

Best Buy sales associate $9.70: http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/Best-Buy-Hourly-Pay-E97.htm Fry's Electronics sales associate $9.19: http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/Fry-s-Electronics-Hourly-Pay-E3186.htm

Not in New York City they're not, and that is what the New York Times is talking about. Yes, Much of the country starts people at ~$9 / hr, but in NYC, $9 / hr is starvation wage. $12 / hr will pay for food and possibly rent, but thats about it. Glassdoor uses the nationwide numbers, and the number of retails sales people in rural areas far outweighs the numbers in the major metropolitan areas. That is why the major met areas pay more, because each individual sales person does more volume by virtue of being in a target rich environment.

-=Geoskd

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[superdave80]

Not in New York City they're not, and that is what the New York Times is talking about.

And we all know that New York City is the only place in America that matters. New York is expensive to live in. Why is this news?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Clock Nova]

Maybe that's because most PC manufacturers use Apple as an R&D department.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[jedidiah]

Well. It all depends. It all depends on whether or not you buy into all of the propaganda fanboys like to spout about their brand being like BMW.

That is why the comparison was being drawn with Tiffany and not Walmart.

If Apple is really like GM or Walmart, then the crap pay is not really out of place.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Sir_Sri]

actually it's a fairly good description of the process you would use to determine the lowest possible wage someone can be self sustaining on. That's a useful metric for governments when setting minimum wages, and for employers looking to hire people who are just barely at that level.

That doesn't necessarily apply to Apple stores though, nor is starting salary reflective of average salary, or salary after a year or the like.

If (for sake of argument) the living wage was 20 dollars an hour, and you were paying 10, then you were clearly telling future employees that this isn't a job where you're expected to be independent at early on. You're looking to hire students mostly, or people otherwise fresh out of school looking for whatever until they get something better.

Now as someone above said, the genius bar gig paying 29 an hour is a big step up from a living wage. But your average teller monkey can't do genius bar level work, that might be a training gap, that might be experience, and it might be that training gets you into the genius bar, and then experience will promote you up to that point.

But calculations like living wage are really important. They tell both the government and employers what lifestyle their employees will be in. 24k a year before taxes doesn't get you a whole lot, but what it does get you depends a lot on where you live. Where I am 24K/year would get you your own apartment, public transit to work, and food. You'd really struggle to have enough money to go to school additionally or that sort of thing (car for example), but you at least wouldn't starve to death and could afford internet access to troll /.. You'd just have to have a way out already, because 12 bucks an hour might trap you at equivalent to that rate for life.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

"In public policy, a living wage is the minimum hourly income necessary for a worker to meet basic needs (for an extended period of time or for a lifetime). These needs include shelter (housing) and other incidentals such as clothing and nutrition" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage)

A living wage is the minimum amount that someone needs to live on and not be a high risk of financial catastrophe, ether by foreseen events (day to day bills) or unforeseen (medical bill related to things like appendicitis). In most place 12$/h is not enough (12$/h = 25k$/y). While it is certainly better then minimum wage, it's not better then what many people could be doing else where (that includes young people in there early 20's.

Ignoring that tangent, this story is mostly about how Apple (who sells high priced luxury goods) is not adequately paying it's sales and support staff when compared to other companies. Also how Apple's management generally doesn't treat these people right ether (not hiring internally, not offering promotions, ect...) While it can be argued that no one innately deserves such things, the fact is most people do expect them, and if they don't get they can end up disliking the job and company. For a company like Apple who thrives mostly on image, such dissatisfaction is dangerous to their future bottom line.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[jedidiah]

The lack of a living wage will simply make particular economic activities unfeasable.

Your attempt to pretend to be Carnegie doesn't alter this.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[khallow]

actually it's a fairly good description of the process you would use to determine the lowest possible wage someone can be self sustaining on.

There are the usual three things to note here. First, not everyone needs to be self-sustaining. In particular, the teenager living in Mom's basement doesn't need to be. They also need job experience. Living wages leave them unemployed unless they happen to be worth those wages.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[hairyfeet]

LOL Wut? The PCs have been pretty much ahead of the curve compared to Apple on everything but shiny. Frankly intel is pushing Ultrabooks not because Apple made the air, but because the average laptop goes for $400 and they know their new core chips can't be sold on machines with THAT low of a margin which is why they are trying to push a market where they can sell i5s and i7s.

Frankly Apple has NEVER been ahead of the curve, they are a brand, like Prada and Nike. You look at even the machines Apple releases on their refresh and you can get machines that very same day that have MOAR power, MOAR memory, MOAR speed, and cost less. the ONLY thing that sells Apple is the brand, because it'll never be hip to carry a Dell or an HP, that's all.

Not saying their machines aren't pretty, or that OSX doesn't look nice, but that is simply not what gets people to line around the block to buy the new iPhone or iPad on release day when there is not a thing wrong with the iPhone or iPad they have. What gets them to camp like tickets to a rock concert is the fact that its simply not cool to carry last year's iPad anymore than it is to wear last year'd designer fashions. Its status, like Gucci or Prada or Armani, which is fine if you are into that but its not because they are ahead of anything, its because its fashion. Oh and before anybody brings up retina don't bother, you've been able to buy ultra HD screens for years its simply not been something people bought. People buy it now not because they suddenly give a crap about ultra HD on such a small screen, its because that ultra HD comes with an Apple logo. hell i'm shocked they haven't gotten into footwear, they could make $40 sneakers in china and slap the logo on and make $250+ a pair, talk about easy money.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference between Apple and BMW or Tiffany is that the latter two are disproportionately far higher in price relative to cheaper options than Apple is relative to cheaper options.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry. No body in the world gets US$60,000.00+ for selling iPhones. You're lying.

CAPTCHA = applauds (why, thank you).

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[CodeBuster]

Living wages leave them unemployed unless they happen to be worth those wages.

Precisely. What the living wage people either forget or ignore is that the alternative to a "living wage" job is not a lower paid one, but no job at all. So the real effect of a "living wage" law is to ensure that anyone whose labor cannot justify a wage that's at least as high as the "living wage" shall remain unemployed. To hire someone who's labor cannot justify the "living wage" is to engage in charity and many small business owners cannot afford to be that generous.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[ChunderDownunder]

Which is not to say workers are not underpaid in the US as a whole.

e.g. the national minimum wage in Australia is $AU15.51

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[dlp211]

You assume that the demand for labor is quite elastic, I would argue the opposite, that it is quite inelastic.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[fredgiblet]

And yet somehow Australia manages to not be a economic shithole.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

$12/hour IS fair, depending on where you are. There are huge disparities in different areas of the United States. Here in WV, if you work in foodservice and retail you start at $8 and after 5 years your lucky to be at $10.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[CodeBuster]

If you're a small business and you cannot find the labor that you need, you either do it yourself or do without. I'm not going to hire just any warm body and pay them the "living wage" regardless of whether or not they're capable of doing the job I need done. Running a business is not the same as running a charity; there's a difference.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps we ought to fashion a global system of government designed to guarantee useful employ and a humanely-appointed and self-sustaining lifestyle to each and every human being alive, rather than extend the massive self-enrichment scheme of some 200 people (and thousands more aspirants) which we today recognize as the contemporary world's geopolitical organization?

Why can't we--the buliders, architects, drafters, and laborers of the Internet, education, and science, allied with thoughtful and effective politicians, entrepreneurs, and educators--build something better?

Why can't we change the way people think? The way the wealthy and the politically powerful think? Why can't we educate them that to do so is in their best interests as well as the best interests of their fellow humans?

Seriously, people. Let's get on this.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

A quick google shows fast food starting pay is right around $8/hour

which is why tipping is customary in the US.

According to the US Department of labour median for a salesperson in May 2010 was $9.94/hr which is still less than $12/hr. don't know how wages in the US compare now to then but you still appear to have a valid point there.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Deorus]

They don't control the entire distribution chain all the way from manufacturers to retailers, either, letting local distributors and retailers essentially eat their lunch, and this is not to mention outsourcing recruitment.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[khallow]

So it's inelastic. You can still end up unemployed because your labor isn't worth living wage. That's a common problem among young black men in the US, for example.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

>LOL Wut? The PCs have been pretty much ahead of the curve compared to Apple on everything but shiny.

OK, pretty strong statement, let's see your proof.

>Frankly intel is pushing Ultrabooks not because Apple made the air, ...

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
(wipes tear from eye)
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Thanks, that is the funniest thing I've read in a while.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Analog Penguin]

If you can't figure out why the New York Times considers New York City labour issues to be news, then maybe you should do a bit more research before spouting off.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[spiffmastercow]

Your comment is based on your lack of understanding about how badly the dollar has devalued. $12/hour isn't a living wage in a lot of places.

It may not be a living wage, but it's almost twice what my wife makes at Target doing a fairly similar job. Everyone else's wages have been stagnant despite increasing cost of living (I make only about 15% more now than I did right out of college 7 years ago), so I don't see why retail would be an exception. Of course, if we didn't legitimize bribery in our government, maybe we'd have a minimum wage that you could actually live on, but that's a completely different topic.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[jbplou]

I don't think you would do any better at Best Buy and that is about the closest thing I can think of.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[jbplou]

Very few entry level salaries at retail stores pay "living" wages. I don't think you understand that low skilled jobs don't pay high wages.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

(posting anon due to modding)

Living wage or not, $12 is a better-than-most starting wage for retail stores (especially with little-to-no experience). If you want to complain about lack of living wages for retail jobs (which is valid), it shouldn't be directed specifically at Apple. There are plenty of places here in CA that pay single-digits an hour.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

We'll eventually be able to do what you suggest, and I think that's a good thing.

But the social cost of trying to do it too soon is monstrous, as we learned from Communism. You can't force-feed Utopia to the masses.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

So it's inelastic. You can still end up unemployed because your labor isn't worth living wage. That's a common problem among young black men in the US, for example.

Young black men are unemployed largely because the only jobs they can get don't pay enough to make it worth working.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

And that is for a full time job, which a lot of fast food employees are not. Casual is $19.82 in Australia.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[dlp211]

Yes, but having a living wage doesn't exacerbate significantly the problem for young black men, but it does solve many other problems. Australia has a $15+ min. wage, near zero governmental debt, and an economy that runs.

And there isn't a market in the world that is 'free'. At best we have a competitive monopolistic market. I swear, everyone took Intro to Micro and never paid attention to the entire section on why markets fail.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[im_thatoneguy]

I see two sides to this.

1) People walk into Apple stores to buy Apple products. iPhones literally sell themselves. It's not the guy with the credit card scanner.

So in this regard, the sales staff, while important--aren't terribly unique or important to the transaction except not being bad. And there are plenty of not-bad employees to choose from. So I see no reason to have high wages.

2) The flip side is that as they say an Apple sales person can easily sell $350,000 worth of *PROFIT* per year. Probably gross sales for an Apple retail employee are a fraction of say a Target checker but that's incredibly efficient--so it seems from a one-off perspective a company which makes $350k from someone's labor every year should give him a good cut of that. Instead they just put the profit into the bank.

As to the article in specific. Comparing an Apple Employee to a Tiffany's employee is a bad comparison. Like I said, an iPhone sells itself. A tiffany's employee needs to present a high-end image to the client. A Tiffany sales person needs to compose themselves like as if they too could afford their goods. That means their expenses for wardrobe are higher, they will have a higher demand on their physical appearance and they need to present an image.

A 20 something sales person at Apple though just needs to be a 20 something person who uses a smart phone... which is pretty much every 20 something in existence.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

These "places" must be pretty expensive OR you're allowing for a lot of unneeded crap in your life. I make just a hair under $12/hr and I make out just fine.

Granted that I don't make car payments and I rent, thus only paying electric and internet bills aside from monthly rent, but still. I make enough to save money when I need to AND pay for what I want. I live smart, not fancy.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[superdave80]

Not in New York City they're not, and that is what the New York Times is talking about.

Are you sure about that?

...Jordan Golson sold about $750,000 worth of computers and gadgets at the Apple Store in Salem, N.H.

Well, I guess I can't blame you, since they hid this way down the article in the first sentence...

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

In America, people working in fast food and retail do not (typically) receive tips. They are paid an hourly rate (again, typically) of at least $7.25/hr. If you wait tables or have another job where tipping is customary the employer is only required to pay $2.13/hr (by federal law). As with the minimum wage, the minimum wage for tipped employees varies from state to state, but the wages can go no lower than the dollar figures specified by the federal government.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Killall -9 Bash]

Who is John Galt?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[sgent]

Tipping in fast food is not customary, and very few do it -- and many places don't allow it.

Servers in tipped positions make $2.13 / hr (although they are guaranteed min. wage if tips don't make up the difference -- although they probably will be fired).

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[khallow]

Young black men are unemployed largely because the only jobs they can get don't pay enough to make it worth working.

That's an interesting opinion which I doubt has any basis in reality. As a counterexample, apparently, there's a lot of people hired into the drug trade at below federal minimum wage. There might be other perks such as sex or drugs, but it remains that a lot of people are working illegally (in more than one sense of the word) for much less than any "living wage" would be. So they're already working at the so-called "don't pay enough to make it worth working" level.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Deorus]

LOL Wut? The PCs have been pretty much ahead of the curve compared to Apple on everything but shiny. Frankly intel is pushing Ultrabooks not because Apple made the air, but because the average laptop goes for $400 and they know their new core chips can't be sold on machines with THAT low of a margin which is why they are trying to push a market where they can sell i5s and i7s.

Yes, Intel never even made countless references to the MacBook Air or even the iPad when addressing their Ultrabook design...

Frankly Apple has NEVER been ahead of the curve, they are a brand, like Prada and Nike. You look at even the machines Apple releases on their refresh and you can get machines that very same day that have MOAR power, MOAR memory, MOAR speed, and cost less. the ONLY thing that sells Apple is the brand, because it'll never be hip to carry a Dell or an HP, that's all.

For someone accusing another poster of fanboyinsm, don't you think you're oversimplifying things a little too much? Have you actually used a Mac? Yes, you can get the same specs for less, but can you get the same specs with the same kind of build quality, battery life, driver support (on both OS X and Windows), display quality, and overall integration with an entire ecosystem for less on anything else?

Not saying their machines aren't pretty, or that OSX doesn't look nice, but that is simply not what gets people to line around the block to buy the new iPhone or iPad on release day when there is not a thing wrong with the iPhone or iPad they have. What gets them to camp like tickets to a rock concert is the fact that its simply not cool to carry last year's iPad anymore than it is to wear last year'd designer fashions. Its status, like Gucci or Prada or Armani, which is fine if you are into that but its not because they are ahead of anything, its because its fashion. Oh and before anybody brings up retina don't bother, you've been able to buy ultra HD screens for years its simply not been something people bought. People buy it now not because they suddenly give a crap about ultra HD on such a small screen, its because that ultra HD comes with an Apple logo. hell i'm shocked they haven't gotten into footwear, they could make $40 sneakers in china and slap the logo on and make $250+ a pair, talk about easy money.

My Nokai 3310 was fine, too, until I tossed it away. Does that mean I should have never bought another phone? Regarding retina, can you please name another brand with them on laptops? Can you name another brand with a 326DPI display on their phones? If it's been available before then I'm sure you can!

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[whargoul]

Take your meds dude.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Noone Thirty]

Apparently Apple as of last week started giving substantial raises, so maybe she's in for some good news.

Apple Retail Employees Getting Sizeable Raises
raising the wages of its retail store employees by as much as a quarter of their wages following an internal review period earlier this year. Employees began learning of the raises in face-to-face meetings with managers last week, according to three Apple employees in various regions across the U.S. The raises, which are based on performance, will begin appearing in paychecks around the middle of July, two of these people said.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Fnord666]

That's an interesting opinion which I doubt has any basis in reality. As a counterexample, apparently, there's a lot of people hired into the drug trade at below federal minimum wage. There might be other perks such as sex or drugs, but it remains that a lot of people are working illegally (in more than one sense of the word) for much less than any "living wage" would be. So they're already working at the so-called "don't pay enough to make it worth working" level.

But does that take into account any benefits that a person getting paid "under the table" also receives? If these individuals take legitimate jobs, they may lose any public assistance benefits they are currently receiving by being unemployed.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Mabhatter]

That's almost $60k a year. For retail that's killer. that's average programmer or sys admin pay (that youre going to get without a specific degree) in most of the US. Even for Union Auto workers that pay either takes 60 hour weeks (on the line) or REQUIRES 60 hour weeks min. (welder, carpenter, etc)

The low end is not terrible. That's about what your average entry level PC tech would get. And WAY over mall rat pay. Comparing Tiffany's to Apple is still Apples to.. Golden Apples. Tiffany's is great, but it's the peak of the Shop Girl jobs. (the best you can really hope for is not to get killed by the plastic dummies)

So for a 10am to 9pm job with no specific college required, little overtime, no on call, etc, its pretty good pay. (not for NYC)

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[milkmage]

is that after the recently announced bump or didn't she tell you ;)

up to 25% wages
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-21/apple-retail-store-workers-said-to-receive-wage-increases.html

and $500 off a mac, $250 off an ipad (every three years) - ON TOP of the 25% discount.
http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/06/21/retina.display.macbook.pros.excluded.from.program/

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[neros1x]

Not entirely true. Ask anybody who used a computer in the late 80s, early 90s, and Apple was way ahead. SCSI on the desktop? Check. A completely USB connected home computer? Check. In fact, it was likely that Apple's early insistence on cutting edge tech is at least part of the reason nobody bought them until Steve Jobs came back. SCSI on the desktop? Who the fuck can afford SCSI on the desktop, and why the hell would I need it? I agree however that with core components (processor, graphics card, etc.) Apple's computers are consistently behind PCs. BUT...Apple isn't really interested in selling computers that run Crysis at 2560x5760 in full 3D, because they learned the hard way that such things only serve a niche market. They build PCs like Black & Decker builds coffee makers. You turn it on, it works. Which is exactly why I'll never own an Apple computer. I don't give a shit about user-friendly or stability. I want to play with the naughty bits. I do think in certain areas they are ahead. I hate Apple to the core, but I can't even argue with the quality of the Apple displays. The original iPod scroll wheel was way ahead of its competition, and maybe touchscreen smartphones were inevitable, but the iPhone made it work before anyone else did.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[gutnor]

Of course, that is funny I get it. But seriously, PC maker have been using Intel and Microsoft as a convenient R&D lab. On the consumer side ( 1 sale = 1 machine ), except pushing ever more dubious crippled-ware from their "trusted" partners, their only innovation was in the cost reduction, race to the bottom sector. Big brand only really invested any R&D in the entreprise world ( 1 sale = 10k machines + 3 years maintenance contract + servers + services )

Apple took a different approach, they could not compete on price per MHz (at the time), so they competed on "anything else" that can sell except the price tag, and in a market not fiercely defended by the big players: Joe User market.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the entire POINT. This is why people who cry about minimum wage are such idiots. It's MINIMUM wage. It's not SUPPOSED to provide you with a life-supporting income. It's supposed to be a base level of income that you're paid while you're given a trial/probation period with a new employer. If you can't get a raise after 30, 60, or 90 days up from minimum wage, then you're probably not really worth it. The only people who earn minimum wage long-term are high school students and new employees. Almost nobody is actually out there trying to support themselves and/or a family long-term on MINIMUM wage. And if we should, therefore, increase minimum wage -- why not raise it to like $30/hr? I mean, if $8 or $10 is great, then $30/hr would be AWESOME, right?!

And, seriously, WTF are you doing trying to get a mortgage on a starter retail salary? Idiots. God damn people feel awfully entitled.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

There were a bunch of stories around June 20th about Apple giving raises and starting the new Employee Purchase program. Seen $4 raises, etc.
http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/06/20/microsoft.retail.poached.employees.with.higher.pay.promotions/

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Ferzerp]

So, your argument is that SCSI on the desktop (something that died out) means that PC makers do what Apple does? You might want to try a different example...

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[mehrotra.akash]

Frankly Apple has NEVER been ahead of the curve, they are a brand, like Prada and Nike. You look at even the machines Apple releases on their refresh and you can get machines that very same day that have MOAR power, MOAR memory, MOAR speed, and cost less. the ONLY thing that sells Apple is the brand, because it'll never be hip to carry a Dell or an HP, that's all.

I dont have other examples, but the REALLY high res displays ("Retina") on their phones and laptops do kind of put them ahead of the curve
While all the other manufacturers refused to listen to consumers asking for something better than 1366*768 or 1080p, Apple did go ahead and make a laptop and tablet with a higher res diaplay
(and ofc the Macbook Air form factor)

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

In what places is $12.00 per hour plus "very good benefits" not a living wage? I believe your (rather douchy) comment is based on your lack of understanding about what "living wage" means.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[shiftless]

actually it's a fairly good description of the process you would use to determine the lowest possible wage someone can be self sustaining on.

Another Keynesian bullshit goal, done for the wrong reasons, which of course (like other Keynesian fallacies) had catastrophic side effects due to its arrogant assumptions that human beings can know enough information about the market to improve it by setting price controls. False. Increasing minimum wage fixes nothing.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[shiftless]

You're welcome to do so, but as of now you've only made an offhand statement. Where's the argument?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[shiftless]

Seriously, people. Let's get on this.

Wow......just wow.....the level of naivete in your post astounds me. This was a joke, or very clever troll....right?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

That 5 you used to make.
Its now equal to about 13-15.

And it's a long way from a living wage just like 5 was.

For around here, a living wage would be 18-20 an hour. And with a full 40 hours you could get by ok.
But most companies will only put you on part time. 39.5 hours a week! You'll never get ahead.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[shiftless]

A living wage is the minimum amount that someone needs to live on and not be a high risk of financial catastrophe, ether by foreseen events (day to day bills) or unforeseen (medical bill related to things like appendicitis).

LOL. You've done nothing here other than show your own naivete and lack of education about money. That's what any of this "labor exploitation" bullshit always boils down to: the people moaning about slavery are slaves because of their stubborn refusal to learn about money and become its master, not be mastered by it. No, they'd rather bitch about capitalism and "robber barons" and this and that.

Read a book some time, and learn how to live standing on your own two feet, instead of living it up paycheck to paycheck and expecting your employer or Somebody Else to cover all ills that may befall you. Life doesn't work life that.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

I work for an airline and get free flights, does that mean that airlines ass rape it's customers?
Hint: the answer's no.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

> but can you get the same specs with the same kind of build quality

It is hard to find other laptops with such crappy "build quality", regardless of "specs".

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

>LOL Wut? The PCs have been pretty much ahead of the curve compared to Apple on everything but shiny.

OK, pretty strong statement, let's see your proof.

Hmm. . . the fact that Apple has used x86 technology and software for the past ten years.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[samoanbiscuit]

You do realize that most of these manufacturers (especially Lenovo and Sony) have had laptops for sale with screen resolutions in excess of Apple's for years? It's just that most customers don't want to buy them because they're expensive. So they become little-reviewed niche products for industry professionals or rich people that don't want to buy Macs. Apple's innovation has been to make the whole customer base subsidize the costs through economies of scale, making them look both cooler and more technically capable than the other HW makers, while making these high def screens for less money, yay Apple!. They're definitely cooler, but not much more technically capable than their competitors.

However, I still can't believe that Samsung, HTC and other iPhone and iPod competitors haven't paid attention to Apple's history with their iPod. They've always put an emphasis on increasing pixel density whenever possible, so all these other HW makers needed to do to appear to be keeping up was ensure each successive generation of their product levelled up in pixel density instead of their stupid race to increase phone screen size. The people in charge of making those decisions for Samsung, Motorola and HTC should have been fired the day the retina iPhone came out for being idiots.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Obama wanted to make tons of people unemployed and those that weren't he wanted to drop their wages and give them food stamps to ensure they were dependent upon him for their food so as to try and ensure those people vote for him. Seems like a pretty good strategy, most people don't realize he did this, even though the numbers are right there plain as day for anyone to see. Also, by dropping the networth of the middle class by 50% in just three short years, those that have a job are very nervous and need to vote for him, because Obama cares about the middle classs. How many trillions of dollars did Obama vaporize? I've lost track.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[arkane1234]

Frankly, you're trying to make it sound like Apple just takes what is out there and puts it into their shell.
You've lost the entire picture, if that's what you think. If you look at what is sold by Apple, you'll realize it's not comparable to a $400 laptop any more than an $1,100 non-Apple laptop is comparable to a $400 laptop.

Not everyone "camps out" in the line to get the iPad/iPhone when the new one comes out. Much like everyone doesn't "camp out" in a harry potter movie ticket line to see harry potter.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[arkane1234]

IDE died out too, but note it all happened in the future and not at the time of the product use.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[arkane1234]

Working at burger king is mindless work where you move items from one place to another and push a button.
What's changed is that burger king is still that, but working at an Apple store is a touch above that since it's either computer work (genius bar) or customer service. (people on the floor)

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

I work for an airline and get free flights, does that mean that airlines ass rape it's customers?
Hint: the answer's no.

Amusingly, this comes from a person who hasn't had to buy an airline ticket in years and gets to bypass getting felt up by TSA officials.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Ferzerp]

SCSI was never common on the desktop was my point. That it died out was just parenthetical info.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[winwar]

Your minimum wage statistic is wrong. In my state, for instance, minimum wage is above $9 an hour for tipped positions.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

Except that the teenager living in Mom's basement isn't working 40 hours/week, and so isn't hitting the gross annual income that the living wage hourly pay rate is based on.

And the teenagers that need job experience typically take the same jobs that the people who need the living wage do - fry cook, server, whatever joe jobs you can get without a high school diploma. To deny teenagers that hourly wage while giving it to full-time employees would be age discrimination.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

Australia also didn't spend ten billion dollars bailing out Wall Street and a defective auto industry and have to finance three wars on foreign soil. Our problems go a lot deeper than just minimum wage.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anubis IV]

It's a retail job. Their turnover is doubtless pretty high. I'd still be willing to bet it's lower than that of an average retail job, however.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

Whoops. That was supposed to be 'trillion.'

Too many zeros for my poor little public-schooled brain to handle.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

I disagree with your assessment. Outside of the alpha cities and a few other bizarre locales like parts of Arizona, the large majority of America is perfectly suited for a single person living on $25K a year, as long as one doesn't have to pay off school loans. The midwest, the south, the flyover states, most of New England, you can have a 1-bedroom apartment for $600 a month without any problem, and many places are even cheaper than that. That's less than the 1/3 of income that every money-management advisor recommends as the maximum amount of income to spend on housing. That leaves you $1200-1300 per month after taxes to spend on food, gas, clothing, a modest car payment, entertainment, and the occasional medical bill (assuming you have insurance). If you don't have insurance, then you're probably fucked even if you make $20/hr.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[erp_consultant]

Exactly. Retail, restaurants and hotels pay lousy wages. I know this because I washed dishes in a hotel for $3/hr back in the day when I was in high school. I understood then that it wasn't a career choice, it was a way to put a few bucks in my pocket while I was working my way towards a real career. In our society, retail jobs and customer service jobs are not considered high skill. Therefore, the pay will be commensurate to it. It might seem unfair but that's the way it is. The solution is to get skills that allow you to move up the ladder so to speak.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[CodeBuster]

Young black men are unemployed largely because the only jobs they can get don't pay enough to make it worth working.

In other words, they've got an attitude problem. Contrast that with the Mexicans or Asians who work hard, don't complain and accept the wage offered. In a few generations their children and grandchildren are joining the ranks of the working professionals and the upper middle class. Meanwhile there are still many blacks who sit on their hands and complain that the deck is stacked against them and that low paying jobs "aren't worth it". Give me a break.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

My thoughts exactly. For retail, $12/hour is a fucking steal. I ran into my old boss from Lowe's a few months ago, and he wanted to bring me back on part-time to cover the end of the night, doing the same thing I did during my early undergrad years, a CSR in flooring. With five years of experience, a good enough reputation that he wanted me back, and desperation to fill the spot so he didn't have to be a salary slave, he still couldn't guarantee me more than $10/hr.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the flip side is that If the product sells itself then the employee is not generating profit. Engineers and marketers that design apple's "miracle products that sell themselves" should be fairly compensated.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

I gave up arguing with hairyfeet long ago.

When you back up your rebuttal with facts, he just ignores it, or changes the subject to some complete non-sequitur.

Oh, and he always claims how he can get x specs for y dollars, yet he never provides concrete, verifiable examples.

In short, he's nothing but a lame Apple Hater, who's superiority complex is far worse than the most effete Apple fan.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density

I count 2. I hate apple and yet agree with most of your points. I just found it unlikely that apple had the highest dpi of any phone and I was correct according to wikipedia so there you go.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Where exactly is this "most places" you speak of? I live in Phoenix, which is within a few percent of the national average cost of living index, and $10 an hour (while not exactly providing for a luxurious lifestyle) was plenty to live off of only a year ago (I've increased my income substantially since then, in case you're wondering.)

Source: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=cost+of+living+in+phoenix

Keep in mind, cities like New York with their large populations and massive cost of living over the national average go a long ways towards pushing up that national average figure, while only being a tiny fraction of the US. To say that 12/hour isn't a living wage in most places is a bit naive.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

Except that there are two million Americans over the age of 25 making minimum wage or less* in this country. And the raises most people get after their trial periods are up are usually only fifty cents per hour, maybe a dollar if your trial period wage is $15/hr.

$7.25 or $8.50/hr, you're going to have a difficult time making ends meet.

That said, I totally agree with your sentiments that raising minimum wage again won't solve any problems, and that most people are fucking idiots and have no idea how to handle their money. Give those 'tards 50% more on the hour, and they'll still buy houses and cars they can't afford. The people living on near-minimum wage that can handle their money and would actually see an significant increase in quality-of-life are in the very small minority.

*Less is because of the $2.13/hr minimum wage for tipped employees, which hasn't been increased in 20 or so years.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

Funny what happens after Jobs dies. Retail workers get raises, Chinese production labor gets raises, one day off and two more slices of bread a week, and Apple stock pays dividends for the first time in twenty years. California finally gets auto registration fees from Apple's CEO.

And yet Bill Gates, who has given billions to philanthropy, is the "evil one."

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[sammyF70]

thanks for proving his point :P

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Dan541]

Apple store is a touch above that since it's either computer work (genius bar) or customer service. (people on the floor)

Both positions are just retail sale jobs.
The customer service people sell products and the "Genius" Bar get people to buy replacements.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[kenh]

Who said $12/hour was a "living wage"?

And why should Apple pay retail clerks walking the floor a wage designed to support a family of four? Do the clerks add THAT MUCH value to the proposition that they deserve $20-25/hr + benefits?

Should Apple ignore the near inexhaustible supply of willing and able workers that will take the job for $12/hour?

If Apple were to double retail clerk pay ($12 -> $25/hr) do you think Apple would keep the same number of clerks, halve the number of clerks or create more clerk positions? My money is on halving the number of clerks in the store.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[kenh]

$15-16 at Tiffany was a swipe at Tiffany as well...

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[rtb61]

What is the point of working if you are not earning a living wage, seriously, why? Who would you be fooling working eight hours a day five days a week basically pointlessly, can't afford health insurance, can't afford a reasonable place to live, can barely afford to sustain yourself only sufficiently to be able to turn up for work. Why work within that system when logically your only hope of a future is to rebel against it, especially when you see all those cheats, liars and thieves wallowing around at the top of it.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[X0563511]

Please, take too many of them. Perhaps he'll OD and be too sick to bother us with such a post again for some time.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[sjames]

Even slaves got (crappy) room and board out of the deal. People making less than a living wage don't even get that. They are probably better off out of work.

If we allow employers to hire people at less than a living wage, we just end up subsidizing their payroll with food stamps. Shall we also help them buy labor saving devices at a discount and pay their power bills for them?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[X0563511]

Me either. However, I do find myself generating some outrage at the overall picture.

If you're working full time, you should be paid enough to live. I don't care if you're job is cleaning up dog shit in the park. If you can't afford to live off a full-time job, then you are not employed, you are enslaved.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

The Soviet Union tried that. It's a great concept, but not at all practical. Human nature makes it impossible. There are lazy people that will live off the system and not contribute. There are also people who will see the lazy people being lazy for the same benefits and wonder why they should actually work when others do not. All in all, a system that rewards people for having better skills and better work ethic moves society further along at a much more rapid pace.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[X0563511]

I was a systems administrator at a large datacenter, and am currently a support engineer for a major company, yet she makes 30% more than I do. I'm also good at my job.

I smell bullshit.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

UPS (in Minnesota at least) starts part time employees at $8.50 an hour, with a $0.50 raise in...either 30 working days or 3 months, I've forgotten which. Raises are set across the company, with all part timers getting a $0.375 raise August 1st, and another on February 1st (I put it that way, because our contract renews in August).

Hrm. I had another job in mind to mention, but I've forgotten what it was now. Pity.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

"Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something." Get off your "I deserve a certain standard of living" soapbox and go south of the border for two minutes to see that standard of living has nothing to do with contentment and happiness.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Lord Kano]

Maybe that's because most PC manufacturers use Apple as an R&D department.

Style is not R & D. There's little question that Apple provides inspiration in the area of style, but their R & D is completely separate from every other company's.

Apple has taken the lead in bringing new technologies (usually developed by others) to the mainstream. Intel deployed USB as a part of their chipsets for years before Apple adopted the technology. When Apple started using USB, the industry followed suit. Apple was the first to make CD-ROM standard equipment in a home computer. Apple was the first major company to standardize on 3.5" floppies and later they were the first to eliminate them.

Apple's track record of bringing new technology to the mainstream is unrivaled, but that is not the same thing as Apple developing these technologies.

Seriously, other than IEEE 1394, what Apple developed standard has gotten mainstream acceptance? I assume that you'll come up with an example or two, but they'll be outliers that I just didn't think of. Not real ground-breaking developments in the IT world.

LK

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[atlasdropperofworlds]

That must be why all those macbook pros have the specs of laptops that are up to $1000 cheaper. Either that or there is something to the case that we don't know about.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[bemymonkey]

LOL Wut? The PCs have been pretty much ahead of the curve compared to Apple on everything but shiny. Frankly intel is pushing Ultrabooks not because Apple made the air, but because the average laptop goes for $400 and they know their new core chips can't be sold on machines with THAT low of a margin which is why they are trying to push a market where they can sell i5s and i7s.

Frankly Apple has NEVER been ahead of the curve, they are a brand, like Prada and Nike. You look at even the machines Apple releases on their refresh and you can get machines that very same day that have MOAR power, MOAR memory, MOAR speed, and cost less. the ONLY thing that sells Apple is the brand, because it'll never be hip to carry a Dell or an HP, that's all.

Just a little bit delusional, aren't you?

Hate Apple all you want, but they deliver a very cohesive package when it comes to laptops, all-in one desktops and smartphone, and it's an experience that non-Slashdotters can actually have without calling a tech geek to set it up for them.

As for never being ahead of the curve - that's just bullshit. Have you SEEN a MacBook Pro or MacBook Air in person? Or an iMac? They're quite impressive haptically and performance-wise, ESPECIALLY when compared to "regular" Windows machines (the type of thing you'd buy at a big-box electronics store) running a crapware-laden manufacturer image... even more so if you don't compare them with an Ultrabook or other brand new notebook, but rather with Windows machines that were on the market when the 11.6 & 13" MBAs came out. Have you seen ANY new developments in the Windows laptop or Android smartphone world over the last few years that weren't at least "inspired" by Apple? I know I"m glad that my Galaxy Nexus and my Thinkpad work the way they do, but I have no problem admitting that many of the features were pioneered by Apple.

Yes, Apple products are often used by people more concerned with style than substance... but that shouldn't change your opinion of the actual products. I wouldn't give up my Thinkpads and custom-built desktops for any Apple device (mainly because I can do things with my machines that no Apple machine can do), but given the choice between a modern Ultrabook or a MacBook, I don't think I'd go with the Ultrabook - and I'm a die-hard Windows user.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[atlasdropperofworlds]

> OK, pretty strong statement, let's see your proof.

The first macbook pro with IVB processors came out about a week ago. Dell already put out an IVB-based laptop almost a month earlier. You can get a decent video card in any macbook, save for the new 15" retina, and even then your best option is mid-range, however Acer has already had a kepler GPU in a laptop since march. Apple is often last to deploy the latest hardware, unless it something like thunderbolt. Of course, there is almost nothing in the market for thunderbolt still, so it's not exactly the most useful technology outside of apple thunderbolt displays.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[atlasdropperofworlds]

> Have you actually used a Mac? Yes, you can get the same specs for less, but can you get the same specs with the same kind of build quality, battery life, driver support (on both OS X and Windows), display quality, and overall integration with an entire ecosystem for less on anything else?

Yes. Owned 2. Mananged to sell them, fortunately.

Again, yes. I currently have a dell XPS 15 with an HD display. The display is better than all MBPs short of the 17" 1920x1200 with matte display. It has a better sound system with integrated subwoofer, and I opted for the 9 cell batter which is giving me 6-7 hours of real-world performance despite the XPS having a quad core SB i7. Build quality? Let's qualify that: Build materials of the case of the MBP are better. Quality and fitment is the same: The XPS is well-built, but has some plastic. Considering the XPS is outfitted like a MBP that is twice the price, I don't care at all.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[DJ Particle]

Not true in all states... some states do assume wait staff, pizza drivers, et al will get tipped, and allow the restaurant to adjust the base pay below minimum wage to account for it. The caveat is that if the tips do NOT make up the difference to minimum wage, the restaurant has to.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[DJ Particle]

To be fair, how many of those workers are working full time to get that $60K?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[AmiMoJo]

There are the usual three things to note here. First, not everyone needs to be self-sustaining. In particular, the teenager living in Mom's basement doesn't need to be. They also need job experience. Living wages leave them unemployed unless they happen to be worth those wages.

On the other hand if you do need to be self-sustaining but some teenager living in his mum's basement is willing to undercut the wages you need just to survive you will be unemployed.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[AmiMoJo]

An iPhone may sell itself but Apple profits heavily from upgrades and accessories. Any salesperson who can up-sell from the base model and get the customer to sign up to Apple Care is generating extra revenue.

Unfortunately for employees the only reward for this behaviour is keeping their job.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[atlasdropperofworlds]

>Oh, and he always claims how he can get x specs for y dollars, yet he never provides concrete, verifiable examples.

I just checked the HP website. I just picked a random 15 inch laptop there (the pavillion dv6tqe), and specced it, as close as I could, to the 15 MBP. I got the price up to $1200 ($1450 less $250), but it had more RAM (8 GB) an HD antiglare display, a kepler 650M with 2 GB of GDDR5 (the MPB's kepler comes with 512 MB). I also threw in a 9 cell battery which is rated at 9 hrs of battery life and a 750 GB HDD at 7200 RPM (the MBP has a 500 GB 5200 RPM HDD). The 15" MBP is still $1799 without options. If I had just upgraded the pavillion's graphics and display and nothing else, it would cost about $1100, but would still have double the RAM and HDD space and a higher resolution display. A $700 price difference is big when you consider that the cheaper system is specced higher. The retina MBP is more interesting, but when I was mucking about with it I had a hard time finding a way to actually use the high pixel density. I like pixel density, and I like that apple is pushing it, but 15" laptops don't need resolutions that high - it's just not usable.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

We got rocks.

laced with uraniom, iron, copper by any chance?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

iPhones literally sell themselves...

Wow, that Siri technology sure is smart!

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is John Galt?

A fictional arrogant bastard invented by a stupid ignorant bitch.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[vakuona]

I say fortunately. I do not like aggressive sales staff. Let me play around with said gadgets, and answerf my questions when I ask, otherwise leave me alone to it. Apple stores are really good at that. I do not want used car salesmen in an Apple store.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Paying your employees a living wage as a small business owner is charity? Really?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[beelsebob]

Seems fair enough to me... Did some googling for other retail jobs you might be unlucky enough to do...
McDonalds Cashier: $7.63
McDonalds Manager: $9.69
Burger King Cashier: $7.92
Burger King Manager: $10.55
Macy's Sales Associate: $8.51
WalMart Sales Associate: $8.82
WalMart Manager: $11.15
Sony Sales Associate: $9.81

Apple Shop Flunky: $11.72
Apple Genius Bar Employee: $18.06

Basically, it seems that yes, Apple pays its retail employees pretty well... In fact, it seems to pay it's retail flunkies more than most shops pay their managers.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Dracophile]

We got rocks that other people want.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[beelsebob]

Yep, I came to the same conclusion –more so, I found retail store managers seem to get paid less than the flunkies in Apple stores, and geniuses in apple stores 1.5 times that again... I have no idea why we should be upset at this.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

How many Genius Bar employees are there compared to real employees rooted in the real world?

Lynxs are not just been grounded by the submitter.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[excelsior_gr]

Because rebels are nowadays labeled "terrorists" and thus get no sympathy at all from the other 51% of the population that sit comfortably in their living-rooms watching the rebellion on TV.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Because less is better than nothing. People working in Apple stores are either doing it because they want to work there specifically or because it pays better than the available alternatives.

The biggest nonsense about the 'living wage' is that the number everyone bands about is the wage required for one working family member to support a family of 4. Maybe if they want a 4 person family they should be doing work that 90%+ of graduates, students, school leavers etc can do and earn well above the living wage for a single individual.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[makomk]

In fact, it was likely that Apple's early insistence on cutting edge tech is at least part of the reason nobody bought them until Steve Jobs came back. SCSI on the desktop? Who the fuck can afford SCSI on the desktop, and why the hell would I need it?

Not just SCSI, but from what I've heard a really buggy, incompatible implementation of SCSI.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[khallow]

On the other hand if you do need to be self-sustaining but some teenager living in his mum's basement is willing to undercut the wages you need just to survive you will be unemployed.

That just means that you need to survive some other way in some other place. It's not fair to the teenager to take them out of the job market.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple created the Commodore PET? You learn something new everyday.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[khallow]

Perhaps we ought to fashion a global system of government designed to guarantee useful employ and a humanely-appointed and self-sustaining lifestyle to each and every human being alive, rather than extend the massive self-enrichment scheme of some 200 people (and thousands more aspirants) which we today recognize as the contemporary world's geopolitical organization?

There's no reason for it. Such a global system, once in place, has nothing to keep it "humane" or to continue to dole out "lifestyle". OTOH, the current approach of competing nations does a better job of the same. You can move or flee to a better country, if the one you're in is a disaster. It's an option that wouldn't exist in the global thing.

I also don't see that even if it could be implemented, that it would be a good idea. Humanity isn't just "lifestyle". A lot of lifestyles are to say the least, uninteresting and not useful to anyone else. We tolerate them because they don't interfere with our lives (not just our lifestyles). The "humanely-appointed and self-sustaining lifestyle" sounds like a particularly sour class of useless, granola-bar-eating lifestyles imposed on us by people who frankly, probably wouldn't have a clue what a life was, much less a lifestyle.

Why can't we--the buliders, architects, drafters, and laborers of the Internet, education, and science, allied with thoughtful and effective politicians, entrepreneurs, and educators--build something better?

Lack of skills and knowledge for one thing. You don't have the skills to modify societies. And even if you did, you wouldn't have a clue as to what a better society would look like. This is the universal problem with utopian societies.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Gates brought computers to the masses whereas Apple can only be bought by geeks.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[johnstrass1]

Who said that one should work only 40 hours per week?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Used car salesmen? The majority of people who go into any store don't know what they want. As a salesperson in any business, its your job to show value to them. This is essential in all sales. You're not selling anyone crap, you're selling them things they want or need, even if they don't know it themselves.

If you don't want their help, its easy for any decent salesperson to read that. But the majority of people go everywhere not knowing what the hell they want.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Retina MacBook Pro 15" Screen at 2880x1800 > Crappy Dell 17" Screen at 1920x1200

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

The Build quality is absolutely, positively overrated. Apple has a failure rate in hardware in line with everyone else, and doesn't even come into first place in that respect.

Driver support? Seriously? You won't even find a single laptop from the worst company that ships with a driver that doesn't work. And as far as hardware addons go, driver support is far superior on Windows.

Battery life? It used to be an issue with laptops, it isn't a significant issue anymore. Apple holds the top spot, but not by any significant amount. And one hour extra battery life is not worth the $500+ premium you're paying.

Display quality as far as resolution goes, is a worthless point on a 15 inch screen. Just as it was a worthless point when the iPhone 4 came out versus the HTC Evo 4G. If you sit and stare at the screen, you may very well be able to point out minute differences. In everyday use it is the equivalent of a gold watch versus steel. Its pretty to stare at, but a worthless addition in terms of function.

Overall integration? Please elaborate, because it makes little sense. If you're talking about how easy it is to plug in your iPhone and connect with iTunes, its easy because you're used to it. I can plug in my Galaxy Nexus and manage my library with any number of programs, as well as the obvious preloaded one. Its just simply not to YOUR liking. But overall integration is again, an absolutely ridiculous point.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Grudge2012]

Not just SCSI, but from what I've heard a really buggy, incompatible implementation of SCSI.

And by "incompatible" you sure mean "could handle 8 devices unlike many PC SCSI cards that could only handle one".

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[floydman]

My wife works at an Apple store and pulls in $29.15 an hour working the genius bar. Which means that she would have been able to qualify for the mortgage we took out three months ago just on her salary. The 25% employee discount is nice also.

Methinks the poster has an axe to grind with his inflamatory language.

how long did it take her to get that salary? or was that when she just started?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is John Galt?

A fictional bastard invented by an ignorant delusional bitch that's who!

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[roman_mir]

Seriously? How many people should go to work and spend 4 years working with low pay and gain work experience but be free of government debt while getting more valuable as a worker over these 4 years instead of taking yet another sociology course with borrowed money?

By the way, are you a proponent of minimum wage? Because if your question: "if you are not earning a living wage, seriously, why?" is truly a question, then the answer is obvious: people want to get experience, learn something on a job and eventually move on to better paying positions.

Now can you answer this question for me: I have been working for myself for a few years, not paying myself any salary while building my software, according to your theory I shouldn't be doing it, right? I mean as a contractor I was making 15-22K per month, so I should have just kept doing it and instead I quit contracting and used the savings to build my own capital (capital, as in means of production), so what do you say to all the people who just do things without getting paid? Inventors, investors, writers, composers, musicians, etc? So what about people who work not even for a paycheck, but hoping/betting that their investment will pay off at some point? They can lose, it's easy to lose on an investment, it's easy to fail in business.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Grudge2012]

Well. It all depends. It all depends on whether or not you buy into all of the propaganda fanboys like to spout about their brand being like BMW.

That is why the comparison was being drawn with Tiffany and not Walmart.

If Apple is really like GM or Walmart, then the crap pay is not really out of place.

Funny you bring up Tiffany's. The sales people there not only have to pay for their business clothing (they of course have to wear) themselves, they also have to buy all the jewelry they wear at Tiffany's - and they do have to wear some too.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Grudge2012]

Not in New York City they're not, and that is what the New York Times is talking about.

Actually, no they are not. Not one mention of New York in the article.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Grudge2012]

I was a systems administrator at a large datacenter, and am currently a support engineer for a major company, yet she makes 30% more than I do. I'm also good at my job.

I smell bullshit.

An Apple Store Genius not only has to be knowledgeable about technology, they also have to have good communication skills. And be, well, "presentable".

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something.

I hope that makes you feel better when you are bleeding in the gutter after being robbed by someone with no standard of living.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Richy_T]

Your definition of enslaved is not only factually incorrect but makes no sense metaphorically either.

You would be metaphorically enslaved if you could not afford to leave a job, not if you could not afford to stay in it.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Richy_T]

Being like BMW? You mean driven by assholes?

(J/K, I know there are some decent BMW drivers out there

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[hairyfeet]

Thanks. Frankly I thought it was pretty obvious. And I don't hate Apple anymore than I hate Gucci or Prada, they are brands and some people go for that sort of thing. there is nothing wrong with that, I'll be the first to say this is a free country and if a particular brand makes you happy? Then please by all means do buy that brand. I like Asrock motherboards and Asus and Acer laptops and netbooks myself, but I'm not gonna lie to myself and say brand A is "better" in some way than brand B or C, its a personal preference, like what kind of shoes I buy or pizza i eat, its just a matter of personal taste.

I never did understand though why apple fanbois get all butthurt when you point out its fashion and then jump through logic hoops trying to justify the increased cost. i mean you never see Ferrari owners with little lists of why their car is a better value than a Mustang do you? of course not. Its all about fashion and price has always been a part of fashion, after all if just anybody can buy it that ruins the status thing, I mean can you imagine Prada coming out with $50 shoes? never happen, it would ruin the brand.

As a final note pointing out Intel talked about the Air with ultrabooks? Well duh, what do you expect the man to compare it to, he is trying to sell $500+ chips in a market where the average selling price of a laptop is $400 OF COURSE he is gonna compare it to the $1600+ machines, who else is he gonna compare it to? If you were trying to sell to the high end sportscar market, are you gonna talk about Camaro? Nope, it'll be the big guys like Ferrari and Bugatti, because THAT is the market you are trying to get a piece of, not the ricer market.

And lets be honest folks so far ONLY Apple has been able to sell any units of any note in that particular market and I would argue that is BECAUSE ITS FASHION. The reason the gamer laptops don't move is because new chips come out practically daily and you aren't gonna hit the leaderboards with yesterday's kits so the amount of money they have to spend on refreshes is insane, whereas Apple can sell the same model for a year and a half with NO decrease in sales. that right there ought to tell you more than anything its not got a damned thing to do with what parts are in it or the sales would fall when all these more powerful machines come out. the reason they don't is they don't have the Apple logo, simple as that.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[hairyfeet]

Wanna bet he hangs out at the local Starbucks so much they all know his name? Just gotta love the crazy fanbois. ;-)

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[tkrotchko]

Actually, this is wrong. There is no person named John Galt even in the book.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[raque]

BK in the 80's was staffed by kids and retires. The Apple store isn't. This has been one of the big stories on the collapse of the American job market. People who used to make a living wage are now competing for former kids jobs.

And this being called called okay!?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[raque]

Young black men are unemployed largely because the only jobs they can get don't pay enough to make it worth working.

That's an interesting opinion which I doubt has any basis in reality. As a counterexample, apparently, there's a lot of people hired into the drug trade at below federal minimum wage. There might be other perks such as sex or drugs, but it remains that a lot of people are working illegally (in more than one sense of the word) for much less than any "living wage" would be. So they're already working at the so-called "don't pay enough to make it worth working" level.

Are we legitimizing criminal activity here? A lot of working off the books is done so people can keep their Medicaid while trying to approach a living wage.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you really want those guys behind the counter in Fast-food-chain-A to "help" you in an Apple store?

You are comparing the most non-thinking, no-experience-needed job in the market place to working retail for one of the world's richest tech companies?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[raque]

A quick google shows fast food starting pay is right around $8/hour, retail at $9/hour, so I'm having trouble generating any outrage over Apple paying $12/hour.

To misquote Shaw "If you put an American worker on a spit you can always find another who will turn him"

Now I know why Apple and others pay what they do. The bright souls on Slashdot are engaged in a race to the bottom instead of helping each other.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

So does this means we can pay you for your work 12/h and does this means your going to go apply there soon ?

Or better yet have you illegally forgotten to disclose your working relation and investment in Apple ?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Is your wife the norm, or the exception? Sounds like the latter. The article offered numbers and testimony of reliable sources. Those numbers don't lie, either.

You seem unable to separate your situational perception from the company wide reality. I don't think the poster has an axe to grind, but I definitely think that you have a flag to wave.

Now don't you have some kool-aid to suck down?

By the way, I am the owner of two MacBooks, an Apple TV, a Time Capsule, an Airport Express, Magic Trackpad, and a Performa 200. But that doesn't mean that I will let them off the hook for employing slave labor(in other countries), and for not sharing the wealth with the people that got them there.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

So, you had enough money saved up to not need income during that time period because you were one of the top 5% of earners for several years prior. Congratulations on having money before you worked for free for experience.

Not everyone, say the other 95%, can save up enough money to not make a living wage while they get experience.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[cthulhu11]

Apple had sleeping working years before Dell did. Actually, that assumes that Dell finally did -- it never worked when I was stuck with one. Said Dell also got dragged onto the floor more than once while Apple users enjoyed MagSafe power connections. The ability to sync contacts and calendars alone justified getting my iPhone. Motorola couldn't be bothered.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

For an entry level retail job? That sounds about right to me -- that's about $3/hr more than how much I got paid to be a cashier at a supermarket 10 years ago - another entry level retail job.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Sir_Sri]

I didn't say it equates to the minimum wage.

But if you're paying an employee and you want them to be self sustaining (i.e. you want them to be able to make a career out of working for you) this sort of data tells you a lot.

If you don't want them to be self sustaining and you don't want them to make a career of it you pay less than minimum wage. Which is what apple is doing and why their average turnover is 2 and a half years as per the article. They don't want people making a career as sales clerks. They do however view genius bar as a viable career and pay accordingly.

It contributes to discussions of the minimum wage, because you need to know where you're setting one number relative to the other. If a living wage is 25 an hour and minimum wage is 5 then you can reasonably conclude that no one making minimum wage will be self sustaining. If the gap is 12 dollars and 10 dollars well then you're within the margins of error on your numbers. You can also start to factor in costs of eduction or other factors that would produce labour mobility and so on.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[roman_mir]

It's not 'making a living wage' when I am not getting paid, this is purely an investment, I could as well have taken the same money that I saved and put it into some other use. This is my risk - doing this type of work, and there is opportunity cost - I could have continued contracting for these few years instead of building my own systems.

Again, according to the GP (rtb61) this shouldn't be done, because, in his words:

What is the point of working if you are not earning a living wage, seriously, why?

In my case I did save money and that's my investment, in other cases people can save money, borrow money from others as an investment.

They can ALSO take a job that DOES NOT PAY WELL, because they are investing their TIME in order to gain experience that will help them to be more productive later, when they will have more experience and be able to make more money. It is the same thing - sacrificing something hoping for some useful outcome.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a choice you made for yourself.
There are many reasons why Inventors, investors, writers, composers, musicians, etc. do what they do. They enjoy it, they're already financially secure, they want to take on a risk for the possibility of a reward.

Contrast that with a recent graduate, an unskilled worker, an older worker with more limited job options. These people don't choose to work for less than the cost of living, "experience" in a minimum wage or slightly higher paying position is the word employers use to justify treating people like "human resources" instead of people.

The reason so many people are drawing Unemployment benefits and/or Welfare is because the minimum wage is so low it doesn't justify the increased expenses on the worker. Things like gas(if they need a car), bus rides/taxi rides, new clothing(unless it's a uniformed position).
Between the increased costs and the time spent at work instead of doing practically anything else the average low paying job is a net loss.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Sir_Sri]

Right, and no job at all may actually be better than a very low paying job, that's why we have social welfare and assistance, so that people who are not ever going to be self sustaining can get the training they need to be something more than a serf their entire lives. (And so that people who won't ever be able to work won't starve to death and won't pose more dangers to society than they already do).

And if your business can't sustain itself on paying people a reasonable wage (not necessarily a living wage) then you probably shouldn't be in business.

If you want to work for a dollar an hour feel free to hop on a boat to china or somalia. I'm sure you'll do just fine. If you don't want to work for a dollar an hour then your choices are trying to get training for a job (which requires money) or making a go of it at minimum wage.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Sir_Sri]

I think I mentioned all of those things.

Except for the notion that living wages leave people unemployed. All minimum wages have that effect, regardless of where you set the number. At some point you're better off not working, and investing your time in job training through social assistance than spending time working and trapping yourself in poverty you'll never get out of. Absent any form of social assistance sure, we could go back to peasant farmers and serfs working for just enough to not starve to death on and not having the ability to be anything more than menial labour, and then minimum wage laws would be depriving the weak peasants of any sort of work.

But that's not the world we live in, and definitely not one we want to live in.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not 'making a living wage' when I am not getting paid, this is purely an investment, I could as well have taken the same money that I saved and put it into some other use. This is my risk - doing this type of work, and there is opportunity cost - I could have continued contracting for these few years instead of building my own systems.

Again, according to the GP (rtb61) this shouldn't be done, because, in his words:

What is the point of working if you are not earning a living wage, seriously, why?

In my case I did save money and that's my investment, in other cases people can save money, borrow money from others as an investment.

They can ALSO take a job that DOES NOT PAY WELL, because they are investing their TIME in order to gain experience that will help them to be more productive later, when they will have more experience and be able to make more money. It is the same thing - sacrificing something hoping for some useful outcome.

That's a choice you made for yourself.
There are many reasons why Inventors, investors, writers, composers, musicians, etc. do what they do. They enjoy it, they're already financially secure, they want to take on a risk for the possibility of a reward.

Contrast that with a recent graduate, an unskilled worker, an older worker with more limited job options. These people don't choose to work for less than the cost of living, "experience" in a minimum wage or slightly higher paying position is the word employers use to justify treating people like "human resources" instead of people.

The reason so many people are drawing Unemployment benefits and/or Welfare is because the minimum wage is so low it doesn't justify the increased expenses on the worker. Things like gas(if they need a car), bus rides/taxi rides, new clothing(unless it's a uniformed position).
Between the increased costs and the time spent at work instead of doing practically anything else the average low paying job is a net loss.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[atlasdropperofworlds]

>I never did understand though why apple fanbois get all butthurt when you point out its fashion and then jump through logic hoops trying to justify the increased cost.

Yes, it a funny thing is that they don't factor in the most justifiable reason to buy apple: It's the product they prefer, and they'll will to pay for it. This is a totally justifiable reason. The cost of apple is high, and it is high to most people, but there is always a segment that pays extra for the status and/or OSX. In rich countries, this is about 1 in 5 people - plenty for revenue for apple to innovate. We actually *want* apple to be successful because they do a fair bit of market experimentation with their extra cash, but they have to be overpriced in order to have that cash, which will necessarily reduce their market penetration. I don't see them ever going away, and I don't see them ever taking over the world, but I always see them as one force mixing up the market and pushing it forwards.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

>Hmm. . . the fact that Apple has used x86 technology and software for the past ten years.

+4 Insightful? Really? The original comment was that Utrabooks were not an Intel reaction to the MacBookAir. (Just a coincidence that they look 99% identical)

Just because Apple uses Intel CPUs doesn't mean they haven't innovated in the hardware space. Whether it is in the MacBookAir, promotion of USB, Thunderbolt, much higher quality enclosures, higher quality screens, lit keyboards, better trackpads, better power connectors, etc etc. Those that weren't totally covered by patents have been copied by other PC makers. I assume other PC makers will come out with retina quality displays in the next year or two.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Tourney3p0]

All three of the people who stand to benefit from a 2880x1800 15" screen agree.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

He didn't say they were bad machines. He said that they're not ahead of the curve. You can't say "That's bullshit, they are too ahead of the curve!", then rant for 5 paragraphs about how it's an okay machine. Well, you can. But you'll look like an idiot.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[roman_mir]

Contrast that with a recent graduate, an unskilled worker, an older worker with more limited job options.

- so what? I was an unskilled worker once upon the time, sometimes making below minimum wage, sometimes making minimum wage, I believe I spent about 2 years having those types of jobs. I don't see how that hurt me in any way, I didn't have the skills, I didn't have the capital, I probably couldn't have been more useful to anybody else at higher wages anyway. I WAS HAPPY that I could get jobs at all at some point in my life, what is your point? Everybody is born without skills, we don't know how to wipe our asses even when we are born, we can't even hold our heads straight on our own, does it mean we are useful right away and should be able to command a salary that allows us to have a minimum living standard of some sort?

Says who?

People have intrinsic value in that they can learn to be useful to others in some way, but nobody owes them anything (maybe their parents owe them something, but even that is questionable). Nobody owes us a living wage, nobody owes us a job that would satisfy our interests, etc.

We are born into this world absolutely naked and completely useless. It's up to the parents to figure out how to turn us into something useful, and the parents have (or used to have) a motivation for that as well - people used to HELP their parents, because it was customary, but it was not a government law.

People took care of their children and children took care of their parents. In the current society for some reason the care for other people's children is distributed among the tax payers, and this is total bullshit nonsense. It only makes sense for orphans, and even THEN it shouldn't be a law, that somebody must sacrifice to help others, it must be purely up to people's charity.

Those who receive charity shouldn't be abstracted away from those who pay, because then this charity becomes a fucking entitlement system.

You feel that if you are born - the system owes you something? No it does not. You are living on charity if the system is taking care of you, but you don't even know it, you think you are entitled to other people's money, which means you think other people should give up their productivity, their time, the time of their lives, their work, their effort and this is done by the threat of government violence,

Taxes are paid only because there is a violent outcome against those, who refuse to pay. This is a threat of violence, and this is no charity.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

You couldn't get out-of-the-box sleep functionality working, and you routinely slammed your computer into the ground because you didn't watch where you were going? Seriously, this happened more than once? Come on, 'fess up. I refuse to believe people like this are actually out there, driving on the same roads as me, going to the same stores as me.

So long as people like this exist, Macs will exist. The sad thing is, they're right around 10% marketshare. 10% of computer owners walk around like this, just like real people.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[roman_mir]

The reason so many people are drawing Unemployment benefits and/or Welfare is because the minimum wage is so low it doesn't justify the increased expenses on the worker.

- no, the real reason why so many people are drawing unemployment and welfare is because those opportunities exist and it's because the highest tax bracket is going from welfare or EI to being employed again.

All of a sudden your taxes go up from 0 to something, anything, and it has to be a really really great opportunity for somebody to forego the freedom of not having to work and just get a check in mail, even if it is a small check.

But think about this: If you are on EI or welfare, you don't have to get up in the morning and go to work. You don't have to drive anywhere, you don't have to dress up, you don't have to leave the house. All of a sudden you are not in a paid vacation anymore. You have to pay taxes, you have to go to work and do something, you have to be there on time and you can't just leave whenever you feel like it. You will have various expenses, transit or gas and car payments, car insurance, maintenance, you have to dress up. You can't just go to a park in the middle of the day and spend 5 hours there, you can't go to the beach.

OTOH you can work under table and make your welfare or EI and also have extra income, and again, you are not paying taxes on any of it.

Oh, what about free medical care for those, who are on welfare or EI? They have medical care, don't they? All of a sudden they may have WORSE medical care, they may have worse type of insurance coverage.

No no, for somebody to get off welfare or EI it takes not a minimum wage, it takes many times that, maybe 4 times the minimum wage for it to make sense. That's how fucked up the system is - all this government interference causes all the prices to be so high, while providing the moral hazard of welfare state and setting wage and price controls (minimum wage, prices on medical procedures, etc.), and all that this does is that it causes prices to be much higher both in nominal terms (dollar amounts) and in real terms (real money, quality, opportunity, etc.)

No, government isn't doing anybody any favours in this, except it gets the opportunity to sell this idea of socialism to the dumbest segment of population - the voters who want this free cheese and the poverty mousetrap that comes with it.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[X0563511]

Are you saying I didn't? I had to wear the monkey suit some days. Talk to customers constantly. Take prospective customers on tours of the facility.

I was hardly a server-room gnome...

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[LordLimecat]

We havent had 140% inflation since the 1990s. Based on food prices etc, we're looking at 20% or so, not much more. $12 / hour for retail is really quite decent, its on par with what a waiter makes, and the waiter works a heck of a lot harder.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[thesandtiger]

Who is John Galt?

A stupid character from a hilariously bad book that espouses ideas even a child would find simplistic and misguided.

Happy to help if it means I saved you the time of reading that tripe!

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean 1920x1200 > high resolution screen that thinks it's 1400x900.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because Australia is inverted. The rich people are broke, the poor people are loaded.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

.... and you CAN'T install the current version of OS X in 32-bit mode. I think that even Snow Leopard was 64-bit only.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Phoghat]

For 2 years I worked at Radio Shack,thought it would be fun. Pay was minimumwage, plus some commission, and the commissions, "perks" , and they kept getting smaller and smaller. I would have been happy with $11.91

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[hairyfeet]

Which is why I said if they like the brand then they should buy it PERIOD and quit with the logic hoops. I like Ford trucks, especially the Rangers. does that mean that Ford is "better" or that Chevy is "worse' than Ford? Nope it just fits me better than the other trucks, everything is laid out perfectly for me, so that is why I like Ford. My oldest has a Chevy S10 and feels the same way about it, even though it feels like a low rider to me, but to him it all fits his body like it was made for him so that is what makes him happy.

I have to wonder if it isn't part of the whole "Cult of Mac" thing in that it isn't enough for them to simply be happy with what they have, they have to somehow be "better" or "superior" to someone else. My grandfather was like that, with $1000 suits and a caddy every year, but I just find that shallow myself.

If Apple or Gucci or prada makes something you like and you think its worth the cost? Then please by all means buy it. But just don't delude yourself that just because YOU bought Brand X that Brand X is somehow better or more perfect than Brand Y or Z, because Apple hasn't been ahead of any curves in years, its not sinking tons of money into R&D and designing all this stuff, its simply buying parts and putting them together, no different than Dell or HP. in fact retailers like Tiger now offer better accident protection at a cheaper price than Applecare so you can't even claim that is the reason to buy.

Its just a brand folks, like Coke or Pepsi, and if it makes you happy than just be happy and buy it. The fact that you can't seem to be happy unless you are right and they are wrong just makes me wonder if that little voice isn't telling you the same thing I am, that you spent too much if all you cared about was hardware and not fashion.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[WOOFYGOOFY]

I think what the poster is saying is that if the pay were good generally, there wouldn't be the turn over. Turnover happens due to pay / responsibility imbalances. There is nothing about retail that is inherently worse than factory work , but factory workers hang on for decades because of the middle class wages such jobs used to pay.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Not entirely true. Ask anybody who used a computer in the late 80s, early 90s, and Apple was way ahead. SCSI on the desktop? Check. A completely USB connected home computer? Check. In fact, it was likely that Apple's early insistence on cutting edge tech is at least part of the reason nobody bought them until Steve Jobs came back. SCSI on the desktop? Who the fuck can afford SCSI on the desktop, and why the hell would I need it?

Well, I had an Amiga 2000HD in '89 and it had built-in SCSI. It also did preemptive multi-tasking, something which Apple finally got with OSX in 2011.

Apple way ahead? Not by my watch.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

2001... Oops

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

See, he tells truth. The airlines don't need to when the government does it for them.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anubis IV]

There is nothing about retail that is inherently worse than factory work

Sure there is. You have to deal with customers. That'll suck out most people's souls in time. Factory work is an honest day's labor where you get to make something. Retail work can leave you scarred if you have to deal with a particularly bad customer.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure what good those roving clerks do anyway.

I'd never buy Apple's over-priced, restrictive products anyway, but I hate going into a computer store only to have someone bother me while I'm quietly looking at the items for sale by myself.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[cthulhu11]

Clearly you've never priced electronics there.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[WOOFYGOOFY]

For a certain type of person this is true. For another type of person, factory work is souless and interacting and helping customers is more varied and interesting.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Americans have been brainwashed by extreme right wing politics. The USA is a banana republic. Maybe it is time for American’s to wake up to the fact that both sides of politics are shafting the working class.

Australia has yet to experience the severity of the global correction.

Australia’s average unemployment rate is hovering around 5%.

Australian’s don’t tip or work with a tip component to supplement their wages.

Wages scales vary from state to state.

Under the Western Australian state awards the minimum wage for a shop assistant is $17.03 per hour plus 9% compulsory employer superannuation contribution plus 4 weeks annual leave plus public holidays plus overtime loading.

For workers not covered by awards, the minimum wages are set by Fair Work Australia, a Federal independent wages umpire.

From their website.

The national minimum wage acts as a safety net for employees in the national workplace relations system to provide minimum rates of pay for employees not covered by awards or agreements. National minimum wage orders are made by the Minimum Wage Panel of Fair Work Australia.

Australia's minimum wage is $15.51 per hour or $589.30 per week. Generally, employees in the national system shouldn't get less than this.

An employee's basic rate of pay depends on such things as their age, job classification and what industrial instrument they're covered by (e.g. a modern award, pre-modern award, transitional Pay Scale, workplace agreement and so on).

The minimum wages received by employees in the national workplace relations system are reviewed by Fair Work Australia annually, with any adjustments taking effect from the first pay period on or after 1 July each year.

For junior employees, the minimum rates are:

Under 16 years of age $5.71
At 16 years of age $7.34
At 17 years of age $8.96
At 18 years of age $10.59
At 19 years of age $12.80
At 20 years of age $15.15.

For apprentices, the rates are:

Year 1 of apprenticeship $9.93
Year 2 of apprenticeship $11.74
Year 3 of apprenticeship $14.45
Year 4 of apprenticeship $17.16.

The Australian west coast mining industry is short staffed and paying between $100,000 to $250,000 per annum.

Life is for living not working. Therefore; don’t whine about wages in the USA, migrate to Western Australia and enjoy the clean free air of Western Australian beaches.

All wage scales, including the unemployed, are covered by free healthcare.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[khallow]

Yes, but having a living wage doesn't exacerbate significantly the problem for young black men

Sure there's a sense in which that makes sense, such as putting another bullet in a dead person. It's not going to make them more dead after all. OTOH, we could just get rid of the living wage ideology. That seems more useful to the people that supposedly are being helped.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[dudeman500]

Communism?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[andymadigan]

Apple was the first to use Intel Core CPUs, which were an enormous improvement over the cooking devices known as the Pentium 4. Apple has been ahead of PCs in the laptop market ever since. PCs have started to catch up in the past year or two, at the same time the iPad, iPhone and their clones have begun to replace PCs themselves.

Apple has its flaws, I swear my mac misses every fifth click or so, and it prompts me to 'identify' my keyboard far too often... but Apple is leading the market. The reason seems to be that nobody else is willing to put the money into new ideas that they are. Microsoft has the cash and the incentive to change things, but without control of the hardware they're left with most customers buying the cheapest hardware available and having a terrible (or at least mediocre) experience... thus the Surface strategy.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

Apple was the first to use Intel Core CPUs, which were an enormous improvement over the cooking devices known as the Pentium 4.

Um. . . no. Intel launched the Core architecture in January 2006, at the same time as both various PCs and the MacBook Pro and iMac were refreshed. Apple didn't get some exclusive six month-contract or something. . . and with SB and IB, they've been about two months behind the most expeditious PC makers both times - the first IB Mac launched less than two weeks ago, when the first PCs were shipping in April.

How can Apple possibly be leading the hardware market when they're using the same hardware that goes in PCs? The only hardware they lead in is displays.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Serpents]

I don't know about the US, but here having a minimum wage job (well below poverty line) usually means you don't qualify for any kind of welfare. On the other hand, welfare does not guarantee survival either (won't even cover cost of food). Of course there are some who still claim that the minimum wage is way too high but given that unemployment among people 18-24 yo is ca. 40% and most people will take ANY job at the moment, and the fact that I see more and more Porsches, Ferraris et al. in the streets I don't think the minimum wage is the problem we have here.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Who said $12/hour was a "living wage"?

And why should Apple pay retail clerks walking the floor a wage designed to support a family of four? Do the clerks add THAT MUCH value to the proposition that they deserve $20-25/hr + benefits?

Should Apple ignore the near inexhaustible supply of willing and able workers that will take the job for $12/hour?

If Apple were to double retail clerk pay ($12 -> $25/hr) do you think Apple would keep the same number of clerks, halve the number of clerks or create more clerk positions? My money is on halving the number of clerks in the store.

I might believe your assertion if Apple was not raking in huge profits from its retail sales. It markets its brand as a premium brand, it sells at premium prices, it forces its suppliers to pay their employees peanuts, it can afford to pay its muppets more to keep them feeling smug about the brand. I imagine fanbois might run from the stores with tears streaming from their eyes if a disgruntled genius dissed their favourite brand.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Most 'free tickets' are standby only, I've seen my in-laws (Continental employees) wait all day for room on a flight before.

Also, even pilots have to get scanned by security, but they do get to skip the line.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

You may not be aware because you are clearly not an expert in technology. 2880x1800 is a much higher resolution than 1900x1200. You can look it up on the Internet. (If you can't figure it out, ask Grandma).

Yours is also bigger in every dimension, more than twice as thick, and with that battery nearly 2x the weight.

Your fortunately comment is very telling. Mac laptops have much higher resale value than any other maker. It is pretty clear you never actually owned any.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife works at an Apple store and pulls in $29.15 an hour working the genius bar. Which means that she would have been able to qualify for the mortgage we took out three months ago just on her salary. The 25% employee discount is nice also.

Methinks the poster has an axe to grind with his inflamatory language.

Congrats to your wife! I worked as a manager and genius for 9 years at Apple and topped off at $24/hour. There is no consistency with their wages. Experience, years at the company, and level of service are not represented in the pay scale. Best shot at a competitive salary is to come from another retailer such as William Sonoma and negotiate a high pay up front. If a person is hired as a Specialist and works their way up the ladder, you're at their mercy to nominal raises.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Wovel]

So like 10 a week? He checked out 10 people buying computers a week for a year (assuming the 750k was not over some longer time period). How much selling did he do? I am sure a lot of those "sales" we're him acting as a cashier. 30% GM - operating expenses (those stores aren't cheap), how much does he think he should make for pushing the last button?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Wovel]

Who has had a laptop with > 2880x1800 for years? One link. Stop just making shit up because you think it sounds good.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[samoanbiscuit]

I was referring to the screen resolutions of the previous generation Macbook Pros (1440x900 and 1920x1200). Other laptop makers have had niche models with resolutions and pixel densities in excess of them, but they never sold as well as the race-to-the-bottom 1366x768 laptops. Stop reading my post in the most uncharitable light possible because you think it makes you smart.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, 'out-of-the-box sleep functionality' didn't/hasn't *reliably* worked out-of-the-box with Windows since the beginning of 'sleep mode' way back in the day. In my professional career (as a software developer), I've had 5 different laptops. Of those, 2 could reliably sleep/hibernate and actually return to a normal working state. Of the unreliable laptops, 2 were Dells, and 1 was an HP. Of the reliable laptops, one came with NT 4 installed stock, but sleep/hibernate/resume only started working correctly once it was upgraded to Win2K. It kept working reliably with early XP, but was replaced before SP2. The other reliable laptop came with Win7 Pro 64-bit installed. (It's my current dev box.)

A friend (another developer) regularly complains that his laptop won't reliably recover from *sleep*, much less hibernation. God forbid he removes it from the dock without shutting it off. It appears to be a problem common to the particular Dell model the company chose with their most recent system refresh. (It uses the same dock as my laptop.)

Over that same time I've had 3 Mac laptops and 1 Mac desktop. All of them slept/hibernated and returned to a normal working state without issue. (Full Disclosure: The desktop did start having issues with it shortly before it's 12-year-old motherboard gave up the ghost.)

In short, 'out-of-the-box sleep functionality' is still a bit of a crap-shoot these days with typical Wintel laptops. It's something Apple has done right since *at least* way back with the old, original bondai-blue iMac. (That's as far back as I personally have any experience with Macs beyond the System 7(?) boxes we had in the computer lab in high school.)

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

The low-paid, low-skilled worker quickly has to learn the art of having roommates. It's a learning experience.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously? Because we can't change the way people think... i.e., human nature. You seem to be advocating for a communist style economic system. It doesn't work because it totally ignores human nature.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[AdamWill]

Comparing it to what you earned two decades ago, as other repliers have said, is absurd. The appropriate comparison is 'similar jobs at the present time'. It seems to be true that $12/hr isn't a terrible starting wage in retail, though, and the story is really just spinning it. Certainly where I live, that's a fairly normal retail wage.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[LanMan04]

I assume that you'll come up with an example or two, but they'll be outliers that I just didn't think of.

No true scotsman

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[shutdown -p now]

A bunch of people did back in 19th century, when it was found from experience that working dawn till dusk is not particularly healthy.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[neros1x]

No my argument is that Apple used to try to stay ahead of the hardware rat race, and it failed miserably for them. Now, they aim for the hardware necessary to give most consumers the experience they want. I don't like the company, but that was certainly a wise decision.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[neros1x]

Amusingly, this comes from a person who hasn't had to buy an airline ticket in years and gets to bypass getting felt up by TSA officials.

. Are we seriously bitching about a company that benefits its employee's well?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[MagusSlurpy]

No, we're bitching about a guy that said since his employer treats him well, that somehow means OF COURSE it also treats its customers well.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[jandrese]

You know what I like about Apple stores? They're not pushy with the overpriced accessories. Last time I bought an iPhone the employee just showed me a list of what Applecare provides, and said he could add it to my bill if I'm interested. No hard sell, no pushing, just an upfront assessment of cost vs. service. For what it's worth, Applecare is pretty much the only warranty I purchase because it's so low BS. If something breaks (and I have a 2 year old), I just make an appointment, bring it in, and they fix it on the spot or at worst keep it a couple of days. No mailing it back at my own expense and waiting 4-6 weeks and then discovering that it only covered parts, not labor.

It's like they care about long term customer satisfaction or something. It's weird.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Then the better paid "clerks" would have more money to actually purchase what they sell.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is a "small business"?

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[Eponymous Hero]

the reason why people don't understand this is they mistakenly believe working the genius bar is anything other than a low skilled job. that's the whole point of apple products -- any idiot can use them. the genius bar is there to serve those dumber than idiots. this, on the other hand, is what i call a high skill job: http://www.theonion.com/video/new-apple-friend-bar-gives-customers-someone-to-ta,17693/

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[neros1x]

Fair enough.

Re:That pay is just for the first few months

[scot4875]

That doesn't even make sense. If they were using Apple as R&D, it should *increase* their profit margins.

--Jeremy

Question already answered

[daveschroeder]

"Would you rather start at an Apple store for $11.91 an hour (average starting base pay, according to the linked article) and an employee discount, or at Tiffany for $15.60?"

I think the people who work at Apple Stores -- and others waiting for callbacks -- have already answered that.

What, supply and demand suddenly can't drive wages now?

But I imagine this, like any article on Foxconn (aka "Apple factory"; forget all other customers), will be another anti-Apple free-for-all, so have fun!

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

So all the people who don't work at Apple stores don't get to answer? This test is skewed.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

On the contrary, would you like to be known as Tiffany Store Genius or Apple Store Genius?

Re:Question already answered

[93 Escort Wagon]

On the contrary, would you like to be known as Tiffany Store Genius or Apple Store Genius?

Well, having just watched "Breakfast at Tiffany's" last night...

The store employee agreed to engrave a plastic ring for under ten bucks, and it wasn't even a Tiffany's ring. While it's true he did solve George Peppard's problem, Tiffany's probably wouldn't consider him a Genius since the net benefit to them was likely negative.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

Tiffany Store Genius, because then I have a chance to bonk some rich trophy wife.

Re:Question already answered

[UnknowingFool]

Talk about apples and oranges. Working in Tiffany's is not working in an Apple store. How about something comparable instead. The article mentioned the average Apple salesman sells about $473K while average electronics is about $206K. I didn't read what the average electronics salesperson makes. If it isn't close to $11.25 starting (with benefits) after commissions then there isn't much room for discussion.

Re:Question already answered

[Khyber]

I'm a Sex Shop Genius.

I get hit on more than any Apple employee ever will, I get great discounts and free porn and free toys/lube, *AND* to top it off male and female co-workers are quite attractive.

In fact, one's coming over on her lunch break in 3 hours. ;)

Tips from customers as I get off work and leave the building (can't accept tips in-store on-clock) is a nice bonus, too! $50+ nightly.

And some of the stories I could tell you. No Apple employee has such privilege, I can guarantee this.

Why would I want to work at Apple?

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe, but in the Apple store you'd be able to explore the other side of your bisexuality.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

Except it would have an indirect effect on customer satisfaction and would probably end up being a net benefit to them.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume they made the comparison because the flagship Tiffany store is across the street from the 5th Ave Apple Store.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty sure she'll think you're gay, so still no chance.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

Never seen the movie, but ten bucks in 1943 dollars would be worth roughly $133 today.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll check with my boss about that. He clears 120k as a department head of network services and works at the Apple store for $12 but is trying to quit Apple because the job sucks. They are constantly changing his work day, working 8 hrs without break, making him do Genius bar work for the the lower rate, having hum do training seminars on his day off, and numerous other crap. I laugh because he puts himself through this just because he loves Apple that much. I get glee out of pointing out these Apple articles to him...and showing him all those new ios features on my android phone already.

Re:Question already answered

[Mabhatter]

You are SO going down for sexual harrassment! I can imagine the lawyers trying to write the HR policy for a sex toy shop.

I bet your Internet is STILL blocked. Free porn means your customers aren't paying for it!

Re:Question already answered

[Mabhatter]

And what kind of markup does Tiffany's have? Jewelry and fancy dresses have 100%+ markup at retail... Especially with a Tiffiany's logo.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

What, supply and demand suddenly can't drive wages now?

Maybe in (many/most) parts of the US it can, but in some industries and location it often can't. If it could, unions would never have been able to get any traction. As it stood, large corporate entities had to be checked in power by employees ganging up on them (which helped bring about forty hour weeks and the idea of "the weekend").

Re:Question already answered

[Khyber]

Sheeeit, 50% of our sales comes from rentals because they don't wan't something trackable on computer. A few buy our no-trace drives loaded with porn, and also on occasion there's the buyer of DVDs/Blu-Ray because they want to display it on a big screen.

And no, sexual harassment is not so expected in this field. We're all freaks and flirt with each other all the time. Whether it gets serious or not is a different story (and one I have many of.)

Re:Question already answered

[UnknowingFool]

Yes but does a Tiffany employee get discounts on merchandise and benefits? All the posted said was that the average Tiffany employee makes more. That's not really a valid comparison. If there was a car dealership across the the 5th Ave Apple Store would it be a valid comparison. Are there Tiffany's across the street every Apple store?

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

> Working in Tiffany's is not working in an Apple store.

Why? They are both fashion stores.

Re:Question already answered

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would I want to work at Apple?

somehow, I wonder more why are you reading and posting on slashdot?

Re:Question already answered

[guruevi]

Also, the comparison is kind of off - Tiffany's is a jeweler, a place where you want to compensate people enough so they don't compensate themselves. Also, I wouldn't hire any kid for my high-end jeweler store. Apple Store employee is just like any other store at the mall, $12/h is pretty high for a mall job, places like Old Navy or Radio Shack barely have their store managers make more than $12.

Re:Question already answered

[arkane1234]

Yeah, you'll be able to bonk some trophy wife's daughter who's coming in for her iPhone.

Re:Question already answered

[RulerOf]

We're all freaks and flirt with each other all the time. Whether it gets serious or not is a different story (and one I have many of.)

We, the users of Slashdot, would like to collectively subscribe to your newsletter.

Calories

[Mike Mentalist]

Those turtle-neck sweaters have plenty of sustenance. Think of those elven corn bread things from Lord of the Rings.

I used to be AppleCare CPU T1

[Anonymous Coward]

at $0.50 CDN above minimum wage. Got screwed into Call Director (hit 0) wages because of a scheduling conflict. Seriously.

Worst thing is, it was that or McDonalds at minimum ($9.60 at the time)

Re:I used to be AppleCare CPU T1

[Anonymous Coward]

I should mention, normal CPU T1 was only $11. I also used to put people on hold to take a piss because my handle time was "too short" even though my resolved cases were high, and customer satisfaction surveys were high (which are all or nothing. You're scored on an "out of 5" scale, and anything 80% or below fails. Do the math. Half the time they even literally said they were complaining about the stores but I still took the hit.)

Re:I used to be AppleCare CPU T1

[Anonymous Coward]

Got screwed into Call Director (hit 0) wages because of a scheduling conflict. Seriously.

Uhh, english translation please?

Re:I used to be AppleCare CPU T1

[Anonymous Coward]

Call Director was a different department, basically operators. (Thus the "Hit 0") I was hired for tech support, but the training was full time and I was in university at the time. They told me when I was hired that the training was part time, this was changed at the last minute. It was a small town, so not many options for work.

They paid me as a call director, not the tech support pay. When I moved to tech support, they didn't increase my pay.

Re:I used to be AppleCare CPU T1

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you, I understand clearly now.

What a stupid time to post this drivel

[brunes69]

With US unemployment at a six month high and the global economy in the tank, a story comes out that people making > $11 / hour at the local Apple store have it hard off?

Pretty sure that there are 10 people waiting in the queue for every 1 job that opens up at one of these stores.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Volante3192]

Yes, making $11/hr means you've got it hard.

Contemplate the meaning of that for a moment. It's not just that we have high unemployment, it's that those WITH employment aren't getting anything close to a living wage. And you know what happens when you don't get a living wage? You have to go on welfare programs.

Funny how that works out, isn't it?

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

So what makes you think that $11/hr is not a "living wage". I'm a bit curious because I currently make slightly more than that and have no trouble putting most of that money away.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you telling me that people cannot live on 22K/year?

Here is a man that raises his family of four on 27K/year: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/06/01/raising-a-family-on-under-2000-per-year/.

I live on 28K/year (making 90K/year, mind you!).

My two roommates live on the 12K/year stipend for their research.

My girlfriend lives on 15K/year.

None of us are on welfare. All of us have savings cushions. All of use drive our own (paid for) cars (between 15 and 4 years old, mine is the oldest). All of us can afford to do reasonable things: going to swim with dolphins this weekend, all of us have spent at least 1 week in a foreign country this past year, several of us have had theme-park weekends, and we each eat out of the house about once per week. We are not about to claim welfare.

Fuck you.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[jjohnson]

Care to break down your budget for us?

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

$1100 every two weeks before taxes. $600 stays in the bank (plus some taxes+EIC return at tax time). Secret is spending control.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[amoeba1911]

Here's the budget:
Rent: $0 - (living in parents' basement)
Food: $0 - (mom cooks)

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Khyber]

Dunno his budget but I know I'm doing just fine in Southern California.

And that's expensive. But I do it on a slow home business and part-time work at a sex shop.

The trick: Quit buying expensive stuff if you can.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

khallow's weekly budget:

12.50x36 = $450 = $375 after taxes

1.) Cheese Doodles $15
2.) Rent to mom for basement: $25
3.) Mountain Dew: $15
4.) Savings: $320

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[interval1066]

Yeah... perhaps I'm not the most frugal of people in the world but I would have a hard time paying all bills and still having cash to put away at 11.00/hour... I would have to give up my car if I wanted to keep a roof over my head. Or I could give up my flat and live in my car I guess.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[drinkypoo]

The trick: Quit buying expensive stuff if you can.

No joke. I keep seeing these articles about $600 video cards where people are saying "Some of us only spend $350 on our video cards" and I'm about ready to shit myself. This is just one example of my fist-shaking-on-the-lawn, but seriously. My whole PC is made up of little more than $600 in parts, and I have six cores and enough video card to play any game out today, if not at top quality and top resolution simultaneously (and if it's new, certainly not.)

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Telvin_3d]

So, your total monthly expenses (including taxes) are less than $1500. That's pretty good. I'd be interested in knowing what kind of area you are living in.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Fjandr]

I quite agree. If someone cannot support themselves full time on $12/hr, they've made poor choices about where they live in relation to the work they are able to accomplish, or even poorer day-to-day or month-to-month money management choices.

My circumstances are seriously edge-case as concerns why my income is so low, but I have a good standard of living in a moderately-sized US city netting half that amount. Doubling my income would actually afford me private health insurance.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

So everyone should live in a gated community no matter whether they have a PhD or just a HS diplomma? Is that what you're saying? that everyone deserves 5 cars and a boat, whether you're a doctor or flipping burgers?

There's a reason we are what we are, evolution requires competition, and if you can't compete, you should not be rewarded as highly as those who can, and thus you should not be able to afford everything you want. The fact that even talantless nothings can make a living and survive, is something already. Had we lived in the prehistoric natural world, evolution would have already gotten rid of such individuals.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

Living in Yellowstone National Park. This is part of my spending control. If your labor isn't worth that much, then live somewhere where it goes further.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[DesScorp]

Yes, making $11/hr means you've got it hard.

Contemplate the meaning of that for a moment. It's not just that we have high unemployment, it's that those WITH employment aren't getting anything close to a living wage. And you know what happens when you don't get a living wage? You have to go on welfare programs.

Funny how that works out, isn't it?

Most Apple Store employees are young students or young workers living at home or sharing an apartment with others and splitting expenses. I really doubt that there's a lot of single parents supporting a whole family on Apple Store pay. So there goes your welfare jab. Getting outraged over this is like getting outraged at making just over minimum wage flipping burgers. If you want to make more money, learn a skill and become a higher valued worker.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[__aaltlg1547]

Try moving out of of Daddy's house.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[cptdondo]

Budgets please. Unless you live in some total backwater, you can't live on $12K/yr, or $15K/yr without some form of assistance. Where I live a cheap apartment can cost $6K/yr. Groceries are easily $400/mo, so that doesn't leave enough to buy gas for one of your paid-for cars.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

Or live somewhere cheaper. If your labor really is worth $11 an hour, then you need to make some sacrifices. That's what I do. There are three things that get missed about living wages. First, if someone's labor isn't worth the living wage, then they get paid $0 per hour. That incidentally is the true minimum though obviously not "living" wage.

Second, a number of people not only are willing to work well below a "living wage", but can afford to. For example, if you're a spouse or dependent child of someone who's already working, then you can settle for less money, yet still make more than your expenses. But "living wage" advocates would rather these people stay unemployed.

Third, income is not static. Just because you earn less than living wage now doesn't mean you always will. Low wages are often part of entry level work and they tend to go up over time. I started below $8 per hour a few years ago and have worked up to my current level. I also gained a lot of valuable job experience. I couldn't get that by staying unemployed.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

Here's the budget:
Rent: $0 - (living in parents' basement)
Food: $0 - (mom cooks)

Not my situation (though I do have room and board nailed), but this is an important class of potential worker. Why should these people be unemployed because they are willing to work for less than "living wage" and frankly, not worth much more than what they are paid? Should we keep teenagers and such unemployed merely because some people can't live on $11 an hour?

Please consider the human cost of having a generation unemployed for years at a time. How are they going to get job experience? How are they going to learn how to run and not to run a business?

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[interval1066]

Or live somewhere cheaper.

Uh, ok, point taken, but I'm not going to make less money to make a point. Or feel good about myself. I feel pretty reasonable about my life making what I make. Haven't made less than $20/hour for years. I'm ok with this.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Skuld-Chan]

So you live in a tent and pump gas?

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[ColdWetDog]

Living in Yellowstone National Park. This is part of my spending control. If your labor isn't worth that much, then live somewhere where it goes further.

Ah, no wonder your cost of living is so reasonable. You're living on top of the next supervolcano. Won't make much difference how much you salt away if you are destined to be launched into the upper atmosphere in tiny little pieces....

There is always a catch.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

How many Apple stores are there in Yellowstone National Park? How many other jobs are available in Yellowstone National Park?

How many Apple Stores are in cities like LA, SF and NY? How much do people working in those stores in those cities get paid - ~$12/hour according to the article.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[phantomfive]

They didn't get an apartment by themselves, they have roommates.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[geoskd]

Where I live, the cheapest living accommodations are $300 / month, and you don't go outside after dark. That gets you a bed in a room with a roommate, and you're sharing a four bedroom apt with 6 other people in the other three rooms. Your portion of the utilities is $100 / month in the winter and $50 in the summer. Food for one person will run you $450 / month, and public transport is $75 / month (lousy subsidies).

Now, $1100 every two weeks is not $11/hr, its $14 / hr. $11/ hr is $900. Take out 17% taxes + soc sec + every other thing, and you get $1500 / month total.

So yes, if you're willing to live in the worst slum, never own a car, never have any privacy or a family, never spend money on a social life, and commute 2 hours a day for an 8 hour shift (if you're lucky enough to get 8 hours, most service jobs are "part time" only to ensure employers don't have to provide full benefits.), you can put away about $500 / month. At that rate, when you are ready to retire, you will have about 250k in savings and no pension, very little if any social security income, and you'll have to hoard that $250k to pay for living in that same slum you have been in for the last 40 years.

Yay American dream.

Minimum wage in this country needs to go up a lot, and millionaires need to return to the days when they were expected to pay 75%+ of their income in taxes to support the society that has made them rich in the first place.

-=Geoskd

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

Groceries are easily $400/mo

Don't eat out much. Buy and cook in bulk. Save leftovers. Buy generic over brand name, etc. You can get that number down. I'd say $200 a month per person (and I bet there are slashdotters who could get that down to $100 a month per person!) is a good target for most of the developed world, unless you're in an unusually expensive location.

Such attempts at cost savings don't make much sense, if you earn a lot of income since they often take time to do and your time is more valuable doing other things.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[DogDude]

You're really fucking stupid if you can't live comfortably on $11/hour. I mean that. Really fucking stupid.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

cheap apartments in my part of the world cost $6K/year each for a 4-bedroom. similar in most major cities in canada.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[cptdondo]

Buying in bulk and such works if you have a group of people. The poster was claiming that his girlfriend could live on $15K/yr unassisted. Sharing rent expenses, sharing cooking expenses, etc. are all some form of assistance. Single portions in grocery stores are extremely expensive.

Here you can't get an apartment at all (unless it's in a drug infested dump) unless you can prove you make at least $35K/yr, or someone (university, mom) vouches for you. And roommates don't count; someone has to sign that makes that much. Getting someone to guarantee you will pay your bills counts as assistance in my book.

I'm not saying it's impossible to live on $15K/yr; I'm saying to do so you have to do some serious cost sharing with others and get assistance from someone somewhere, even if it's co-signing on the lease agreement.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Sir_Sri]

Two roomates pretty much sums it up.

That and actually spending 28k a year is a lot. That's equivalent to about 40k/year in before tax income (which is 20 bucks an hour).

The two on research grants only get 12k but they don't and aren't expected to be building a pension or unemployment for example. Nor would they be able to build equity in a property at that rate. On and if they're on research grants they probably have health care through their institutions, and they're living that badly (with no meaningful savings towards retirement) as an investment. It's not sustainable, but it's certainly viable short term.

Saying he 'lives' on 28k a year when he makes 90 is silly. He's only spending 28k a year (which is still more than his two roommates combined) but much of his 'not spent' income is actually going to be spent, when he buys a house, a car, or retires. 24k a year would not leave him much room to do that. Depending on where you live naturally.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[zippthorne]

If Yellowstone ever does go off, we're *all* gonna die. Those actually living on it will just get to skip the months of cold, starvation, and wars.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[geoskd]

Here is a man that raises his family of four on 27K/year: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/06/01/raising-a-family-on-under-2000-per-year/.

Look at his budget and then read through the line items. Hes talking about feeding a family of $450 / month. Where I live, Ramen, Chef-boy-are-dee, and Penut Butter and Jelly Sandwhiches run me that much for just me. Insurance $600 for car + home? My insurance is $1000 just for the house. Taxes, 0.6%? WTF, my home taxes are 3% and climbing, and anyone who thinks renters dont pay property taxes is just foolish. Health care $100 / month? My employer pays 80%, and my 20% for a family of four is $300 / month. Gas 316? for the year? Thats, what, all of ten gallons a year. Must be nice to live within biking distance of work, but all of that housing where i live is out of my price range by a wide margin.

So in short, he's living in an area with less than half the average cost of living, and saying that anyone can live on $30k? Fuck you Asshole.

-=Geoskd

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[dlp211]

I love the "if someone cannot support themselves on $12/hr" bullshit. You know most people support more then just themselves, they have kids, spouses etc. My wife makes 13 and change an hour. Her "full time" job comes in at 35 hours a week, just enough for her to be considered full time. After taxes and health insurance she brings home 650 every other week. Rent alone is 1200 a month, cheapest in our area, throw in $90 for cell service, another $90 for cable and internet plus another 100 for electricity and we have no money at the end of the month and we have the cheapest health plan they offer and if me, her, or our kids ever got severely sick/injured we'd be screwed. She has an education, in fact graduated top of her class but graduated 2007 as a teacher, so you see where that is going. The idea that 10, 11, 12, 13, or even 14 or 15 dollars an hour is a living wage is a joke. If I didn't have the Post 9/11 GI Bill coming in on top of her wages we would be going into a massive amount of debt so that I can get my engineering degree.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[cptdondo]

$500/month for a 4 bedroom?????? WOW!!!!!

What are your building costs? On a 30 year note, that's roughly, what, $50K US to build a 4 bedroom apartment? So we're talking building/purchase costs of $50/sf? What part of the world are you in? 1950?

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

you've got to be kidding.. where I live a studio apartment is $800/$900 a month. Either you live at home, or out in the bushes somewhere

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[cptdondo]

Also, he's got a $450K house paid for. At some point he was making a lot more than $30K/yr. Sure, if my house was paid for I could be holier than thou and pontificate about how wasteful you are.

The reality is most of us don't get $1M to play with by the time we're 37. So sir, take your holier than thou attitude and go fuck yourself.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[fredgiblet]

So everyone should live in a gated community no matter whether they have a PhD or just a HS diplomma? Is that what you're saying?

Nice strawman

What he's saying is simple, there are different costs of living in different areas. He's not talking about gated communities, he's talking about the difference in rent for a tiny apartment, the difference in price for food in different areas. A living wage in one area is a ticket to Welfare in another, simply based off of differences in prices.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[dlp211]

1200/month rent
300/month health insurance
200/month car insurance/renters/life insurance
200/month cell/cable/internet
100/month electricity

That is the basic break down of my budget. I have the cheapest insurance that I can get, the cheapest rent, the cheapest internet and cell service. The only thing we splurge on a little bit is the cable because I enjoy watching sports and the kids love the disney channels.

Total = 2000/month and we haven't even touched gas, food, car repair/maintenance. 11/hr * 40/hr/week * 4.3/weeks/month = $1862/month and that isn't even taking out taxes. Not everyone lives in bumfuck idaho, not everyone is single and at university. Some of us have families and can't just get up and move away when we feel like it.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't seem to have included any growth from the money he has put away (say in an S&P 500 index fund IRA). Using reasonable amounts based on this discussion, he would be able to withdraw between $3400 and $5000 a month (adjusted for inflation) for 20 years of retirement if he started out of an undergraduate program and worked there at his paltry rate till 65, with a total IRA fund of between 1.8 million USD and 2.6 million USD at the time of retirement.

http://www.bankrate.com/calculators/retirement/ira-savings-calculator.aspx

It really isn't hard to save for retirement if you start early, even at the wages being discussed.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, lots of people in poor countries live on less than $1 US per day. Even accounting for cost of living differences, it'd not an enviable situation.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[RubberDogBone]

Where did the idea EVER come from that you were supposed to get a job/situation like the one you describe and stay that way your entire life?

The plan should be, get a job. Keep that job until you can get a better one. When you can, get a better job and move up. Repeat as needed. It won't take most people more than a few years, a decade tops, to climb the job ladder into something that pays well and provides the base needed to raise a family and eventually retire. They can climb the ladder as high as ambition will take them.

Nobody is supposed to try to have a family and kids, and/or work their entire lives and try to retire off a job paying $11 an hour. THAT idea is repulsive. This country rewards people who get off their tails and think outside their self-imposed boxes (mental prison cells) and try to achieve something better. You have got to try.

Easy? No. Nobody promised easy. Just that it can be done if someone is willing to try.

Settling for less than that is the problem. Too many people peak at those low plateau jobs and never reach higher.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Or move... I lived on less than $1000/month very comfortably (4 bedroom house, 4 people). Now that I've purchased my own house, my expenses (mortgage, utilities, gas, food) are down to around $500 a month (as an individual). The trick is moving away from population centers where there are too many people and not enough housing.

In fact, there are several 4 bedroom houses for sale near me for less than $20,000. Yes, this is in the US of A. The American dream is still possible, you just can't have it when your dream is identical to everyone else's.

I can agree about the wealthy paying more taxes, but minimum wage is an abomination that only drives price inflation. Also, if it gets too high, people just work under the table because many businesses can't afford to pay more.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[timeOday]

Sure, you can live on $15K/year as a kid, supporting just yourself, if you're lucky enough to be in good health. But for a family of 4, health care premiums alone average over $15K / year. $15k minus $15k doesn't leave a lot for other essentials. ("Family of 4" is the most reasonable unit of sustainability, since two people with two kids on average equals a steady population.)

Like many people, I have "employer-provided" health care that pays a good chunk of the $15k, but that no longer means as much as it used to. My share of the premiums, plus co-pays and deductibles, would take the lion's share of that $15K in a year. The glory days of being insured and therefore having no risk of health care expenses is long gone for most people.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[linuxscrub]

This.

I think he and his wife were in the $150k-$200k area for at least 3-4 years before "retiring."

But, even so, if you add in $1500/month for mortgage (which will pay a pretty big loan), your in the $45k/year range, which is quite a bit more but not an obscene amount, but is a good salary (considering it must be after taxes).

LS

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

So your solution for the millions and millions of people living in cities and making shit wages is that they should move onto national parks and compete for a few hundred jobs, which also pay shit wages, because the cost of living's cheap? Won`t that drive the cost of living up (so you'll no longer be able to put those big $600 cheques into your savings account)? Of course, with the influx of people, will come an influx of industry to serve them, meaning more jobs, stores, etc. And they`ll have to build massive housing and infrastructure, and the cost of living will go up more to pay for it. So then I guess your `$1100 every 2 weeks` really won`t seem like a ``living wage`` anymore when you can`t even pay for rent and food without 3 roommates. (Do you see why your situation can`t work for everyone in the country?)

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

>...millionaires need to return to the days when they were expected to pay 75%+ of their income in taxes to support the society that has made them rich in the first place.

No one actually paid rates that high (except those who couldn't control their income - lottery winners, etc). Everyone else spend huge amounts of time/money to divert money to those areas that weren't taxed. This made for a lot of rich lawyers/accountants/lobbyists/congressmen, but was very inefficient and very bad policy. Ask ANY professional economist and see if they want to go back to those days.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[cluedweasel]

Where do I start with this one? "Working hard?", "talent?". So folks working in fast food restaurants, cleaning businesses, pumping gas (I live in Oregon) don't work hard and don't deserve a living wage? Not everyone is lucky to have the chance, and talent, to be a surgeon, a software developer, an investment banker, etc. People shouldn't be consigned to a live of just scraping by just because you feel they're not worthy. Having access to decent housing, funds for your retirement, reasonable healthcare and some semblance of a live outside of work has bugger all to do with being wealthy. It should be the default option for anyone working in the U.S. By and large it is for anyone living in Scandinavia or western Europe.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[cptdondo]

Where did the idea EVER come from that you were supposed to get a job/situation like the one you describe and stay that way your entire life?

That's the definition of a "living wage".

We in the US have taken up this "up or out" mentality where it's no longer possible to spend your life doing a simple task; you have to somehow "better yourself" in order to actually make a living wage.

So we start off at starvation wages, and if we can't make the cut we starve. Just listen to some of the rhetoric.

There's a lot of value in having an experienced person doing basic tasks, but we've forgotten that. Go to Europe, or Japan, and see what level of service you get there.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[JoeRandomHacker]

Dang. And my mod points just expired.
+1 Insightful, otherwise.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

Sharing rent expenses, sharing cooking expenses, etc. are all some form of assistance.

Sounds more like misused semantics to me than a credible argument. To me, assistance means providing help. In particular, with respect to financial matters, I think "assistance" means providing help without much in the way of return.

Here, it's simply exploiting economies of scale when more than one person buys stuff. In other words, mutual benefit from cooperating on such things. Else, any trade or financial transaction which benefits a party would similarly be "assistance". Eg, I provide assistance to the gas station owner when I buy gas. In such a case, almost everyone would be "assisting" almost everyone and the term wouldn't have much relevance.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

but I'm not going to make less money to make a point.

And you don't have to. I have no problem with people making vastly more than me. I'm ok with this.

What I have problems with is people who want to live in a certain place or have a certain lifestyle or enact a certain poorly thought out idea, and force employers to pay for that.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Smurf]

With US unemployment at a six month high [...]

Wait... what?

The US unemployment in March, April, and May was 8.2, 8.1, and 8.2% respectively. Although that is certainly way too high, is is by far not the highest in the last six months. In fact, it's the lowest since January 2009.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Noone Thirty]

Admittedly there's some ambiguity, but I believe the word "each" in his post implies that four people are each paying 6K per year.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in colorado springs.... not exactly a cheap place to live...

My mortgage for my house is about $950/month
Utilities: roughly $100/month in the summer, $150 winter
Cell phone: $80/month
Gas: $100/month (I drive an hour each way - geo metro & 51mpg)
Food: depends... let's say $100/month (if I cooked, it'd be MUCH less)
Car Insurance: $25/month
Total cost: $1405

Don't preach SOCIAL LIFE OMG

I get paid roughly $65k/year -- Yes, life is about spending control. Spare me the lecture of OMG $1500/month isn't enough to live on. My total monthly bills do not exceed one paycheck. I take home a shade under $1500 every two weeks. I contribute 10% to my retirement and save at least a grand a month. I've made much less and made it work for a very long time. I don't live on credit, don't have a car loan, and I made it through college (bachelors degree) without student loans. Life is very much indeed spending control.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

No. My solution is far more realistic. If you can't make it in the big, expensive city, then get the fuck out. Yellowstone is far from the only cheap place out there.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

if you are destined to be launched into the upper atmosphere in tiny little pieces....

Sometime in the next few hundred thousand years. And that's only if I ignore the warning signs, such as years to decades of precursor events, humongous volcanic eruptions, and such.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Space cowboy]

One of us doesn't understand capitalism.

"If you (1) work hard and (2) have the talent, you can achieve greatness."

This sounds pretty much like the ideal statement of how to get on in a capitalistic society. You need to put the effort in, and you need to have intrinsic value. If you don't have *both* of those, you're screwed. That's how capitalism works - it's a re-definition of "selfishness" as applied to the working environment because the crux of the system is that the workforce is working for private owners, not the government. Those private owners do their best to exploit their employees to maximize their profit, because, well, they think the money ought to be in *their* hands rather than their employees.

Your plea is that not everyone has intrinsic value, and so they are screwed; that's not fair to them and ought not be tolerated (which I agree with, for what it's worth). Unfortunately, what you're suggesting is that the US adopt a more-socialist outlook, and the raving loonies on the right, as well as a lingering distrust of communism (unfortunately conflated with socialism) from the US-vs-Russia days make that ... unlikely.

Socialism isn't the worst thing in the world. Example: in the UK, when a car hit me on my motorbike, the police, fire brigade (the bike was in flames) and ambulance were there in minutes (these are all socialised services), I was taken to hospital, operated on, cared for and released a week or so later. Cost to me at the time: $0 - healthcare is socialised as well - everyone pays a little (much less than I pay for health insurance in the US now, for example) and no-one ever goes bankrupt because of medical fees... In addition, I obtained grants (from the government) to go to college, and the govt. paid me to do a PhD, not the other way around. This is more socialism.

The UK is still a capitalistic society because capitalism is a fine way to harness the innate desire to better oneself. I'm happy about this - I was free to create a startup company, go bust, create another and sell it for a handsome profit - in a non-capitalistic society that would have been far harder to do. I do like the socialist safety nets that underpin UK society though, my theory goes like this: capitalism is like a fine blade - it's a lot better when it's tempered. The problem for a lot of Americans seems to be that one uses Socialism to temper Capitalism, then you get the best of both worlds by treading the middle-path rather than veering too far to the right or to the left. As it stands, the US is in danger of veering so far to the right that I'm not even sure it could come back without some major upheaval in US society. This is the major reason I haven't switched citizenship - I used to joke that retaining my UK citizenship (even though I'm married with a kid) was the fallback plan. It's not a joke any more, I doubt my long-term future is in the US - once I've made enough cash, we'll probably be off.

Simon.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

If Yellowstone ever does go off, we're *all* gonna die. Those actually living on it will just get to skip the months of cold, starvation, and wars.

That's nonsense. Sure, if we ignore the obvious signs and don't prepare, then sure, most of us could die in resource wars or under thick ashfalls. But even a bad supervolcano eruption is a foreseeable event. And we can prepare for it with food storage, evacuation plans, and a sensible resettlement plan.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, I'd like to thank you for your service and I'm glad the GI Bill is getting you an education.

But

You know most people support more then just themselves, they have kids, spouses etc.

Unless you lost a good paying job then entering into these kind of personal situations without having your financial house in order is kind of your own fault. There's a reason everyone is waiting longer to have children and get married, it takes longer to get a good job and have some financial security than it used to. Now if you lost your job, well, that sucks. Hopefully unemployment is helping.

Rent alone is 1200 a month

In many places renting is more expensive than owning. A cheap 3 bedroom house (approx value: $110,000) in older neighborhoods in my area rents for around $1200. Meanwhile, a 30 year fixed mortgage (including taxes and insurance) for the same house is only $750 (provided you have a 20% down payment). I'm assuming this isn't an option for you, but figured I'd throw it out there.

$90 for cell service, another $90 for cable and internet

I know these might seem like necessities to you but they are not, they are luxuries. You can live without them surprisingly well. A $20 landline with an answering machine gets the job done fine.

The idea that 10, 11, 12, 13, or even 14 or 15 dollars an hour is a living wage is a joke.

To some it probably is a living wage. I make $40/hr but I could manage to pay my mortgage, put food on the table, and keep my car running on $12/hr if I had to. Wouldn't be easy, wouldn't be fun, but I'd be able to live -- and no, I would not have health insurance in this scenario.

There's a reason it sucks to be poor. Though, I'll admit, it sucks more today than it used to.

Good luck.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Mabhatter]

In most of the country $11 ($22k per year) is an OK factory job. If you have a roommate and marry her, the sex and dating is cheaper and she still pays half the rent. Two jobs at $11 put you at just about the per capita household median (about $44k) in the USA.

Why do you think one auto worker at $19/hr with 60 hr weeks is such a "good thing"? That's almost enough money mom doesn't have to work, or if she does it buys "toys" (or private school, babysitters, second car,etc) They also get pension and health insurance so that makes them terrible greedy bastards!

$11/hr jobs are what the politicians are promising us!!! THAT is the Great Recovery. Even though Romney made minimum "living wage" in Mass. Higher than $11/hr and required you to carry health insurance, he doesn't think. That is the right plan for ALL of America now. When you hear them complain about taxes at $250k being "unfair" remember that HALF of the households operate on $44k or less. THAT is what the 99% thing is all about.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Mabhatter]

Well you only pay tax on PROFIT. Beyond living expenses that's pretty easy to knock down. Of course a good portion of millionaire wealth is held in securities or company ownership and while they may HAVE millions, they only RECIEVE $100k a year that they live off.

That group is where most of the Tea Party crowd is from in my opinion. That $70-$100k a year has went from being RICH in the 90s when they peaked, to being just "better than average" and they have no children, no college to pay, home paid off, so no real deductions... they are single people sitting on a lot of money (when per capita household is $44k)

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't begin to point out how off your post is, however I will try.

1. You didn't account for raises and promotions. If someone worked at an apple store for 30 years then I would expect them to at least attain manager level at some point. If they don't get promoted then it would be safe to assume that they are a scrub employee and deserve their minimum wage.

2. If you are trying to support yourself on a minimum wage job, then living with your parents might be a better option then you're ridiculous living set up that you outlined above. I actually just moved into downtown baltimore in a completely renovated row house in canton square, which is a great area with many young professionals and I am only paying $400 a month because I choose a smaller room.

3. You're acting like minimum wage is set up to allow people live very comfortably. Clearly its not when its offered to people who are still in high school. Its low level, unskilled labor.

4. Apple isn't open during the night. Get a second job bussing, hosting or waiting tables. My parents worked multiple jobs while taking college classes at night, supported themselves on that absurdly low minimum wage that you depicted above. Don't even start to say that its too many hours to work 2 jobs. People on salary constantly put in over 40 hours a work. Lawyers and Accountants going for their exam spend 8 hours in the office every day, 4 hours 2 times a week in a class for their certification and extra time studying on their own. Bottom line is everyone has to work their ass off.

5. Not going to get involved with the 75% tax you support other than this: It would bring the private sector to a grinding halt, which based on statements seems to be what you want.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. But our country also has a value system that is absurd.

Real talent is rarely rewarded in American society. That's how it's been since since WWI. Most of those who "succeed" in America have borderline personality disorders. Our multi-millionaires are the sickest of us all and are the most insatiable, insufferable sorts.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

That's 22k before taxes. Your take home would be 18k or so.

And if you think 18k is alot. You don't live anywhere. You live in one of those flyover states ppl wanna get the hell out of.

And you're one doctor, one broken car, one bad luck incident visit away from bankruptcy. You will bust your ass forever and never have shit to show for it. Not at 18k a year. Hows that company fanboy loyality workin out for ya...

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anubis IV]

Quick notes:
1) You're clearly not used to being frugal in your spending for food. You can pretty comfortably survive at under $150/mo. for food (I just noticed another responder to you says they're at $100/mo. comfortably). You can eat out for lunch and dinner pretty regularly for under $300/mo. if you're careful with where you go and what you purchase. I know, because I've done both of those within the last few years.

2) Minimum wage jobs are not the end goal. They are a way stay afloat while you find something better. That might just be a better position at the store (in this case, maybe a Genius?) or it might be investing in an education. In my case, I did it to get through grad school. Now I have an awesome job with great benefits.

3) Minimum wage is not for achieving the American Dream. It's more like a weed-out class for the American Dream. Remember, the American Dream is not owed to anyone. It must be worked for and reached towards. That means working your way out of the entry-level, low-skill, minimum wage position and moving on to something better. And then moving on to the thing after that. And again. Suggesting that everyone pulling minimum wage should be entitled to the American Dream for staying there and never growing beyond that is silly.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anubis IV]

Where I live, Ramen, Chef-boy-are-dee, and Penut Butter and Jelly Sandwhiches run me [$450/mo.] for just me.

I call BS unless you're on the ISS orbiting earth. Where are you living that food is so much more expensive than it is for everyone else? There's no reason to need $15/day on food unless you're indulging yourself.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[arkane1234]

$1,100 every 2 weeks means $1,100 / 80 hours = $13.75/hr.

There's a bit of a difference between $11/hr & $13.75/hr. like $2.75/hr difference...

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[arkane1234]

"Gated community" is not a good thing.
It's synonymous with an apartment.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Zagnar]

$400? Are you eating caviar for every meal? It used to be that I was able to get by on $100 per month, it's a bit more now that I'm eating healthy and working out. Beans, Peanut butter, pastas and multivitamins are most of my diet, though there's always pot roasts of carrots, potatoes and cheap steak. Oatmeal is excellent for fiber and plenty of dishes with veggies can be made cheaply.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[MagusSlurpy]

I can't speak for him, but I'll break down my budget for you and the GP (I live in the greater Cincinnati area)
I rent a house with a roommate, $500/month covers my rent and utilities.
Car payment: $200/month (2005 Honda Accord, ~100K miles, in good shape)
Car/motorcycle insurance: $70/month (motorcycle is paid for)
Gas: $150/month (more in winter, less in summer, thanks to motorcycle)
Groceries: $200/month
College loans: $300/month
Credit card bills from undergrad: $100/month
Cell: $40/month (T-Mobile)
Total: $1560/month

I'm currently looking to ditch the roommate, I expect about a $300 increase in rent and utilities to move into a 2-bedroom apartment by myself.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[MagusSlurpy]

You forgot one thing:

WoW subscription: $15

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[MagusSlurpy]

You forgot one other point - if you can't afford kids yet, don't have them.

Coat hangers are surprisingly cheap, these days.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[MagusSlurpy]

How the hell do you spend $400/month on groceries? That's $4/meal, EVERY meal. Two bowls of cereal in the morning should cost you a buck, maybe a buck and a half. Buy a 5# bag of chicken for $8, a bag of pasta for $4, and a bottle of tomato sauce for $2.50, and you have $1.25 full-dinner meals. You could even have a beer with every meal, and still be cutting your food bill in half.

Hell, if you had two bowls of cereal every morning, made sandwiches for lunch, you could have an $8 steak for dinner every single night!

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[kenh]

"Minimum wage in this country needs to go up a lot, and millionaires need to return to the days when they were expected to pay 75%+ of their income in taxes to support the society that has made them rich in the first place."

When the government assessed "millionaires" (which meant people making over $150K/year, the cutoff for the top tax rate - there was no special "millionaire rate") the "millionaires" figured out how to hide their income to lower their tax bills, when the rates are lower there's less incentive to try and hide income.

How many jobs will be lost for every dollar the minimum wage increases? What, you think increasing the wage paid to stock boys in grocery stores won't reduce the number of clerks on the payroll?

If a person works their entire career at minimum wage how many millions should they have for retirement?

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[MagusSlurpy]

Hes talking about feeding a family of $450 / month. Where I live, Ramen, Chef-boy-are-dee, and Penut Butter and Jelly Sandwhiches run me that much for just me

Buy your ramen from Amazon. 41 cents/pack, free shipping. Chef Boyardee, $1/can. Free shipping. Jelly and peanut butter are similarly priced. I just cut $350 from your monthly budget. $1400 if you feed the wife and two kids the same way (I don't recommend it).

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[kenh]

So you are choosing to live off your wife's low wages because you want to be an engineer someday.

That is not a typical situation, most people with spouses that earn that little and have no children (since you didn't mention any and failed to list child care as an expense) would take it upon themselves to get a job and contribute to the family budget.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[MagusSlurpy]

So. . . if you have a family, wifey gets a job at the Apple store with you, and your monthly income is $3724/month, before taxes. Gas, food, car repair suddenly become a lot easier with that spare $1000 after taxes. And if you don't have parents around to provide free babysitting, split your shifts - that's the single best thing about working retail stores, that the hours are so very flexible.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't value the effort of desperate people willing to work no matter what the price, your value goes down too.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[tycoex]

Why did you decide to have a family before you got a good job?

Get the job first, then get to making babies. We have enough people on the planet as it is.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

You misread the other AC - $6K per person, so presumably that's $24K per year for a 4-bedroom apt. So $200K and $200/sf if your figures are accurate.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

We have those experienced people here too. It's usually retired people that are either supplementing their income or trying to get out of the house during the day.

Society should not reward those that are lazy and unmotivated. Why should someone that's doing the exact same job as someone that is just hired get twice the wages because they've been doing that exact same thing for 20 years? Jobs should pay what your labor is worth regardless of years doing it. That's one of the very fundamental issues we have with labor unions -- they reward tenure, not ability.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Buying in bulk works fine as an individual for a lot of grocery items. A bag a rice might last you the year or it takes a few months to run through the box of pasta, but that's okay. I live alone, but will periodically buy the 6 or 10 lb bag of chicken breasts or a 5-6 lb container of ground beef and freeze or cook and freeze them. Other than requiring a freezer, there is no assistance necessary. Most fruit and vegetables are sold by weight or by quantity - it is no more expensive per item to buy one apple rather than a dozen. For strawberries and other things packaged by the carton, it might be a bit more for smaller quantities, though the freezer is still an option there.

I've never seen a lease agreement that requires a single tenant to have a particular salary, rather the combined salaries must meet a certain threshold - usually about 3x the 12 month rate, so rent in your area is probably $1K - $1.2K?

Finding a roommate is mutual assistance and really is how you should be living if your income is that low. Besides, based on the scenario depicted, you have one professional and grad students. In that environment, a roommate is beneficial as a collaborator as well as for living expenses.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

No, fuck YOU. Talk to me when you're raising two kids oh and your ass got laid off from that 90k/year job and now you're making 52k/year.

Fucker.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

We in the US have taken up this "up or out" mentality where it's no longer possible to spend your life doing a simple task; you have to somehow "better yourself" in order to actually make a living wage.

No. You CAN make a living wage your entire life without moving up. But you're not going to get to own a big house, drive a fancy car, and carry the latest iPhone in your pocket. What people are saying is that the living wage won't support the lifestyle they WANT to lead, and frankly speaking that's just too fucking bad. If you're not willing to put up with the situation you're currently in then you'd better be willing to do something about it.
Yes, some people fall through the cracks. But the vast majority of people who make the complaint you do, when you really examine their situations you'll find it's a matter of them wanting more than they have without being willing to DO more than they are.

There's a lot of value in having an experienced person doing basic tasks, but we've forgotten that. Go to Europe, or Japan, and see what level of service you get there.

Exactly. Because, for example, in Japan those people are happy to live with their parents in the same house in the same neighborhood working the same job, riding the same peddle bicycle to work at the same place their father and grandfather worked. They understand that their individual role in life is to always be poor and lower-class.
In the US, we have the idea that everybody gets to be middle class, and that's bullshit. While it's true that what class you belong to should not restrict your ability to move up (or down) the social latter, this relatively recent idea that you deserve to move up the ladder is horribly wrong.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Kergan]

Nobody is supposed to try to have a family and kids, and/or work their entire lives and try to retire off a job paying $11 an hour. THAT idea is repulsive. This country rewards people who get off their tails and think outside their self-imposed boxes (mental prison cells) and try to achieve something better. (...)

Where did the idea EVER come from you that unicorns gallop down rainbows while crapping skittles?

In the real world, individuals don't have skills in such high demand that they can flip jobs like you seem to be doing. Normal people have the career prospects of being on minimum wage until they retire. Typically, they put on just enough debt to remain in debt slavery until they die. HR managers aren't exactly banging at their door with a better offer.

You have got to try.

Easy? No. Nobody promised easy. Just that it can be done if someone is willing to try.

Settling for less than that is the problem. Too many people peak at those low plateau jobs and never reach higher.

In the real world, many people fail miserably when they start a business, and they lose part or all of their savings in the process -- or their family's savings. Many of those that fail come out so wrecked that they just never bounce back. If your retirement savings are $250 at age 60, I'd wager you're probably happy you didn't lose it all at age 40. Because for every person you know who made it rich, you know another who tried just as hard and made it in the street.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

How the hell are you spending $400/mo on groceries? You shop at Whole Foods or something?

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[mal0rd]

There's a lot of value in having an experienced person doing basic tasks, but we've forgotten that. Go to Europe, or Japan, and see what level of service you get there.

I agree with the rest of your comment, but I don't get this part. Service in Europe is horrible; it's one of the few things I miss about the states.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

What you're forgetting about Mr Money Mustache is that he made a nice amount of money before his 'early retirement' and does not have a mortgage anymore. I could easily live on 27K a year as well (probably less) if I did not have a mortgage.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Budgets please. Unless you live in some total backwater, you can't live on $12K/yr, or $15K/yr without some form of assistance. Where I live a cheap apartment can cost $6K/yr. Groceries are easily $400/mo, so that doesn't leave enough to buy gas for one of your paid-for cars.

I live in a house that is paid for. So I only have to pay property taxes on it.
The Sun heats it in the winter, so I don't pay to heat it. I pay about $50 a month for power. $25 a month for water.

My car is paid for and run well even though being 20 years old. Insurance on it is about $25 a month.
Gas is about $3.29 a gallon, and my car gets 28 mpg.

I drive 50 miles a day. So for the sake of simplicity, lets say i pay $200 a month for gas.
My cellphone/internet bill is about $75

I pay on average about $100 week for food (i could reduce that when i go on a beans and rice diet).

So thats about 775 (not including property taxes) . Meaning it costs me $9300 to live each year. The rest of 2700 probobly goes to the taxes, and fun and savings. So yes, 12k a year is doable. You just have to be commited. $15k a year would be close to luxury.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

I forgot the mention, the house was built for about $11,000 in 1997. Its about 800 sq feet with nice adobe walls on one acre of land. You can life well on very little if you put your heart and mind into it.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[geoskd]

You should have read the column for "after 3% inflation". Then its at 1,100 / month, less than what he earned with working. And for the record, the calculator showed 750k with a 5% ROI. That's relatively high risk investment, and you wont get that much over the life of the person because at some point in 40 years, the market will tank and he will be unemployed and the investment rate will go negative. In short you read the results wrong, and made some majorly impractical assumptions. I hope you dont fail as utterly with your own retirement planning.

-=Geoskd

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[geoskd]

Where did the idea EVER come from that you were supposed to get a job/situation like the one you describe and stay that way your entire life?

because ~75% of jobs in the US are service sector jobs like the ones we have been discussing.

How do you get a better job when all the other jobs around you are pretty much the same as the one you have?

-=Geoskd

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[makomk]

Of course, if he did do that, then a few decades down the line when he was still stuck in a minimum-wage job with no prospects it'd be his fault for not taking the opportunity to better himself when he should've. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[geoskd]

1) You're clearly not used to being frugal in your spending for food. You can pretty comfortably survive at under $150/mo. for food (I just noticed another responder to you says they're at $100/mo. comfortably). You can eat out for lunch and dinner pretty regularly for under $300/mo. if you're careful with where you go and what you purchase. I know, because I've done both of those within the last few years.

I live in a place where food is hideously expensive. I don't really know why, but even the milk costs >$4 per gallon. The lowest grade of hamburger is $3.99 per pound. Pasta runs about $1.60 a small box. My parents live about an hour away and everything costs half as much out there. I'm stuck a lot closer to the city though.

2) Minimum wage jobs are not the end goal. They are a way stay afloat while you find something better. That might just be a better position at the store (in this case, maybe a Genius?) or it might be investing in an education. In my case, I did it to get through grad school. Now I have an awesome job with great benefits.

No, minimum wage was created so that society did not need to actively support the bottom social class all the time. When it was first created, it worked ok. Now, it has failed to keep up with cost of living and as such is too low. Much too low.

-=Geoskd

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[geoskd]

How many jobs will be lost for every dollar the minimum wage increases? What, you think increasing the wage paid to stock boys in grocery stores won't reduce the number of clerks on the payroll?

No, it wont, that is not how hourly jobs work. You cant just cut jobs and still get the same amount of work done with hourly jobs. So, one of two things will happen. First, the employer will take a reduction in profit. Second, the employer will raise prices for product, increasing the cost to the general public, and driving inflation. As long as the minimum wage keeps up with inflation, then this is not a bad thing. Inflation is effectively a flat tax, and with a minimum wage in place, the bottom is automatically exempted from it.

-=Geoskd

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[geoskd]

Ok, I'll play:

1. You didn't account for raises and promotions. If someone worked at an apple store for 30 years then I would expect them to at least attain manager level at some point. If they don't get promoted then it would be safe to assume that they are a scrub employee and deserve their minimum wage.

Almost everyone I know in the service sector has to put up with nasty working conditions designed to drive turnover.This is deliberate for the sake of keeping wages low. My employer does it too. Promotion? My employer *requires* a bachelors degree to become a supervisor (for a $2.00 /hr bump). That is in spite of the fact that being a supervisor here requires no higher education skills at all: No math, no writing ability, nothing. Promotion is not an option unless you want to tack a 100k debt onto that budget we drew up.

2. If you are trying to support yourself on a minimum wage job, then living with your parents might be a better option then you're ridiculous living set up that you outlined above.

Not everyone has parents in a position to help them. I know a guy who did just that though, moved back in with his mom. He was living in a room with his two brothers until the landlord found out and had to throw them out for being over occupancy, and getting his Occupancy permit revoked.

3. You're acting like minimum wage is set up to allow people live very comfortably. Clearly its not when its offered to people who are still in high school. Its low level, unskilled labor.

Thats not what it was meant to be when it was created. It was meant to ensure that average Americans could get a job that paid enough to live on; hence living wage.

4. Apple isn't open during the night. Get a second job bussing, hosting or waiting tables. My parents worked multiple jobs while taking college classes at night, supported themselves on that absurdly low minimum wage that you depicted above. Don't even start to say that its too many hours to work 2 jobs. People on salary constantly put in over 40 hours a work. Lawyers and Accountants going for their exam spend 8 hours in the office every day, 4 hours 2 times a week in a class for their certification and extra time studying on their own. Bottom line is everyone has to work their ass off.

Meanwhile 10% of the country is unemployed. Don't get me started about Mandatory unpaid overtime, its the biggest crime in American business. Just cut 1/3 of the staff and make the remaining people work 50% longer hours for no additional pay. (3) Profit! People cant leave because if they are lucky enough to find another job, that employer did the same thing already, so the job is 60+ hours / week no matter where you go. All in the name of almighty profit.

5. Not going to get involved with the 75% tax you support other than this: It would bring the private sector to a grinding halt, which based on statements seems to be what you want.

No it wont, it will have very little affect on anyone except the very wealthy, for whom it will mean a smaller inheritance for their children. Our country had taxes at that level during the industrial revolution, and it didn't stop our economy one bit. Germany has taxes even higher than that *right now*, and their economy is the only one in Europe not in serious trouble. The FUD you just spewed is the rhetoric the wealthy use so they don't have to choose between leaving their kids millions in inheritance or that new 75 foot super-yacht they want.

-=Geoskd

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[cptdondo]

I guess it depends on which part of Europe; I spend a lot of time in a small town in the Czech Republic and service there is very good. Even in Prague outside the tourist areas it's pretty good. You have a lot of old timers who kept their skills and passed them on even under Communism.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

If you don't value the effort of desperate people willing to work no matter what the price, your value goes down too.

So another reason to reduce or eliminate living wages. It reduces our value as well.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

So folks working in fast food restaurants, cleaning businesses, pumping gas (I live in Oregon) don't work hard and don't deserve a living wage?

Why do you think "working hard" means you should get a "living wage"? It should be about the value you provide, not the motions you go through. Instead, I think the simpler solution is to get a better job, if you don't like the current one.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

i'm not sure if 11.52 is fair, but i object to this---
the very tired "starving kids in africa" argument.
this is just one more way to roll the chewbacca defense.
look over here at this irrelevant fact, ... never mind the
problem at hand.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Some people don't have that kind of time *because* they earn so little per hour.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[the_B0fh]

pssst: I have certain knowledge that we're all going to die whether Yellowstone goes off or not...

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[msobkow]

Welfare and disability programs are what North America implements as their "social" programs. Canada fares slightly better than the US in that we have socialized medicine and no lifetime limits to medical benefits, but those who are employed cover that expense through higher taxes than I used to pay in the US.

But on either side of the border, if you're unlucky enough to become disabled (as I have: chronic, severe migraines), the "social safety net" means looking forward to a lifetime of poverty. Sure I get enough to pay for basic expenses, but I only have about $100/month left over to cover "extras" like clothing, furniture, or "toys".

I don't own a TV so I don't have a cable bill, but if I did, that would mean I'd only have about $50/month left over for food and clothes. Yay torrents!

I spent 30 years programming. I made good money, but lived in high priced areas and wasn't able to save a lot. When I was finally unable to work for a living, my savings lasted me two years. I've never owned a home because I had to move every 2-3 years, so tying myself down with property would have been foolish.

Socialism is a great concept, but the reality is that everyone I know who lives in countries that are more "socialist" than Canada also live pretty much at the poverty line. They can look forward to a lifetime of subsistance living. Granted, having a place to live at all is a benefit, but quite frankly, you don't want to live in the neighbourhoods you can afford to live in on social services or disability in Canada. And if you move to a small town thinking to save money, you'll find your benefits cut because the rents aren't so high, so you still end up living in slum conditions.

if you can call it "living."

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

I was free to create a startup company, go bust, create another and sell it for a handsome profit.

Lots of the "pro-capitalist" idiots who think that we somehow owe businesses a ready supply of teenage semi-slave labor just because "they can't afford it" will have that statement go in one ear and out the other for the obvious reason. You are decidedly NOT free to do that in the US these days, unless of course the business you're starting is done with a portion of a healthy inheritance you can afford to lose. Starting a business and failing at it can quite literally kill you in the US if you have the misfortune to become ill while doing so. If not, you'll simply have to live with monstrous debt and an inability to secure credit for a good portion of your life. The notion of trying something and learning from it has absolutely no place on a loan application.

Henry Ford went bankrupt 7 or 8 times, I believe, before finally finding a business model that worked for him. THAT was the American Dream (tm) back then, but these days it would simply be legally impossible for him to do that. We have a society where laws have been bought and paid for precisely with the intention of preventing that from happening, in fact. Ever wonder why large companies oppose national health care when having it would actually remove costs from their books? Nobody ever asks that on Fox News, or any corporate news, but here's a hint: it's not about the money they spend on health care, though they do love to whine about it. It's because having employees who are free to change jobs with less hassle, who are free to start their own businesses, who in fact have the options that "capitalism" is supposed to afford people in a society of abundance--having employees like that means they have less control over them. It might even mean upward pressure on wages, and of course we can't possibly have THAT in this society. Not since the great (tool) Ronald Reagan was elected, which was the last time wages kept pace with productivity for some strange reason.

Of course, I don't know why I bother because there's no reasoning with conservatives. Somehow they believe it's the natural order of things that we owe businesses a supply of cheap labor, that people should somehow "better themselves" even though the supply of better jobs is less than the supply of low paying jobs and they have for 30+ years supported policies that stifle the processes that create better paying jobs which these people should allegedly step into. They don't even understand that last part, of course, because tax cuts for the rich simply don't cause any effect other than making rich people richer. We've done it for 30 years. Hasn't worked once.

You know what does work? Spending. Economies thrive when people spend money. Ideally, it would be actual people getting some of the wealth they help produce who would have disposable income that they spend on stuff, which is why eliminating the middle class through our insane trade policies has been so predictably devastating to the economy. As a last resort, spending would be done by the government, which by the way is precisely what every "conservative" administration from Ronald Reagan onwards has done and is the real reason the economy seemed to be doing well. I say "seemed" because the point of government spending is to start the economic cycle, not maintain it, but of course what it's used for under conservatives is to funnel tax money to their corporate crony buddies instead of actually putting people to work in real jobs producing real things of value. You may not agree with what Roosevelt did with making the government the employer of last resort, or Eisenhower with his huge borrowing and spending on a national transportation infrastructure, but you'd be simply wrong not to admit those things produced dams, roads, bridges, airports, train stations, etc. Things of value. Things that drive commerce. Things that got the economy going so that businesses of all sizes were ab

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[sir-gold]

You assume there is a better job, and you assume that you are likely to get that job instead of the 200 other people who applied for that same job. This is made even worse when several of those 200 people are related to someone already working at the company.

People don't work fast food because they WANT to, they work it because it's the best job they could get. (it's hard to find a better job when there are 10-times more job-seekers than jobs)

A few years ago, I applied for one of 7 positions open for machine operator work at an oil-pan factory in Manitowoc WI. they were getting applications at the rate of 200 PER HOUR. (and they were taking apps for 3 days)

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

I've lived on $8/hour. Seldom saw a full 40 hour work week so I made ~10K/year. Living in a college town, not total backwater. Managed to keep my stomach full of food (For much less than $400/month. That figure is way too high.) Plus I managed to gets stoned and drunk a few times a week.

Owning a car, health insurance, or keeping any significant savings would have been impossible. But, I imagine I could pick two of those three off of 15K/yr.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[GeorgeMonroy]

If you want to eat healthy then good luck buying groceries for $200 month per person. We rarely buy anything in the aisles where all of the crap food is. We mostly shop in the produce, meat and dairy sections you know the refrigerated sections. You cannot buy vegetables in bulk as they only last so long. To eat healthy is expensive. We don't even go for the "healthy" health nut products. We range anywhere from $300-$400 a month per person to eat healthy. So yeah if you want to eat like crap then by all means spend $200 a month per person. It takes money to eat healthy.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[pianophile]

Groceries: $200/month

You eat three meals a day, for a month, on that $200? This figure alone causes me to suspect that you are unusually frugal, i.e. never eating out, always brown-bagging lunch, no pre-prepared food, lots of very simple, home-cooked fare, etc. Not an impossible lifestyle, but an usual one these days, in this country.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes this can be true, but for some of us stuck at 10-12$ an hour that had gone to school to get that degree that employers want (hoping for a better paying job soon) we usually have student loans to pay back and if you got stuck getting private loans you might have alot to pay back a month

i make 10.25$ and hour, because we have unpaid lunches i only put in 37.5 hrs a week which makes my gross income 1537.5$ a month, now out of that i pay 6.14 for dental, 93.76 for medical, 4.80 for vision, 3.18 for life insurance. then 72.50 a month for fed income tax, 86.87 for Social Security tax, 44.58 for medicare, and 70.72 for state taxes so my net income is: $1155.12 a month

Because the only work i can find right now is far away, i pay about 250$ a month in gas in a sub compact
I still need to eat and that is about 250$ a month
All my utility bills are about 140$ a month
with all the travel i at least spend about 20$ a month in car maintenance.
I live at home so rent is free for now.

this brings me down to 495.12$ left after most bills are paid. which i could deal with and find a decent place to live with this, except!!!!

STUDENT LOANS
Sallie Mae Private $150 Month
Sallie Mae Federal $350.21 Month
Other Loans from ACS $150 Month
Total $650.21 a month in student loans

  $495.12
-$650.21
--------------
-$155.09

So basically i ether have to cut food very short or not pay my student loans and if something breaks in a month i have to pay even less on my loans, (im already in collections on one loan and am close on another)

so yes you can live on 10-12$ in hour, if you dont have any student loan dept (aka if your parents had money)

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[DogDude]

Having a family to support and living in a very expensive city and paying for cable TV on $11/hour? I'd say that fits perfectly into my previous statement.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

You must love your MacBook to live on 28k/year =D

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Uberbah]

The US unemployment in March, April, and May was 8.2, 8.1, and 8.2% respectively. Although that is certainly way too high, is is by far not the highest in the last six months. In fact, it's the lowest since January 2009.

Because those are the cooked U3 numbers that just forget about workers if they've been unemployed long enough. The more realistic - and honest - U6 unemployment rate has never dropped below 14% since Obama took office.

The other fact usually left out of the storyline: anything less than 200,000 new jobs a month is an increase in the unemployment rate - because we need that many new jobs just to keep up with population increases.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

They can climb the ladder as high as ambition will take them.

[...]

This country rewards people who get off their tails and think outside their self-imposed boxes (mental prison cells) and try to achieve something better. You have got to try.

You have also got to be lucky. The further down the ladder you start, the luckier you need to be. Any time I hear talk like this, I am fairly certain I am hearing someone who is either incredibly lucky, or just started high enough up the ladder that they could afford a couple of mishaps along the way.

Consider: you're working at an $11/hr job, you get the flu, are out of work for a few days or a week. Do you even still have a job to go back to? Do you have enough savings to cover the money you didn't make while sick? If not, which bill do you decide not to pay? Hopefully you're smart enough to pick the one with the lowest late penalty. If you went to the doctor, did you have health insurance? probably not. Even if you do, you have to pay co-pays for the office visit, prescriptions, etc.

When I was a teenager I had a buddy who was in a much worse situation that I was. My parents were middle class, could afford to send me to a good college, etc. For my buddy, not so much. He was basically on his own at the age of 18. He was a hard worker though, and this is America Dammit! The Sky is the Limit!

He was busting his ass at multiple jobs, one of which was a dishwasher. One night, he cut his finger on a knife that was in the sink. The cut was deep; he nicked a tendon, and required a trip to the ER. He had to get stitches and his hand needed to be immobilized for several weeks. He now had a nice size bill to pay, and surprise, no job, because who needs a dishwasher that can't, you know, wash dishes? This was the start of a long slide for him.

Until you see someone desperately try to make it and fail, it is really easy to believe that people who "plateau" must not be "reaching higher".

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Please. At $90k a year you choose to live like a pauper. Good for you. For real poor people it's a much scarier proposition.

When your car dies or you need surgery you'll dip into your savings - or maybe you even have medical insurance. Most poor people don't have those things. They have credit cards and debt.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

I worked in restaurants for 7 years, busting my ass in the kitchens. My first job started me at 6.50/hr, and 7 years later, the most I had made was 13/hr. keep in mind, the 13/hr was after I moved to Seattle, one of the most expensive places in the US to live.

No, the ladder climbing thing doesn't work. The ladder has been greased and rigged by people at the top so that the only people who can guarantee that they'll make it up the ladder are their friends and family. Everyone else has to hope that they're in the right place when the right person dies. I have been working since I was old enough to, I've worked in factories, service industry, and technology, and I've never earned a living wage. I had more money in high school than I do now, just because of how much more expensive things are (wages have not kept up with inflation, not even close.)

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Uberbah]

Get the job first, then get to making babies. We have enough people on the planet as it is.

So only the rich and middle-middle class are allowed to have families now? Aren't you guys just a bushel of peaches.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[mmcxii]

What are you eating if you're only paying 3.30 dollars a day for food but you're not cooking?

I stand by you people who are claiming that you're not paying 400 dollars a month for food because it is an outrageous number but I'm guessing that 2 burritos, a nachos and a coke is 5 bucks at Taco Bell. I find it hard to believe you can eat without cooking for 3.30.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Coat hangers are surprisingly cheap, these days.

Dude, seriously. What the fuck is wrong with you? Your glib and graphic allusion stands in for the death of untold numbers of impoverished and desperate women.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Those utilities sound on the high side, but it's easy to eat on less than $15/day.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[MagusSlurpy]

Of course I'm frugal, I'm trying to live on $2000/month. I eat out once per paycheck, it's my celebration.

And I'm a bachelor, so yes, it's very definitely "simple fare."

But yes, that's exactly what's wrong with this country - no one bothers to live within their means anymore.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy. I'm still on the college kid diet... I eat at work when I can and lunch meat sandwiches & tuna make everything work just fine. Even if I spent $200/month on food, the point remains the same: $1500/month is still something you can live on comfortably if you make the right financial choices.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

You assume there is a better job, and you assume that you are likely to get that job instead of the 200 other people who applied for that same job.

That is a fair assumption to make.

People don't work fast food because they WANT to, they work it because it's the best job they could get.

If true, then they should be happy with what they have. Sounds like cutting back on their expenses would be more productive than griping that they aren't getting paid more.

A few years ago, I applied for one of 7 positions open for machine operator work at an oil-pan factory in Manitowoc WI. they were getting applications at the rate of 200 PER HOUR. (and they were taking apps for 3 days)

Sounds to me like either you were a really good fit at that job or the application was a waste of your time. Either way, so what? Apply to stuff where you're more competitive.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[cptdondo]

Exactly. Because, for example, in Japan those people are happy to live with their parents in the same house in the same neighborhood working the same job, riding the same peddle bicycle to work at the same place their father and grandfather worked. They understand that their individual role in life is to always be poor and lower-class.
>

Been to Japan lately? Like in the last 30 years? The standard of living is higher than in the US.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Smurf]

With US unemployment at a six month high [...]

The US unemployment in March, April, and May was 8.2, 8.1, and 8.2% respectively. Although that is certainly way too high, is is by far not the highest in the last six months. In fact, it's the lowest since January 2009.

Because those are the cooked U3 numbers that just forget about workers if they've been unemployed long enough. The more realistic - and honest - U6 unemployment rate has never dropped below 14% since Obama took office.

The other fact usually left out of the storyline: anything less than 200,000 new jobs a month is an increase in the unemployment rate - because we need that many new jobs just to keep up with population increases.

Wow, way to absolutely miss the point of my reply to brunes69. According to the site you linked to, the U6 unemployment rate in January 2009 was 14.2%. From February 2009 to Frebruary 2012 it was never bellow 14.9% (in fact it was never bellow 15.1% except in February 2012). In March, April, and May 2012 it was 14.5%, 14.5%, 14.8%.

Therefore, what I said still holds true even if you use the U6 unemployment rate. What did I say? Oh yes:

Although that is certainly way too high, is is by far not the highest in the last six months. In fact, it's the lowest since January 2009.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[sir-gold]

You assume there is a better job, and you assume that you are likely to get that job instead of the 200 other people who applied for that same job.

That is a fair assumption to make.

People don't work fast food because they WANT to, they work it because it's the best job they could get.

If true, then they should be happy with what they have. Sounds like cutting back on their expenses would be more productive than griping that they aren't getting paid more.

A few years ago, I applied for one of 7 positions open for machine operator work at an oil-pan factory in Manitowoc WI. they were getting applications at the rate of 200 PER HOUR. (and they were taking apps for 3 days)

Sounds to me like either you were a really good fit at that job or the application was a waste of your time. Either way, so what? Apply to stuff where you're more competitive.

There is only so far you can cut your expenses (you can't really get lower than $400/mo for rent, for example), and it's pretty tough to meet basic needs when you make $7.25 an hour and only get 20-30 hours a week ($650-950/mo before taxes). There is a reason why the new-hire paperwork at walmart includes medicare and food-stamp applications. Simply "being happy with what you have" is fine, but gets rather difficult when you can't even cover your own basic needs (let alone save for the future, or raise a family).

I suspect you have never actually been truly poor before. (like, 'going to the food shelf', or 'selling blood plasma to pay rent' poor)

And the story about the factory job (which I didn't get due to lack of machine-operator experience) was only included to illustrate how much competition there was for so few jobs.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

$6K/yr for an apartment... ridiculous! You can't even think about a studio/1-BR apartment (outside the ghetto) here for less than $800/mo, so it's closer to $10K/yr for us--and I guarantee that won't include heat or electric. ...but $400/mo for groceries? Are you nuts? I spend ~$200/mo and I'm a full grown adult male fat ass. Granted, I do eat out about 2-3x/mo and I do buy lunch at work 3-4x/wk... but honestly, you need to look at what you're buying if you think $400/mo for groceries for a single person is normal (outside of shopping exclusively at Whole Foods or eating expensive cuts of meat and a pound of cashews every day).

The only possibly way to "live" on under $20K/yr (GROSS) is if you're with multiple roommates and effectively going nowhere financially.

To the GP, you say you "live on $28K/yr, but make $90K/yr" ... I'd like to understand your math, do you mean you have figured out that you are spending what you would earn on a $28K/yr gross salary (i.e. $14/hr with a 40hr work week) or do you mean that you spend $28K/yr to live? Because $28K/yr to spend requires you to earn something like $35-40K/yr gross depending on your state.

Not saving for emergencies, not saving for future stuff, not saving for retirement, etc... those are all the things that people tend to neglect when they're "living" on a tiny salary, it's not so much living as barely surviving.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

and it's pretty tough to meet basic needs when you make $7.25 an hour and only get 20-30 hours a week ($650-950/mo before taxes).

Then get a better job.

I suspect you have never actually been truly poor before. (like, 'going to the food shelf', or 'selling blood plasma to pay rent' poor)

Well, yes, I save money and have a basic degree of financial competence. I don't do alcohol or drugs. And I live within my means.That rules out most cases of "truly poor" right there.

And the story about the factory job (which I didn't get due to lack of machine-operator experience) was only included to illustrate how much competition there was for so few jobs.

No it doesn't. Most applications such as yours could be tossed right away because they didn't have the qualifications that the employer was looking for. Look I'm not so great at looking for work, but it's out there even in today's climate. And I think it's a bad idea to waste time on high competition jobs where you can figure out at the start that you're not part of the competition.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

None of us are on welfare. All of us have savings cushions. All of use drive our own (paid for) cars (between 15 and 4 years old, mine is the oldest). All of us can afford to do reasonable things: going to swim with dolphins this weekend, all of us have spent at least 1 week in a foreign country this past year, several of us have had theme-park weekends, and we each eat out of the house about once per week. We are not about to claim welfare.

I honestly don't see how that is possible...

Unless you've got free room and board, or living ~6 to an apartment, you can't be living on less than $20K gross in the US all while being able to save for the future, swim with dolphins, travel abroad, go to theme parks and eat out once a week (oh, and own cars)...

Now, you do say "your two roommates", so you are clearly living in a group situation. You're sharing housing costs, which is great. You essentially create the financial dynamic of a multiple earner family household, but if you wanted to actually have your own private apartment... you have to admit that $12-15K/yr is not going to cut it.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

I cook all my own meals, mainly because I hate to go longer than a few hours between meals.

I spend $60-70 each Sunday at the grocery store. I spend about an hour cooking and end up with 15 little tupper-ware containers of food (second breakfast, lunch, second lunch at work), as well as stuff for breakfast/dinner/second-dinner in the fridge and pantry. My intake is ~3000Kcal a day.

When you aren't throwing away half of your food, the food budget really grows. I bet I trash about a tablespoon full of rice a week at the most, well that and the occasionally piece of gristle in my meat. I didn't come to the $60-70 figure out of budgeting reasons, I did the math and figured out my macro and micro nutrient load, and that's just what ended up being the total.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Wovel]

Sharing is not assistance.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Wovel]

You live in a million dollar house or way overpay for homeowners insurance. You are also terrible at math (See your gas calculation). Perhaps your poor math skills are why you are so easily bilked into overpaying for everything.

By the way, a case of ramen (36 packages) can be had for under $15. You must eat over 10 gallons of peanut butter and 200 cans of pasta a month. By the way, eating a highly marketed name brand pasta would not be the choice of a budget concious shopper. Look in the bean and pasta aisles at the large bags of product without the fleshly logo.

Maybe you should get out in the world more before you start questioning others.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Then get a better job.

I think the GP's context was that for some people, they're already at the best job they can get. Your response only demonstrates your lack of understanding of the poor's plight

Well, yes, I save money and have a basic degree of financial competence. I don't do alcohol or drugs. And I live within my means.That rules out most cases of "truly poor" right there.

Which is the GP's point: you were never poor to understand the poor's plight, yet you give out suggestions and advice to the poor

In other words, you're the princess who's saying "let them eat cake"

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[IwantToKeepAnon]

So what makes you think that $11/hr is not a "living wage". I'm a bit curious because I currently make slightly more than that and have no trouble putting most of that money away.

Not a "living wage" means you can't work at Apple and afford Apple products. Now that's tragic.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Uberbah]

Wow, way to absolutely miss the point of my reply to brunes69.

Your post was absolutely easy to understand. That was your first problem.

According to the site you linked to, the U6 unemployment rate in January 2009 was 14.2%. From February 2009 to Frebruary 2012 it was never bellow 14.9% (in fact it was never bellow 15.1% except in February 2012). In March, April, and May 2012 it was 14.5%, 14.5%, 14.8%.

Which is why I said the U6 unemployment rate had never dipped below 14% since Obama took office. My, aren't you a quick one.

Although that is certainly way too high, is is by far not the highest in the last six months. In fact, it's the lowest since January 2009.

In fact, that's total nonsense unless you're using cooked numbers, and not even the better-than-U3 U6 numbers tell the whole story. Which is really quite simple:

Have we created new jobs to replace the ones lost during the crash?
Have we created an average of 200,000 jobs a month since Obama took office?

The answer to both of these questions is an obvious "no". Which means that unemployment is worse now than it was in January 2009. Obviously.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[jwhitener]

Fed Minimum Wage facts

"1.7 million earned exactly the prevailing Federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 2.2 million had wages below the minimum.2 Together, these 3.8 million workers with wages at or below the Federal minimum made up 5.2 percent of all hourly-paid workers. "

"Although workers under age 25 represented only about one-fifth of hourly-paid workers, they made up about half of those paid the Federal minimum wage or less."

Trying to live on your own after college on minimum wage is hard. But even harder hit are those 50% of minimum wage earners who are over 25, and likely will not (or cannot) get higher paying jobs. Lack of education, disabilities, etc..

Would you rather have 2.5% of our workforce permanently earning a non-living wage, using various forms of welfare, or would you rather have the cost of some luxury goods (retail, restaurants, etc..) go up slightly, and those minimum wage workers paying more tax, buying more things, and generally helping to stimulate the economy?

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[khallow]

I think I understand the point quite well. And I'll just say this. If you can argue rationally on Slashdot, then you're never going to "understand" (in the vague, touchie feelie sense of the original poster) the plight of the "truly poor" because you will never be as poor as they are, even if all of your wealth is stripped from you.

I don't take such sentiments seriously because it's likely claiming that one has to be stupid in order to understand stupid.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[rjstanford]

Cost to me at the time: $0 - healthcare is socialised as well - everyone pays a little (much less than I pay for health insurance in the US now, for example) and no-one ever goes bankrupt because of medical fees..

Amusingly (to me - I'm another UK expat living in the US) the tax situation isn't all that bad either. I did this math back in late 2009 so it should still be pretty current now:

  I'll compare the tax burden on someone making USD 80,000 and GBP 50,000 - I know they're not completely comparable, but its a rough note. I'm ignoring a lot of minor taxes/fees here.

The US individual pays $16,188 in federal income taxes and $6,120 in FICA/Medicare taxes. This gives them a take home pay of $57,692. Their employer also pays $6,120 in FICA/Medicare taxes, for a total cost of $86,120.

The UK individual pays £9,930 in income tax, and £4,258 in NI (national insurance). This gives them a take home pay of £35,812. Their employer pays £5,668 in NI, for a total cost of £55,668.

Let's convert those UK numbers into their USD variants at the same rate, just for fun:

The UK individual pays $15,888 in income tax, $300 less than their US counterpart, and $6,812 in NI, or $692 more. This gives them a take home pay of $57,299, $392 less than the US guy (only 1/2 of 1% less). Their employer pays $9,068 in NI, for a total cost of $89,068, which is $2,948 or 3.5% more than the US cost.

The big difference here, of course, is that the US employee still has absolutely no health care. Reasonable coverage for a single person in good health easily consumes that $3,000 difference - and that's ignoring any family obligations, what happens when they're laid off, etc.

Finally, the total tax burden in the UK is about 37% of GDP, compared to about 27% in the US, but the UK numbers include comprehensive healthcare and the US ones do not. In the US, healthcare costs (including insurance company overhead) run about 17.5% of GDP (some of which is government covered, but less than half). If you add in 9% to represent a conservative estimate of non-government-paid healthcare costs in the US, then you get within 1%-of-GDP of the UK... again, pretty much the same cost.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps the cost of homeowners insurance varies widely by area, much like home prices. I couldn't find it for less than around $900/year for a reasonable policy (i.e. up to full rebuild w/ allowances for increased building costs and personal property replacement, w/ no screwy outs for the insurance company) on a roughly $125K house ($135K total valuation; about 1800 sq. ft.). It's nowhere close to a million dollar home, figuratively and literally - the closest home with such a value is probably 25 miles away.

- T

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Fjandr]

I do support someone else as well.

So still not buying it.

Children are a choice.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[Fjandr]

That would fall under the latter half of my statement.

Rather than roll the dice with a loan and guessing where the economy is going to be 4 or more years later, there's this thing people used to do (some still do) to get through college when they didn't have parents with money, GI benefits, or stellar academics: worked through college using whatever means were available. Night classes, community college classes, half-time, quarter-time, whatever.

There are hardship exceptions I've heard that I actually believe, but most cases I've heard (directly or indirectly) involve someone who made a choice to do something with readily identifiable consequences not requiring the benefit of hindsight to see. Gambling is something you should do for fun, not complain about, or do not at all.

I can guarantee, unless you can't spare a single hour every day (with practice, a half hour), that you could cut your grocery bill in half immediately. Actually cooking, instead of reheating/reconstituting, has a vast number of benefits, of which cost is a single one. More than likely, your energy level and arteries would thank you too. You're at home, so it probably wouldn't be that difficult to work something out between yourself and your parent(s). If you're on good enough terms with them to be living rent-free, you can probably come together to slash your (and their) food budget. Even without cooperation, you can certainly do a number on your own, barring exceptional circumstances.

You get $72 more a month in lump sum, since the standard deduction and personal exemptions cover the entirety of your pay. Unless you're living in one of the really abusive income tax states, you're also probably (or should be) getting most of the state income tax back as well. That right there can knock off one loan payment, bringing the rest to about $600/month if you're only getting the Federal money back. Better if, as I suspect, you can also get some or most of your state taxes back.

As for the loans, that sucks. That's a gamble you made and are currently losing. On the bright side, in the long run you'll almost certainly make up for it unless your degree is in the liberal arts.

You can at least bring your current situation to temporary parity. It's highly unlikely that, with some creativity, more cannot be found in there.

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[scot4875]

And that problem exists for all the other cheap places as well. Certainly your solution is more realistic than the reductio ad absurdum that the GP AC suggests, but it still fails to take into account the tragedy of the commons.

--Jeremy

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[scot4875]

Buy your ramen from Amazon. 41 cents/pack, free shipping.

Holy shit. I've never resorted to a Ramen diet, but back when I was working at WinCo (regional supermarket) in the late 90s, there were regularly deals for Maruchan Ramen for less than $0.10/pack. (In fact, I think during back-to-school rushes it would generally be $0.03/pack) I find it difficult to believe that $0.41/pack is now considered a "good" price.

--Jeremy

Re:What a stupid time to post this drivel

[MagusSlurpy]

It has increased in price enormously. A good deal at the supermarket these days, at least in Cincinnati, is a quarter per pack - and like you said, in 1999, it was a dime a pack, at least on sale. I'm sure we could find a better price than Amazon's if we tried, but fifteen seconds was about all the effort I was willing to put into that post.

$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you kidding me? They have no specialized skill. It's a basic retail job. Some people in the US would kill for $12 an hour. And you even get to hang out in the air-conditioning. Give me a break.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just mention "Apple" and all the iHating, whining trolls that are typical of /. come out of their pits.

That's a good starting wage for a retail job. Compare that to any other store and one will find that Apple pay's their base workers quite well.

But no... it's "Apple" that's being discussed so just hate for the sake of hating.

Crybabies.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

^

In particular, how many Tiffany's jobs are there? Is that the norm for retail employment. Do you think Apple jobs are less desirable than Walmart?

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[grif_91]

I second this. I work as a corrections officer in Kansas, working with >800 inmates Minimum to Maximum security inmates five days a week, and I only make $12.98/hour, with very bleak outlook in the way of raises.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

This. Apple is a shitty company, but the fanboys who want to work for them deserve to be treated like shit too.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

The NYT is staffed by people who think that a living wage includes a new Apple gadget every six months, a $3K/month studio apartment, and an all organic diet. They're only slightly less out of touch with reality than Mitt Romney is... not much less, though.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

I second this. I work as a corrections officer in Kansas, working with >800 inmates Minimum to Maximum security inmates five days a week, and I only make $12.98/hour, with very bleak outlook in the way of raises.

So, I take it you supplement your income by smuggling drugs & contraband to inmates?

Or do you stage prizefights and bet on the outcome?

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

You know that prison guards in California can make over 100k a year.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Apple is a shitty company"

The most successful company in the world is a shitty company? On what metric do you base this allegation?

Methinks you're just a hater without a clue.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Sir_Sri]

very bleak outlook in the way of raises.

So you're basically trapped then unless you can change jobs or move your job somewhere else.

What the TFA isn't great at explaining is what the average salary growth profile looks like for an apple store employee. It mentions a guy who got a 49 cent raise one year, and then 2.82 the next year. It does say the average tenure is 2 and a half years, so it seems like the retail side is mostly intended for people trying to sustain themselves minimally until they move on to a real job that can be a career.

In your case there aren't a lot of choices. Corrections officer is generally a career gig, not a temp gig. Apple store retail monkey is more of a temp job anyway.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[geoskd]

You know that prison guards in California can make over 100k a year.

And yet the guy in Kansas has a better standard of living because it is a lot cheaper to live in Kansas than California

-=Geoskd

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[RubberDogBone]

Yeah, they need to try working in a warehouse or digging ditches or landscaping or hauling trash out of foreclosed homes or roofing or road paving or concrete work, or any of a hundred other jobs paying 7-12 an hour in the heat, on your feet all day, in the sun.

And then complain about your $11.91/hr to sit in air conditioning in a clean, safe mall environment stocked with the very latest gadgets and lots of people to talk to, all day.

Think about the guys up on a roof spreading tar all day long in 130 degree heat trying not to get badly burned by molten tar or piss off the hair trigger boss. Or the poor sap tasked with cleaning crap out of a house, with no HVAC and god only knows what in the trash. Needles, nails, excrement, bugs, who knows.

To workers like that, the Apple store environment is as close to heaven in white as they can possibly imagine.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Spy Handler]

You know that prison guards in California can make over 100k a year.

And now you know why the fricking looney of a state (which I live in unfortunately) is broke and makes Greece look good.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? Because competition for good employees is so much higher in California than in Kansas? $100k+ is largely to do with supply and demand. Someone who can follow orders, no matter how banal, show up on time, always finish their work and continue to do so year after year is quite valuable. In Kansas, where opportunities are scarce, people will accept whatever they're given, but in California there are plenty of opportunities available for these kind of people so their price is higher.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is *dirt* cheap where he is living in Kansas. I know where he works from and grew up nearby. The whole place is being abandoned and you can even purchase a two-story victorian house for $12-24K at auction in some desolate town.

He also doesn't understand that $12.98/hour won't even get you a studio apartment in San Francisco.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

Will you idiots stop modding these naive posters up? Do they even live nearby an Apple Store or a Tiffany's?

No. They do not.

Where these stores exist, the cost of living is 5x higher.

This post isn't insightful, it's the opposite. Jesus F. Christ.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[MagusSlurpy]

You know that prison guards in California can make over 100k a year.

And yet the guy in Kansas has a better standard of living

Well, I don't know about all that. He still has to live in Kansas, where the best entertainment is betting on which trailer park gets wiped out by MNF (Monday Night Funnelclouds).

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[MagusSlurpy]

On what metric do you base this allegation?

This metric would be my guess.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

Move to Michigan/Ohio/Indiana. Lots of prisons. Most of the guards make 50k a year. They advertise locally at 40k starting with a military background and taking a 6 week course. I'd imagine you would not need either with your experience.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it probably has a lot more to do with California being an extremely liberal state over paying state workers. It's one of the reasons why they're in such a big financial hole right now. Also, it's possible that those workers are getting a lot of overtime.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Spy Handler]

that's correct. But the biggest reason prison guards here make $90k AVERAGE plus another $50k in benefits is their union. Believe it or not, the prison guards union is one of the most powerful in the state. For some reason the heavily Democratic state legislature gives them whatever they want.

Here's an example of the lunacy that is the state of California:

State records show the average vacation payout for Corrections employees is $25,000. But in 2010, a $97,000-a-year-parole agent received a lump sum of $269,000 for unused leave, a $119,000-a-year administrator got $243,000 and a $70,000-a-year parole agent got $176,000.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Chewbacon]

I agree. 8 years ago I made a whopping $6.88 an hour in retail. After a yeah I went up to $7.05. I don't think I'd catch up with these guys at that rate. Hell they make more than I made as an entry level IT tech. I'd have jumped to an apple store in a heartbeat even thought I dont use their stuff.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Uberbah]

Shorter version of your post: get back in that bucket, retail crabs.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Uberbah]

Any particular reason why this was left out of the storyline? From your link:

The deal lifts the cap on saved vacation, meaning prison guards will be able to stash away an unlimited number of vacation days and get a lump sum payout when they quit or retire. Normally state workers can accrue up to 80 days of vacation for payouts.

They aren't getting crazy super vacations. They're getting compensated for the time off they've accumulated.

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[Wovel]

I would lose the $1 and go to the Apple store :)

Re:$12 an hour is being exploited?

[AdamWill]

Try reading the article, rather than the summary. It's not a bunch of Apple employees complaining they're not being paid enough. It's a lot more nuanced (and interesting).

I heard through the grape vine

[Anonymous Coward]

25% raise is in the air ...
$30/hr for counter workers

Re:Rich MILF bonus

[Anonymous Coward]

second that...instead of a dumb twat apple fan girl.

it's not always about the cash.

[MrCrassic]

You don't work at the Apple Store to make any sort of serious cash. There are many better conduits for people to travel down in both IT and sales if money is a concern. People work there for the *coolness* factor. It's about as hot as working for Google or Facebook, and employee discounts are never a bad thing. Its also an easy experience builder for people, especially given the floor traffic.

And not to nitpick, but $10/hr ain't bad. Especially if you're earning tips.

Re:it's not always about the cash.

[Anonymous Coward]

I do know that in Austin, working at an Apple store might be a way to get into a better job internally, be it customer support, or even IT work. So for someone starting out who knows the college route will leave them with the same odds of finding meaningful employment [1].

Apple has a decent employee package, and for a 20-something, it is worth it. Pay is competitive, decent health benefits, discount on toys, and a lot of other items.

So, for someone just starting out, it is hard to beat working at Apple.

[1]: Ironic that in other countries, it costs their citizens $0 for a college education, while here in the US, it is a non-dischargable debt (where people who gamble away can sit back for 3-4 years and the debts go away.) No wonder companies hire H-1Bs by the legions.

Re:it's not always about the cash.

[__aaltlg1547]

Yeah with the employee discount you can buy Apple gear for only 75% more than competitive hardware.

Re:it's not always about the cash.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's "competitive hardware" to laptops 1.8cm thick with 2880×1800 IPS screens?

Re:it's not always about the cash.

[Anonymous Coward]

A student discount is often better that an employee discount. It's not a straight 25%, depends on the product.

AYT writer is a fool

[tomhath]

Much of the debate about American unemployment has focused on why companies have moved factories overseas, but only 8 percent of the American work force is in manufacturing, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Yea, that's the problem...Duh. People need jobs, so they work retail.

Re:AYT writer is a fool

[DesScorp]

Much of the debate about American unemployment has focused on why companies have moved factories overseas, but only 8 percent of the American work force is in manufacturing, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Yea, that's the problem...Duh. People need jobs, so they work retail.

That manufacturing stat cuts two ways, though. A smaller percentage of the population works in manufacturing, but our population growth has been huge over time. Even with the outsourcing trend, in total output, America is manufacturing more than ever before, including the "glory days" of the mid 20th century during and after WWII. The need... and value of... service sector work has grown even more though, and that's why they're where the jobs are. For all of the bitching about how we don't make things anymore, or don't have as many farmers, etc, the fact is that we're in something of a golden age right now. We're building more things and growing more food than we ever have before. Technology has simply changed those fields to where fewer people are required to do them. Modern business supply chain methods have also reduced the need for personnel. We've wrung an awful lot of efficiency out of the process. Manufacturing is faster and less worker intensive and more efficient than even two decades ago. So even if we adopted a Japanese MITI-style industrial policy (which, most economists now think, has failed them in the long run), massive numbers of manufacturing jobs aren't coming back. We'll continue to make more and more, but unless you artificially limit or ban productivity technologies and supply chain methods... which would put us at a huge competitive disadvantage... you're simply never going to see more than 10 percent of a modern western country working in factories. And there's really nothing bad about that. Skilled workers will always make a nice living, but your kid would probably be even better off as a banker or manager.

Article notes everyone just got raises

[maccodemonkey]

Funny how the summary didn't note why the article was just published, Apple just gave everyone raises. Reports are that geniuses are being paid in the ballpark of $30 an hour now, which is reasonable for an IT focused job.

From TFA:

"Even Apple, it seems, has recently decided it needs to pay its workers more. Last week, four months after The New York Times first began inquiring about the wages of its store employees, the company started to inform some staff members that they would receive substantial raises. An Apple spokesman confirmed the raises but would not discuss their size, timing or impetus, nor who would earn them.

But Cory Moll, a salesman in the San Francisco flagship store and a vocal labor activist, said that on Tuesday he was given a raise of $2.82 an hour, to $17.31, an increase of 19.5 percent and a big jump compared with the 49-cent raise he was given last year."

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[slippyblade]

Every one of the numbers tossed around in this article make me gag. Those wages, even pre-raise, are ridiculously high for an entry level retail job. And as for your $30 and hour for the "genius" bar?? Please. My sister is an RN - you know - the people in the hospital that save your life? - and she gets about $25 an hour. I've NEVER heard of an IT position, especially one attached to a retail operation, making that.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[Nimey]

Are they contractors? If they don't get benefits and have to pay their own taxes, etc. then it's not quite that ridiculous.

If they're benefits-getting employees, wow. I've been doing IT for 7 years at a state university in the Midwest and I get $23.50/hour, started at ~$17/hr. Our cost-of-living in this area is pretty low; for example, a 1900 square-foot house with 1/4 acre lot might go for $158K new.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[Anonymous Coward]

>Oh yea! You think that's a shitty wage? I'll post about how shitty someone else's wage is, so you should be happy with your shitty wage.

You're racing each other to shitville. Dumb move.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[Skuld-Chan]

Yeah and your getting ripped off. I work for a state university at the exact same wage, and all my friends who do the exact same thing (I manage all their labs, and do package management in SCCM among other things) made 10-20k more than I do.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[maccodemonkey]

Are they contractors? If they don't get benefits and have to pay their own taxes, etc. then it's not quite that ridiculous.

If they're benefits-getting employees, wow.

From my understand, they're real employees with benefits.

The benefits alone puts them a step above most people in this economy.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[dlp211]

No, those wages are good, everyone else is just getting ripped off.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[Nimey]

In exchange, we get better job security. The extra money would be *great*, but I'm pretty happy having a job.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[MagusSlurpy]

Probably free tuition too, if you chose to use it.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[Anonymous Coward]

If your sister as an RN is making $25/hour, she's either doing so voluntarily or isn't willing to work the tougher jobs. None of the ER nurses I work with makes less than $50-60/hour, and the ones with seniority make more.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[Anonymous Coward]

I make > $25 in IT for a retail corp. I'm not on the sales floor, though.

Re:Article notes everyone just got raises

[j-beda]

Every one of the numbers tossed around in this article make me gag. Those wages, even pre-raise, are ridiculously high for an entry level retail job. And as for your $30 and hour for the "genius" bar?? Please. My sister is an RN - you know - the people in the hospital that save your life? - and she gets about $25 an hour. I've NEVER heard of an IT position, especially one attached to a retail operation, making that.

There seems to be a lot of focus on what other jobs pay and that in comparison one of the rates is too high. Maybe neither is to high, but rather both are too low, with one being a bit less "too low".

I keep thinking about the overall increase in economic output of the "western world" since the 1900s and if that if only a small fraction of that increase had been spread around to everyone in society we would all have real living wages and 10/hour per week jobs. What has actually happened is that the majority of the gains have got to the top of the pyramid : http://xkcd.com/980/
In 2007 dollars: Average 1965 production worker pay $19.61/hour, CEO $490/hour; Average 2007 production worker pay: $19.71/hour, CEO $5420/hour

To me it seems that there could be no argument possible that could justify the production worker's stagnant income in comparison to the more than 10-fold increase in CEO compensation. I can understand why it has happened, but do not think it is good for society in general that it has happened.

I have no good idea how to structure a system that would more fairly widely distribute economic gains without imposing excessive undesired side-effects of cheaters, freeloaders, decreased incentives to innovate and strive for advancement, etc. On a worldwide basis, I am certainly in the 1% and am not particularly interested in decreasing my standard of living so others can increase their, but there must be a way that we could structure stuff so that increases go more toward the bottom of the pile than towards the top.

Of course that sounds a lot like communism, and we have seen how poorly that has been implemented.

Aspirations of working at the mall?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when has an entry level job working retail sales at the mall been an aspirational job? This is typically something that high-schoolers and college students do part time to earn some extra cash or help pay for school.

These are low skill jobs with a lot of turn over and will never be tops in pay. A store manager is a different story, but they make more money of course.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

Apple vs Tiffany

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you rather start at an Apple store for $11.91 an hour (average starting base pay, according to the linked article) and an employee discount, or at Tiffany for $15.60?

Hard to say. I'd have to run the math, factoring in such variables as value of store stock, ease of concealment, average return for Apple/Tiffany product on the black market, sophistication of store security and employee monitoring, etc.

Neither. Retail is hell.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd rather get punched in the gut for a nickel a hit.

Seriously I don't understand how some people can be so rude and demanding at stores. I'm almost apologetic when I have to correct some uninformed store clerk for being wrong.

Maybe I'm just not naturally brash and assertive.

Apple's shtick

[Anonymous Coward]

This is what Apple does so well. Serves up the rubric of being somehow about something more than mere money, and yet in reality it is as cut throat and uncaring as any other faceless corporation. Whilst Steve Jobs was on stage doing his guru bit, countless thousands of de facto slaves toiled away in utter misery for the sake of Apple's bottom line. Jobs may be dead, but the nauseating conceit he fostered of Apple as good corporate citizen persists.

Re:Apple's shtick

[Anonymous Coward]

This.

"Ethicalness"

[Anonymous Coward]

So, what's the break point for "ethicalness"?

Is there some point at which these questions are becoming sooooo ridiculous that /. just stops posting them? I mean, when we've got "Fair trade, non conflict" sourced everything, all of which is made into products by robots maintained by workers with overtime and full health and dental do we get to stop then, or is someone going to form a "fair treatment of robots" league?

How much a society cares about the ethics of its consumption is directly proportional to the amount of wealth that society has on median.

Kids, here's the bottom line:

[dsmithhfx]

Apple is a disgusting company that makes super-profits, because it treats its employees like garbage. Should that bother you? I dunno, have you got a conscience?

Re:Kids, here's the bottom line:

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you have a clue?

Re:Kids, here's the bottom line:

[Anonymous Coward]

Really. They pay more than the average clerk job. The average starting wage at UPS is $8. Instead of sitting in an ivory tower try to do some research and learn what an entry level job is.

Working at Apple is an entry level job. I ready through the NYTimes article and the interesting part is the training the receive. When I was in HS and College I worked to pay my bills and I can tell you that I didnt received any training. Apple's training seemed to promote customer experience and other valuable lessons.

When I started my career after college I got paid peanuts and had to work hard to get valuable experience that led to promotions and opportunities at other companies. The truth is that while education and college degrees are great they don't provide any training for the real world and work.

Re:Kids, here's the bottom line:

[dsmithhfx]

Apple has a history, and it's not a good one. Look it up.

I completely agree..

[Anonymous Coward]

In fact, $11.91/hour starting pay at retail is pretty damn good, since most retail stores start at minimum wage.

The author has absolutely no reference point to make any sort of claim, here.

Don't click the NY Times link.They just need views

[SensitiveMale]

They are following the Dvorak method for generating page views. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOHzHVF-4Mg Don't fall for it.

I prefer unfair trade food

[Anonymous Coward]

I enjoy the bitter taste.

The Day I Finally Quit Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, It's finally here. I knew slashdot has been going down hill for a while now, but today I leave it behind. After seeing an extremely ignorant submission slandering Tifton 85--an excellent traditionally bred Bermuda grass--as an evil GMO linked to Monsanto, now I have to read this type of crap. I won't even bother joining the discussion--this is no longer the place to find well-reasoned debate. Have fun kiddies, and don't bother telling me--I won't let the ideological door hit me in the ass on the way out.

As others have said....

[tkrotchko]

At the risk of being redundant, these are retail clerk jobs, and don't require a whole lot of skill.

People walk into the store ready to buy a computer. I've never seen a clerk in an Apple store actually sell someone a computer who didn't already want one.

Re:As others have said....

[khallow]

People walk into the store ready to buy a computer. I've never seen a clerk in an Apple store actually sell someone a computer who didn't already want one.

There are two things to note. You don't want that person changing their mind. That's part of the job. Also, the clerk can add value by upselling.

Re:As others have said....

[MagusSlurpy]

Yeah, but the whole Apple store only carries what, 10 products, with an average of three possible upgrades? Not too complicated.

"Sorry, I'll have to get Bob to help you decide if you want to get the 8 GB or 16GB iPod, I only know about the 8 GB and 16 GB iPhone."

Re:As others have said....

[khallow]

So you don't think there's any possibility of upselling? I do. A simple product line doesn't keep you from getting the customer to buy more stuff. In your implied example above, a customer might come in looking for an iPod and come out with an iPhone too. That's an upsell.

Re:As others have said....

[MagusSlurpy]

No, that's technically a cross-sell.

And of course there's a possibility of upselling - the 16 GB iPod when the customer came in looking for an 8 GB model!

There just aren't a lot of options to require talent in the Apple sales staff. It's like working the concession stand at a movie theater - "Would you like to buy a large? It's only a quarter more!"

Re:As others have said....

[Phroggy]

People walk into the store ready to buy a computer.

And if the salesman isn't very good, all they walk out with is just a computer.

Have you seen the people working at Apple stores?

[swillden]

In many cases, Tiffany wouldn't hire them. I've never seen anyone with two-inch gauges and tattoos from wrist to shoulder working at Tiffany.

I'm somewhat surprised that Apple hires them -- not that they don't do a good job, but few companies would hire such for public-facing positions. I think Apple has tapped a good employee resource there; bright, competent young people who've made personal appearance choices that generally disqualify them for customer-facing jobs better-paid than 7-11. And it probably does allow them to pay a little less.

Re:Rich MILF bonus

[viperidaenz]

Dumb twats are easier to get into than smart ones. MILF's have usually been ripped a new one by their children.

Apple overflowing with cash

[ThePeices]

With Apple having as many billions of dollars lying around as it does, why doesnt it want to pay its employees properly?

Its not like they cant afford it, so it is a conscious decision by the company to pay them so little.

I guess it shows that no matter how much money you have, it is never enough, even when your money is measured in the tens of billions of dollars, and also shows that people and companies will do dodgy things to save insignificant fractions of that money.

But Apple must still be applauded for sticking to their morals, even though us 99%'ers do not agree with those morals.

Re:Apple overflowing with cash

[NicBenjamin]

In retail $11.91 an hour starting wage is great. Even for skilled employees. H and R Block Tax preparers, for example, are only paid $8.50.

I have had jobs in retail since 1999, and I have never heard of a non-supervisor pulling in $11.91 an hour in base salary before. Yeah with commission the 20-hour a week entry-level dude can sometimes pull in $15/$20, but base salary of almost $12? It just doesn't happen outside of New York City.

Re:Apple overflowing with cash

[dochin]

One good turn deserves another. I don't appreciate being used as part of your 99% argument. Leave me out. From now on you may refer to yourselves as the 98.999999999833%

Re:Apple overflowing with cash

[MagusSlurpy]

I worked five years for Lowe's (2003-2008) in Cincinnati, started at $9.50 and quit at $12.05, I believe. I was a model employee, however, up until the point when I realized I could bring home the same amount bussing tables in half the hours each week.

Haha, I actually still have a pay stub from 2005 in my desk drawer (because I'm a pack rat). $11.55 in November 2005.

Re:Apple overflowing with cash

[vakuona]

Apple is currently making out size profits. They shouldn't pay outsize wages. They may pay bonuses instead, but you don't out yourself on the hook for high wages because you are currently making lots of money. That is a bad way to run a business.

BS

[Billly Gates]

I am the last to defend Apple but have any of you slashdotters worked retail before?

Apple wanted to hire me at $16 an hour and fly me down to Cupertino for training as a tech. BestBuy pays $9 an hour and prefers to hire their minimal wage teenagers instead.

$12 an hour is awesome for retail! Sure the pay is about $20,000 a year and you can't live off that but it is 25% more than the competiton. Tiffany's? Well you have to have many years of experience and be great with selling credit cards and be a good saleswomen or man for that job. They do not hire teenagers.

WHat I do not understand is if you are great at sales you can sell cars for ALOT MORE money or work in corporate sales? I guess you get broken and fear based employees for that price but Apple does pay above market wages as they do not want a geeksquad representing their products.

Re:BS

[Anonymous Coward]

"Tiffany's? Well you have to have many years of experience and be great with selling credit cards"

Credit cards? What?

I've bought two anniversary gifts there and a credit card never came up. Maybe I spent too much?

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[Anonymous Coward]

It pains me to see such judgement passed on what I thought was a website full of forward thinking technologists.

I get paid less than minimum and I'm a dev

[Anonymous Coward]

So piss off

Re:I get paid less than minimum and I'm a dev

[MagusSlurpy]

Quit coding for Torvalds then, you goof.

the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[decora]

has gone up dramatically since the 1990s, and the Consumer Price Index has essentially been 'gamed' to hide all of this.

gasoline in particular went haywire about the same time that the commodities exchanges switched from open pits to electronic trading (see the book Asylum by McGrath-Goodman for more information)

food is linked to gasoline of course, but it still doesn't explain why flour is fluctuating up and down by 100% every few months.

housing of course went through the roof thanks to the subprime mortgage securities and their deriviatives (CDOs, Synthetic CDOs, etc), and the foreclosure robo-signing scandal has backlogged the system so much that prices still havent come down properly.

in other words, yes, things have changed.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[billstewart]

Of course, gasoline prices weren't at all affected by the US starting wars in oil-producing countries...

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[superdave80]

...housing of course went through the roof thanks to the subprime mortgage securities...

So, you haven't noticed that the problem of sky-high housing costs have corrected itself?

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually no most people haven't. Housing cost have gone down, but it's almost impossible for someone to get a mortgage to afford one. I don't care how nice or big a house is, most people can not simply put +80k down on a new place. So they are left rent, and rent has not gone down. If anything it's gone way up. Hell I'm in AZ (one of the worse hit areas of the state to boot), I've seen homes and apartments going for 30-50% more then they where 2 years ago! The town home right next to mine was going for 1200/month two years ago when I moved in. Since then people have moved in and out, and the new tents that live there are paying 1655/month. Housing for the bulk of the population is generally going up, not down.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually no most people haven't. Housing cost have gone down...

Sorry, but that should read: "Actually no most people haven't. The average price of a house has gone down..."

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[KugelKurt]

the price of gasoline, food, and housing has gone up dramatically since the 1990s

Stop whining about gas prices, Americans. You people pay half of what is common in Europe: http://gasoline-germany.com/maps.phtml?homeland=US&kartenversion=EUM&waehrung=USD&einheit=Gallon&sorte=SU

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[4phun]

Of course, gasoline prices weren't at all affected by the US starting wars in oil-producing countries...

I know that has to be tongue in cheek. If it is not then you and the rest of slashdot better fasten your seat belt because Israel and the USA appear to be ready to strike Iran over the nuclear issue sometime after July 1 2012. Gasoline will increase in price dramatically if not from the actual heavy weapons discharged over Iranian soil, then simply because the USA has figured out how to shut off the flow of oil using insurance companies. The Western insurance companies will no longer insure any of the super tankers leaving Iranian ports after July 1, therefore no oil for the world supply.

One way or the other there is going to be a significant spike in the cost of oil just before the US election as that Muslim state can not be permitted to obtain any more nukes. Iran already has sufficient enriched material for five nukes which the Iranian religious leaders desperately hope to use on Israel and possibly the USA.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop whining about gas prices, Americans. You people pay half of what is common in Europe:

Most of that is tax, we are still less than $1 per gallon tax in the US. You pay about the same per gallon pre-tax as we do.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[DinDaddy]

Since this is a discussion about the buying power of wages, how much of it goes for gas versus tax is irrelevant.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget that the Federal Reserve has been fighting against deflationary housing pricing pressure with everything they have... Extremely low interest rates have more to do with housing prices staying up than the robo-signing scandal. In reality, the policy of righting the 'wrong' of the housing bubble has been to make everyone poorer without them realizing it, since housing prices CAN'T go down all the other prices must go up.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[blackraven14250]

Yup, rent has definitely gone up. Increased demand for rentable properties and all that, given the lack of credit to buy...

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[shiftless]

You need to move somewhere else that is not fucking ridiculous. I don't know what planet Arizona is from, but here in the midwest (where we have things like flowing water, etc) both houses and rent are cheap.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[MagusSlurpy]

I don't know about cheap. I'm looking for a new place to live around Cincinnati, and I can't find a two-bedroom apartment anywhere near my job or school that's much under $800, unless I don't mind replacing my car windows once a month.

I know it's cheap compared to Chicago or NYC or Arizona, but considering the same apartments cost only $600/month three years ago, that's a pretty significant increase.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[MagusSlurpy]

Except that having higher taxes tends to lower the cost of living, since you're getting things like working public transit and effective health care.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

That's pretty much bullshit. The FHA is still alive and well; interest rates are at ridiculous lows. You can get a mortgage right now with very little cash up front; you just need to be able to cover certain fees and meet some minor expenses. I got into my current mortgage with less than 5% of the property value cash.

The FHA premium pretty much sucks, but interest rates are so low that paying them feels like paying a non-insured mortgage did ten years ago.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[X0563511]

Good thing they don't charge for characters in the body of a message. You don't need to try to scrimp by putting part of it in the subject, you know.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[X0563511]

I pay almost $500 for a tiny studio apartment, 15 miles out from the city center in a pretty low-income area. Seems a bit much TBH, for all of the one room that I have.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[X0563511]

Not really. It just needs other data to be meaningful: how much you guys pay in taxes overall.

If you don't pay as much sales or income tax, for example, then it balances out.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to move somewhere else that is not fucking ridiculous. I don't know what planet Arizona is from, but here in the midwest (where we have things like over 8% unemployment) both houses and rent are cheap.

FTFY

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd wager house prices and rents go down much further. The current spike in rents is because tenants cannot afford houses at the going rate, while owners can still afford to sit on their properties.

Owners of the current inventory backlog will eventually panic when their mortgage payments or losses start to really bite. That's when they'll want a tenant -- any tenant, at any price. In southern Spain, which was just as bubbly as AZ, banks are sitting on entire lots in order to try to keep prices artificially higher than they should be. They'll be forced to recognize their losses at some point, and recapitalize by conducting a firesale. I doubt things are very different for City, BAC or Wells Fargo. (The shadow inventory in the US is enormous. Surely you know some people who haven't paid a mortgage in months and who have yet to get foreclosed.)

By the way, this area is one where introducing a new tax might might make very good sense: a tax on unused real estate, say a few months' worth of rent at the going local market rate. It would instantly nuke real estate speculation, and instantly bring prices crashing down to a level that people can afford. Also, it would make the owner's incentives match those of his tenants: crack shacks would get repaired so as to be rentable at all, and the lower the rent in an area, the less the tax liability for sitting on a property (eg the vacation house).

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[bryan1945]

You don't remember the 80s very well, do you?

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[zidium]

has gone up dramatically since the 1990s, and the Consumer Price Index has essentially been 'gamed' to hide all of this.

gasoline in particular went haywire about the same time that the commodities exchanges switched from open pits to electronic trading (see the book Asylum by McGrath-Goodman for more information)

food is linked to gasoline of course, but it still doesn't explain why flour is fluctuating up and down by 100% every few months.

housing of course went through the roof thanks to the subprime mortgage securities and their deriviatives (CDOs, Synthetic CDOs, etc), and the foreclosure robo-signing scandal has backlogged the system so much that prices still havent come down properly.

in other words, yes, things have changed.

"has gone up dramatically since the 1990s,"??? What went up??

Starting your conversation in the SUBJECT line is **very** rude, you know.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[turkeyfeathers]

food is linked to gasoline of course, but it still doesn't explain why flour is fluctuating up and down by 100% every few months.

So what's your problem? Flour stores well in a sealed plastic container, so just stock up when the price is down 100%... that's an unbeatable price.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you guys should count yourselves lucky.

The average starting wage here (SA) is $292 a month / or less than $1.50 an hour (based on actual hours worked), and here gasoline is $5.30 a gallon... let alone all the other living expenses.

$12 an hour is a professional (software dev / consultant) average wage/

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Gr8Apes]

The cheapest apartment I could get in the area I worked in the early 90s was $500/month, and included, gratis, potential lead poisoning. I opted for roommates instead. Pay was much much lower then, for everything.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

Obligatory Pop-Culture Reference:

The Rent if Too Damn High!

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

In the 1970's I worked at HP entry level assembly full-time, at a gas station part-time and in the cafeteria part-time to make ends meet. Had no phone, used the one at the gas station across the street. It was fun times just out of school. But why I'm making this post is to say, the early years are generally a struggle with just getting by, that is part of getting started. If I was starting out all over again today, I would expect to be in the same situation. Working full-time at an entry level job, and pick up 1 or 2 part-time gigs, and then work my butt off developing skills to prepare for opportunity at the full-time job. I'd probably be aiming for one of the genius-bar gigs as demand for folks with those skills are only going to grow

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[fast turtle]

efective health care? working transit? What have you been smoking? The current tax burden of the American Middle Class is in excess of 70 percent and you can not pay your tax burden by April 15th anylonger. in fact, your tax burden isn't paid until Febuary 1 of the following year, meaning we never get ahead as the government continues to spend, spend, spend while printing more ass wipe paper so it looks as though you're making more. As a prime example of inflation, back in 1980, I could buy enough grocceries to feed 2 adults and 3 teens for a week for 40 dollars yet in 2012 when I go to the store, I can't even buy enough grocceries to feed 2 adults for a week for less then 50 dollars. Note that I do use a budeget and such and have done so for over 40 years, so I can see how much food has increased and keep in mind that food is one of Maswells Basic Needs. If it's not met, then none of the other needs can be successfully met - basic economic theory that goes back to the 70's.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[doccus]

I agree with the poster above... and frankly, I am shocked, and sickened , at the hard line attitude prevalent on this board, that 1) 12$ an hour is a "living wage", and 2) a "living wage" is not necessary in the first place, for EVERYBODY..Look , students and teens are subject t a different wage classification anyways, so that's a bogus argument.. I assume most everybody here actually has HAD a job in the past, so you must know that you dont get all of your wages in a pay packet. I don't know what y'all down in the states lose, but here it can be $200 to $300 per month.. and unless "daddy" GAVE you a free car (mine didn't!!)n you have to go BUY one so as to get to work.. and since you can't pay for one all uy front., you have to make payments.. now maybe you'll be lucky enought to be able to take the bus to work, so it's only $50 for a bus pass per month, but more probably you might be one of the 50% that do not live close to work.. so maybe $200 more a month. fo9r a reliable used car.. OK so you've still got 1200$ left, assuming you worked all 160 hours every 4 weeks...Not living with your mom?.. OK, another 800$ out the window.. where I live, in western CAnada, there is NO POSSIBILITY WHATSOEVER of finding a rental for less, even a vbacjhelor.. unless you want to live in a welfare building with crackheads and a community toilet and kitchen for 400$ per month.. and they're already full up.. which is why our homeless is the highest in Canada.. so you've got 200 more after that for utilities, and cable.. if you're lucky.. as utility rates have skyrocketed here.. and 200 for food.. No clothes, or gas, or medical, personal or other sundry..That's not a "living wage" thats a "subsistence" wage, and if a crisis comes, you're headed right for the welfare lines.. and, hey, good luck there, these days!

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[donutface]

Not really. It just needs other data to be meaningful: how much you guys pay in taxes overall.

If you don't pay as much sales or income tax, for example, then it balances out.

Sales tax (or VAT) in Ireland is currently at 23%. You also pay 20% income tax on anything up to 32,800 euro and 41% on anything above that. You are issued a number of tax credits which reduces your tax burden somewhat, but once you go above the 32,000 mark you'll be taxed pretty heavily. There are further taxes on income ontop of this. Its a massive contrast to WA for instance where sales tax was at 11% and there was no state income tax

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[MagusSlurpy]

I was saying that the higher taxes in the UK vs. the US translate to lower cost of living in the UK versus in the US.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you talking about "The CPI has been gamed"?

The CPI is designed to show the average price of goods by following the prices on a basket of goods. It might not be fully accurate in every respect, but to say it's been "gamed" is a bit silly. It's relatively well designed and reflects what it's supposed to.

Housing went through the roof because you Americans have this "Buy! buy! buy! buying is always better than renting, and the price will always go up, never down, so buy now!" mentality - that, and the banks would loan money to anyone with a pulse. In the end, though, I blame the person who took out a loan he couldn't pay more than I blame the bank for giving it to him. If the banks give loans, you blame them for being irresponsible, and if they don't, you blame them for not giving anyone a chance.

I don't know... when I lived in Philadelphia in 1996, a mid-range (i.e. center city modern building 10th floor apartment) was about $900, and when I left the US in 2008, it was only $1000. Top-of-the-line places were easily $3000 a month, and that never really changed. Bottom-of-the-line places were around $400-$600 (depending how ghetto the location was), and that never really changed either. Housing prices are very regional in the US, and the go up and down on a regular basis, contrary to popular belief - but looking at the national trends, they haven't changed to much as a whole over the past 10 years.

You don't have to live in a place where you depend on gasoline (and I recommend you don't...), but any effect that gasoline prices have on the price of food (which is less than you think) will be factored into the final price, and thus the CPI.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[erp_consultant]

I live in AZ and I can tell you that property owners are having no trouble renting houses. Not only have a good portion of the foreclosed homes been bought up but new houses are being built. Why? Because non-investors that just want a place to live don't want to pick over the scraps of foreclosed homes that are left, often competing against investors with all cash offers. They would rather buy a new home that doesn't need all kinds of repairs and is not next door to some other home that needs all kinds of repairs. Plus, they can pick their colors etc. So builders are building. In my view, part of the reason that led to over speculation in the Phoenix market (along with Florida) is that in both those states the bank cannot sue you if you walk away from your mortgage. You simply give the bank the paper and leave. In other states a mortgage is considered more of an actual contract. If you welch on the deal they can come after you. Many of the real estate investors here bought multiple homes with little or nothing down. When things went sour they just said "screw it" and left the bank, and ultimately their neighbors, to pick up the pieces. Change that law and investors can no longer walk away so easily from investments that haven't turned out the way they wanted. It would also prevent individuals from doing the same thing. A lot of people that have done short sales here are perfectly able to pay their mortgages - they just don't feel like it. As always, market forces have begun to correct things. A series of government sponsored programs have proven to be worthless, as I expected.

Re:the price of gasoline, food, and housing

[Serpents]

Or higher wages for government employees, more tax cuts for corporations and the rich, another war or two. It's not only how high the taxes are, it's about how well you spend the money.

It's retail. What did they expect?

[NicBenjamin]

Minimum wage is the norm. I work for a pretty good employer (Home Depot), and I get a raise whenever minimum wage goes up. I do not get the opportunity to work inside in air conditioning. I am expected to help people load their cars with their purchases, which more then once have literally weighed a ton (50 40 lb bags). My option for advancement exist, but none would get me to $11.91/hr. I do not get an employee discount of any kind, on anything. I could have benefits, but they require premiums and on $8/hr premiums are impossible.

Re:It's retail. What did they expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

Something sounds like bullshit.
Home depot has employee discount. Unless it changed in the last few years.

Re:It's retail. What did they expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. If a ton of material bothers you, don't be a construction laborer. 20 tons per day per person is the quota for 100 bucks.

Re:It's retail. What did they expect?

[MagusSlurpy]

I posted this above, also, but I worked for Lowe's about five years ago, and at that time, Depot paid more than Lowe's did. I know both have been hurting lately, but I was making $11.55 as a CSR in Flooring ($12.05 when I left at the end of 2007) in 2005. At the time, they gave a 10% raise if you moved up to Team Leader, and again to Sales Specialist or Department Manager (I started in 2003 at $9.50). Start looking for opportunities for advancement, work hard, and kiss ass, the lack of the last being the thing that finally boned me.

But yeah - loading 15 50# bags of mortar and a pallet of 65# tile boxes wasn't worth $12/hour then, let alone now. Or concrete or shingles, which really sucked since they weren't even my department.

Re:It's retail. What did they expect?

[NicBenjamin]

Flooring Employees start at $8.50, so the wage difference is only about $1 an hour. But that buck is probably why Home Depot makes a lot more money then Lowe's. I'm making less then that because I work in the parking lot, and started at $7.60/hr. Then Minimum Wage went up in Ohio so I'm up to $8.

If my store got exactly the right job openings for me to get promoted $11.91 would be reachable in a couple years. But as a starting salary?

Re:It's retail. What did they expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

I feel your H.D. pain.

It's amazing how "unskilled" retail labor has moved to the minimum wage floor and stuck like glue these past several years. Unfortunately that seems to follow general unemployment. In the 99-01 period I worked a few part time jobs and was consistently able to get ~$2/hr more than minimum wage.

The other day I started noticing that both the grocery store and Home Depot in my area have signs up at the registers saying that they are hiring for general positions.

Stage 1 -- Lots of people looking for work, pay minimum wage, don't bother advertising because you have 5 apps for each position
Stage 2 -- People are looking for work, but the quantity and quality is dropping off, start advertising... still pay minimum wage.
Stage 3 -- Start to actually pay a few bucks more than minimum because you realize that having a sober, on-time, courteous employee who doesn't steal or drive away customers is actually worth the extra ~$50/wk.

Based on the number of idjits I've seen working at my local HD... standing around in groups talking, not helping customers, giving out right wrong advice, talking bad about the store or products... and then suddenly the number of those same who are no longer seen... I'd say we're headed to Stage 3, at least in my area.

Beats actual work.

[couchslug]

Go hump boxes on a loading dock or be a parts puller at a salvage yard, then tell us how bad the Apple workers have it.

25% raise news was on the radio

[billstewart]

Probably was NPR, but it might have been traffic radio\\\ CBS. Of course, it might have been motivated by the NYT story, or it might be an effect of Cook taking over the business from Steve.

compared to the iran-iraq war in the 1980s

[decora]

which saw several million casualties and refugess, including over a million people dead, with chemical warfare and massive tank battles, and then the 1991 gulf war where Saddam set his own oil fields on fire.... then of course the 1970s violent revolution in Iran, the rise of the Ba'ath Party in Syria and Iraq, the Suez crisis, the various wars against israel, etc.

compared to all that, the US invasion in 2003 of Iraq is not very big. it seems big, but it really does not explain the price craziness at all. things have been much more chaotic in the past in the middle east, but prices were much more stable.

Re:compared to the iran-iraq war in the 1980s

[Phrogman]

Where I am living (Victoria BC), the price of gas fluctuated continuously apparently based on whenever something bad happened. My theory was they would adjust the price up on bad news because we would be more worried about the news than the price of the gas. It essentially fluctuated between about $1.05.9/Litre and $1.39.9/Litre on a daily or weekly basis with no apparent correlation with the actual price of oil at the time. By bad news I mean anything: the death of Michael Jackson drove the price up for instance.
This ended recently for about 2 weeks - coincidentally right after some gas stations in Ontario were found guilty of colluding on prices at the pump, but ended this last week when the price plummeted as low as $1.02.9 at a station a few miles away from me and caused massive lineups. One of the local stations is usually at $1.47.9 and still does business because its the only station in a few mile radius.
Basically, the local gas companies have been either colluding or engaging in a wild gas war for the past few years - at any rate the price is *well* over what would be an acceptable profit in any other industry I am sure.

Re:compared to the iran-iraq war in the 1980s

[CrimsonAvenger]

Basically, the local gas companies have been either colluding or engaging in a wild gas war for the past few years - at any rate the price is *well* over what would be an acceptable profit in any other industry I am sure.

While I have no particular information about gasoline prices in Canada, in the USA, gasoline companies make a bit more than 6% profit.

As compared to, say, soft drink makers (14%+), brewers (16%+), magazine publishers (51%+), just to pick a few samples out of the list.

How is that bad?

[Anonymous Coward]

How is almost $12/hour bad? I'm not at all a fan of Apple or their products, but I have to say I'm on their side with this one. $12/h is great for retail. I worked behind the counter a few years ago and the going rate then was around $6.50 to $7.00 per hour. I just checked and in this area minimum wage is under $10, so it sounds like Apple is going above and beyond what other retailers are paying.

Discount or Cash...hmmm....

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd rather take the cash.

The discount is only good at Apple, but my cash works everywhere.

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[Fjandr]

You can be forward-thinking and still be realistic about how companies typically select employees for public-facing positions.

In addition, swillden's description was probably the most non-judgmental analysis of that particular employee issue I've read to date. The only real implicit judgment in the statement was actually in regard to his assumptions about Apple, not the people they hire for front-line retail positions.

Literal reading

[Anonymous Coward]

Since the article clearly discusses entry level employees who are "Apple fans", it occurs to me one has to properly factor in the 25% hardware discount layered on top of the $500 employee discount to determine the net value after all is factored in. Thanks for the admission against interest that Apple geeks seek to be Apple employees.

I suppose the imminent 25% wage increase for "valued employees" factors non-entry level to a new level. Cool.

It's still just retail.

JJ

I can wish.

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering that I'm paid almost $4 less per hour at this current retail job, I'd be happy to work either of those places - my problem is that I don't know jack about Apple OR jewelry, and I want to avoid working for commission again if it can be helped, so here I stay. $11.91 is an amazing starting rate, though. But to keep this from being yet another whiny comment about how terrible or rough my job is, I do love it. I love it a lot. With a bit of budgeting I'm living alright with that $3-4 less than an average starting Apple employee.

captcha: disprove

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[DesScorp]

In many cases, Tiffany wouldn't hire them. I've never seen anyone with two-inch gauges and tattoos from wrist to shoulder working at Tiffany.

I've never seen anyone like that at an Apple store either. For all of the "think different" stuff, Apple seems to prefer their employees... even retail clerks... to be stylish and "clean cut", so to speak. Remember, Apple is all about image.

Re:Rich MILF bonus

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess the choice really depends on how big a thing you wanna stick in, I think you better stick with the apple twats.

NO

[Anonymous Coward]

You really don't want to work for Apple. I was an "Expert", their highest-ranking sales/technical position for two years. Their pay is crap, their environment is full of BS, and their managers are hostile non-college degree tawts who are fearful of any employee getting to the level that may risk heir jobs.

It's awful, yet you;re constantly told it's "the best", and the cognitive dissonance required is too much for the average slashdotter.

Well will the boycott help?

[philofaqs]

Let's face it, fewer customers/less demand to Apple's mind means less need for staff/geniuses and lower wages need to be paid... Methinks your suggestion is going to make it worse for them not better.

Easy.

[pubwvj]

"Would you rather start at an Apple store for $11.91 an hour (average starting base pay, according to the linked article) and an employee discount, or at Tiffany for $15.60?"

Easy. I would rather work at Apple. Hands down. No contest. Discounts at Tiffany's are useless (to me) whereas the employee discount at Apple is fabulous. Besides, I like Apple products better than Tiffany's junk.

But, I work for myself so the point is moot. The reality is it is a free country and people choose to work at Apple. It isn't slave labor. Nothing wrong, nothing to see here, move along.

Re:Rich MILF bonus

[microcars]

yeah I know you've been modded down into oblivion, but I have to disagree.
Every Apple Store I have ever been in is filled with MILFs buying stuff for themselves or their kids.
If I was not happily married, I would consider hanging out there and "helping" customers, or....applying for a job so I could do it all day.
For the potential "action" of course.

$11.9/hr and employee discount ...

[Anonymous Coward]

and first hand to get the latest Apple gadget? Wow! I do wish I could have this job in my home town...

Sure

[Greyfox]

I know someone who has an art degree and has worked the last 20 years in photo labs. She doesn't make much more than $11 an hour now, and would probably have a lot more advancement potential in the Apple Store.

shocking news: biggest company isn't a charity

[amoeba1911]

They are unskilled laborers, $12/hr is alright for that kind of job. I am not an Apple fan, but this is silly to single out one company. I think it was some Disney employees that were fighting for a 25 cent raise when Michael Eisner gave himself a multi-million dollar bonus.

I despise Apple, but it's not just Apple. As any company gets bigger, there are more leaders, and more levels of leaders, each successive layer receiving significantly more money than the lower level... Walmart, anyone? Apple store employees are no more deserving of more money than Walmart employees. Apple's no different than Walmart etc.

The people who run the company aren't running a charity. At the end of the day it's not how much love the company has, because love does not pay the bills, love will not buy you that luxury mega-yacht in the Mediterranean. If you pay 30000 employees just $1 more per hour, that would come out to roughly $43 million dollars. Tim Cook received $570 million dollars worth of stock, for that money you could pay each apple store employee an extra $12 per hour, for some of them this would be doubling their wages. Go ask Tim Cook if he wants to give up his $570 million bonus just so that his store employees can make $20k more per year. Would you??

The problem is much deeper than Apple. The problem is that we somehow accept it as okay when someone gets compensated 20 thousand times more than some others. Do you seriously think one single person can ever be as productive as 20000 others? Maybe you convince yourself that maybe he's doing 20 thousand people's worth of work, so it's okay. Maybe you give up and accept it as "the world's unfair" and there's nothing you can do about it. As long as you convince yourself it's okay, you will have store clerks working for $12/hr while the people on top in the very same company will be getting 20000 times more money. I never hear anyone say: "Hey! Stop that! You can't give yourself twenty thousand times more money than this other guy."

Re:shocking news: biggest company isn't a charity

[DogDude]

It's not quite as simple as you make it out to be. It's not "productivity per employee". You have to take into consideration responsibility, too.

Re:shocking news: biggest company isn't a charity

[Anonymous Coward]

You have some people in your society that you need or want to do some jobs, jobs such as harvest vegetables and fruit, or perform retail services but you dont think they deserve enough to afford a small place to live, basic medical treatment, save some money for later, and have some money to spend on a few items to enjoy themselves. The problem is that they are not skilled enough. They are not a CEO, web designer, doctor, or engineer, patent owner... or owner of property - land or buildings. If they were more skilled or owned those things, they would be, and the world would be, a whole lot better.

I make rules and laws until there are too many to read. I own things and occupy important positions and make a lot of decisions, by rights - that others should take note.

When anything is wrong, when the system doesnt work in all places or for all people, not of me it is.

Re:shocking news: biggest company isn't a charity

[Anonymous Coward]

Your $43 million dollars figure is probably per year, I suppose.

The Tim Cook $570 million dollars worth of stock is vested over 10 years, which means it's "only" about $57 million per year.

If your figures are correct, then it means if Tim Cook forgoes that $570m, Apple can pay each retail employee a bit more than $1 more per hour.

Not too shabby I guess for a 10% raise, but definitely not double.

Re:shocking news: biggest company isn't a charity

[kenh]

"If you pay 30000 employees just $1 more per hour, that would come out to roughly $43 million dollars. Tim Cook received $570 million dollars worth of stock, for that money you could pay each apple store employee an extra $12 per hour, for some of them this would be doubling their wages. Go ask Tim Cook if he wants to give up his $570 million bonus just so that his store employees can make $20k more per year. Would you??"

That bonus Tim cook got was one-time expense, raising everyone's salary $20K/year would cost Apple $570M every year going forward. After a couple years, that starts to add up...

Re:shocking news: biggest company isn't a charity

[Anonymous Coward]

Computers and electronic systems are damn well doing the job of thousands.

Re:shocking news: biggest company isn't a charity

[Erikderzweite]

By "responsibility" you mean "golden parachute" in case of a major screw-up? Take Elop, for example -- he has ruined Nokia, what responsibility will he take?

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[swillden]

In many cases, Tiffany wouldn't hire them. I've never seen anyone with two-inch gauges and tattoos from wrist to shoulder working at Tiffany.

I've never seen anyone like that at an Apple store either. For all of the "think different" stuff, Apple seems to prefer their employees... even retail clerks... to be stylish and "clean cut", so to speak. Remember, Apple is all about image.

Different stores, maybe?

I've been to the stores in Utah (SLC) and Colorado (Boulder, Broomfield and Denver), and seen many employees with body mods. Not a majority, mind you, but a significant minority.

Re:Living Wage

[Anonymous Coward]

If people can't live on the wages they are paid; they will supplement their income in other ways. Whether that be theft/robbery, it will happen. Paying people a "living wage" reduces crime.

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[swillden]

It pains me to see such judgement passed on what I thought was a website full of forward thinking technologists.

I didn't pass any judgments on the employees. If I judged Apple, it was positively, both in that they're willing to employ people many companies would not, and that they're smart enough to exploit an underutilized part of the workforce. If I made any negative judgements, it was towards all of the other potential employers who refuse to hire people that don't fit a certain range of images for public-facing positions, or else towards the general public who are uncomfortable with people that don't fit those images.

In fact, I don't judge those companies negatively, either. Public reactions are what they are, and companies have to deal with reality as it is not as they wish it were. And I don't really judge Apple positively, either, because I don't think their hiring policy is any kind of a moral stance. I think it's just a recognition that the bulk of their target market is young enough not to be too put off by alternative images.

Deja Vu

[Anonymous Coward]

Every few weeks, the New York Times seem to have an anti-Apple article. The previous articles I remember are about the China labour issue and federal taxes. While there has been a lot of discussion about whether these criticisms are justified or not, lets say for the sake of argument that they are. Even then, Apple is not the only or worst offender, so it is curious that the Times has chosen to single out Apple in each case. In general I like the the articles in the New York Times, but their choices here are puzzling and leave the impression that they have an axe to grind.

Slave labor

[Anonymous Coward]

To hire someone who's labor cannot justify the "living wage" is to engage in charity and many small business owners cannot afford to be that generous.

if you cannot afford to run your business without slave labor then society should not allow your business to remain open.

Re:Slave labor

[CodeBuster]

Maybe it will fail. That's what's great about the free market, it prevents businesses which are inefficient or not economically viable from continuing to operate. Compare this to government which wastes tax dollars year after year on stupid, wasteful and inefficient programs. It's much more difficult to get rid of bad governments and that's a big part of the problem with government trying to do too much and be all things to all people; it doesn't work. Market forces are like natural forces, we ignore them at our collective peril.

Re:Slave labor

[shiftless]

So it's slave labor if the person can legally work enough to afford to eat, and stay with a relative, church, or other charitable person/organization while they save up and make a plan to improve their lot? In your opinion it's better for that person to just be unemployed with no hope of employment and to remain a burden on the welfare state?

Is it slavery if a person can't afford a cell phone, Xbox, broadband connection, and has to hit up Goodwill, yard sales, flea markets, and rely on smart thinking to work on a tight budget and stick to it? I recently lived for a year on $1000/month in the midwest. Let me tell you, it's entirely possible. If I can do it then somebody making over twice as much has no fucking excuse, other than their own laziness, ignorance, and stupidity. Today's America is full of can't-do pussies who will spend all day long arguing all the reasons why they can't, without a second's thought as to how they should and could.

I think it's got to be something in the water. Where have all the men gone?

Re:Slave labor

[Anonymous Coward]

Should society subsidise the costs of youth labor so that the market will provide them with work skills training?

Re:Slave labor

[martin-boundary]

Wage slavery is when the slave makes less than what is required to live independently and save enough money to better himself/herself. It has nothing to do with $1000/month or whatever. If you dont make enough money to move out of your parents' house, then you're a wage slave. If you don't make enough money that you can't save enough to survive six months when you lose your job, then you're a wage slave. If you don't make enough to be able to take care of your family, then you're a wage slave.

It's called wage slavery because the person is stuck, all their time is spent at a job and it's impossible to leave that job because it never pays enough to save the minimum amount needed to move away without risk.

If you live in NY city, and you make $1000/month, you're obviously a wage slave. The same amount in Nowheresville may not be as bad.

Re:Slave labor

[Anonymous Coward]

To hire someone who's labor cannot justify the "living wage" is to engage in charity and many small business owners cannot afford to be that generous.

if you cannot afford to run your business without slave labor then society should not allow your business to remain open.

This already happens. Consumers communicate their demand based on the price they will pay for an item. Suppliers communicate their ability to make goods or services at said price by either providing or not providing their product. Employees work or do not work based on the acceptability of their compensation. Who is the slave?

Re:Slave labor

[CodeBuster]

it never pays enough to save the minimum amount needed to move away without risk.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Re:Slave labor

[khallow]

if you cannot afford to run your business without slave labor then society should not allow your business to remain open.

In a market-based system, such a business goes bankrupt. There's no need to "allow" or not.

Re:Slave labor

[Anonymous Coward]

if you cannot afford to run your business without slave labor then society should not allow your business to remain open.

You want to ban almost all charities. Brilliant.

Re:Slave labor

[vgrinber]

To hire someone who's labor cannot justify the "living wage" is to engage in charity and many small business owners cannot afford to be that generous.

if you cannot afford to run your business without slave labor then society should not allow your business to remain open.

The Apple Store employees, just like those of any other company, are not slaves by the very fact that they can quit at any time. Your ability to go elsewhere and earn more is not decided by Apple, but by your own level of skill. In addition, who is to decide what the living wage is? The government? One could argue that if the minimum wage were, say $20 per hour, Apple wouldn't open any stores at all since it might not be profitable to do so; and so you would solve "the problem" by getting rid of the low paying jobs. You would get your wish. Unfortunately, there would be more competition for what remained and the same employees you call "slaves" would have no wage at all since they would not have the skills to compete in the market. (In that case, I would be expecting you to ask the government to raise taxes to subsidize jobs because the evil corporations won't make any.)

Re:Slave labor

[Anonymous Coward]

The "free market" is controlled by gigantic, corporations and financial institutions. The free market is not free, and the worship of the concept is completely ridiculous and has no bearing on reality at all.

Re:Slave labor

[atriusofbricia]

To hire someone who's labor cannot justify the "living wage" is to engage in charity and many small business owners cannot afford to be that generous.

if you cannot afford to run your business without slave labor then society should not allow your business to remain open.

This is going to wreck my mods.. but...

How in the hell did this get a +5 Insightful?! What in the hell is insightful about calling a employee a slave? Get a damned clue. Person A offers to pay Person B a particular wage to do a job. The wage is determined by market forces including the size of the appropriate labor pool and Person B's qualifications to do said job. Person B can accept or not.

Not paying a "living wage" does not make the employee a slave or anything even remotely like it. Slaves don't have choices. Slaves can't improve their skills and move up. Slaves can't gain experience and then ask for improved pay.

Don't fucking conflate these two things. It is a dire insult to all those who have been slaves and those who still are.

Re:Slave labor

[Maritz]

I think what's likelier is that they can well afford to run it without slave labour, but choose not to, as it's less lucrative. Why such a business would necessarily go bankrupt isn't clear to me, I imagine it would do perfectly well, better than it would by paying a fair wage in fact.

Re:Slave labor

[Sir_Sri]

It's not that you can't survive for the short term. it's that such low wages aren't sustainable. Someone that low on the economic ladder is, in the long run, going to be a burden to society because they're going to need government sponsored pensions etc. and they'll never pay any meaningful amount of taxes. It's a job not a career so to speak.

Now if you invest in people early enough (public education for example) they become worth a lot more than if you don't, being able to read and do basic math is tremendously valuable, we just don't always see it because effectively everyone in western society meets those standards. The question for living wages and so on is whether or not you are going to have people trapped at that economic reality for ever, or if it's just a temporary gig that has students rotating through.

It's not slavery. It's serfdom. You may not be the property of someone else, but you have no labour mobility to ever become anything other than a low wage minion. Low wages really can and really do trap people in low economic tiers, they don't have enough money to save anything, nor can they borrow money to invest in a better business/education etc because they don't have enough money. It takes a huge amount of effort to get people out of that trap. But it can be done.

Also, again, depends where you are. 1000 bucks a month in new york or silicon valley wouldn't go very far. In Mississippi that's not a huge problem.

Re:Slave labor

[Sir_Sri]

They do in many cases. Around here is 2 bucks an hour chipped in from the government on a 10 dollar minimum wage.

Re:Slave labor

[Rinnon]

To hire someone who's labor cannot justify the "living wage" is to engage in charity and many small business owners cannot afford to be that generous.

if you cannot afford to run your business without slave labor then society should not allow your business to remain open.

Minimum wage is not slave labour, it's just minimum wage, nothing more, nothing less. Dramatic hyperbole is not going to make your case solid. If you actually believe that "if you cannot afford to run a business without paying minimum wage then society should not allow your business to remain open," I think you have a rather naive understanding of how much money many small businesses are making.

Re:Slave labor

[khallow]

Why such a business would necessarily go bankrupt isn't clear to me

Because they wouldn't be able to get labor. Historically, real slave labor has coexisted with capitalism. But in the developed world, real slave labor is virtually nonexistent aside from exploitation of people who for whatever reason are legally persona non grata (such as illegal immigrants or prisoners).

But the sort of so-called slavery that is businesses which pay less than the so-called "living wage" isn't slavery merely because people working there choose to work there. In other words, the business fills a need. Interfere with that via minimum wage laws and then those businesses aren't filling the need as well. That's a typical example of how top-down mandates make an economy less efficient and beneficial.

Re:Slave labor

[khallow]

One could say the same of any generally beneficial concept which can't be achieved in the absolute such as peace or knowledge. And one would be equally foolish to do so.

Re:Slave labor

[Asic Eng]

I work for a large multi-national company. It wastes company dollars year after year on stupid, wasteful and inefficient programs. That's an effect of large organizations - the people deciding things are no longer directly affected by their decisions. The market will favor less broken organizations, but that can take a long time and it will only replace companies with others who do better on average. Also sections of the company which do well will keep alive sections of the company which only burn cash.

Re:Slave labor

[Anonymous Coward]

No, not insightful. Slave Labor != Unprofitable labor. If I have an employee who generates $20 per hour worth of income, and I have to pay him a living wage of $25 per hour, guess what... I replace him with a machine that costs less, or offshore the job, or whatever. Why do you think there are so many jobs that have disappeared from the market entirely? They simply aren't profitable to do anymore (Note that this is necessarily the fault of minimum wage laws, in and of themselves)

Also, remember that the full cost of an employee is far more than the hourly rate. A $10 an hour full time employee is probably costing an employer $20 an hour after taxes, insurance, etc.

Re:Slave labor

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is, that's a variable amount of money. A guy who gets in over his head with a big house and a nice car can find himself a "Wage Slave" on a six figure salary. On the other hand, like you say, a $1000 a month can be enough to actually do okay in a lot of places. This also hints at the whole issue with a living wage. Who is it that decided that a living wage should be enough to care for a family of four on one income? That's absurd. One or two people, okay, but establishing four as a minimum? There's gobs of people (including all the /.'ers in their mom's basement) that don't need that as a living wage. Not even close. $12-15 an hour (well below "living wage" numbers) isn't bad for a single person, or for a second income in a two income household, etc.

For retail, that's not bad.

[Anonymous Coward]

Back in '06 I worked at a Target as an associate on the sales floor. All I made was 7.50 an hour and they would flip out if I worked enough hours to got overtime.

my new iPod has Jewnius

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one welcome our new Apple Jew overlords !

Suck suck suck suck those sheckles Apple !!!!!

Wow

[Anonymous Coward]

They make 11.91/hr? sounds great to me.. there are always mobs of employees at the stores standing around. From what I understand you don't exactly have to be a computer genius to get a job there, no college required. For retail that is actually pretty good money. I don't see how you think those workers are being exploited. I suppose everyone has to bash Apple and ignore all the other companies that do the same or worse.

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[Anonymous Coward]

In the past, people who bought apple products were computer geeks, hackers, and other undesirables. Now look what's happened.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Exploiting...?

[RightSaidFred99]

How is anybody being "exploited"? I can't stand Apple for a variety of reasons, this is definitely not one of them. If people are willing to work for that pay, then both parties are satisfied and nothing's wrong.

so what

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently someone is willing to work at Apple for $11.91, so let them work.

All businesses exploit their workers.

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

All businesses exploit their workers, underpay them etc. That is what you do to workers. Everyone knows only being the man at the top matters, and you're supposed to crush the fuck out of everyone else until they work for free for you because you offer crackers for lunch.

Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[SuperKendall]

12/hour isn't a living wage in a lot of places.

And why should it be?

If you pay everyone at ANY job a living wage, how are teenagers supposed to find work? They do not NEED a living wage. They would rather you hire two of them instead of one on a living wage, so they both can work.

It's no surprise teenage unemployment is skyrocketing, with a whole generation of kids unable to gain the valuable experience of working - and it's all thanks to people like you who REALLY do not understand the full job market and all the roles it plays throughout someones lifetime.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[dlp211]

Teenage unemployment is skyrocketing and yet we have some of the lowest minimum wages(adjusted for inflation) the country has seen in its modern history. It's almost like wages have nothing to do with teenage unemployment at this point.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[shiftless]

Teenage unemployment is skyrocketing and yet we have some of the lowest minimum wages (adjusted for inflation) the country has seen

Period.

"Minimum wage" is a modern invention. It's a stupid idea that doesn't work.

Your argument is wrong because you don't take into account the fact that employment levels would increase significantly if the minimum wage requirements were lifted.

But oh noes.....other people's wages would have to decrease accordingly.....including yours!
 
....But wait! Less taxes could then be deducted from your paycheck, due to decreased drain on the welfare system.......right?

LOL

Of course not. Our Founders understood this. Once government grows, it is very difficult to shrink. When welfare comes out of our personal generosity as free people rather than being taken forcibly out of everyone's pocket, that drain on one's pocket book can increase or decrease as befitting the individual's circumstances. When it's taken forcibly however, the drain is always there regardless. Everyone has a more difficult time making a living whether that is appropriate to their circumstances or not. The employer is taxed and is not able to hire as many people, due to part of his productivity being taken from him, and rerouted to some government program he doesn't agree with and that isn't necessarily in his interest.

The government thus directly causes unemployment through taxation. When minimum wage laws are passed, the only people really affected are the unskilled and entry level workers. There are fewer jobs for them because the total budget available at each company to pay workers doesn't increase just because the State mandates things should be a certain way. This causes even more pressure on the welfare system, and soon the politicians are crying for more funding. The cycle repeats itself.

The effect is, poor people who otherwise could have pulled their weight in a free market, are muscled out by competitors (X number of jobs open, Y number of competitors, you do the math) who then receive a higher wage, which does not necessarily correspond with the wage they are worth, and is much less likely to correspond with said worth than it would under free market conditions.

Government is the problem....not the solution.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[arkane1234]

Teenage unemployment spurred up during the recession that has occurred since 2007 or so. You'll note nothing happened between then and now other than a global recession.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[dlp211]

Bullshit. Dropping the minimum wage would do nothing to spur employment. Why would employers higher more people that they don't need even if they could get them at a reduced price? And while there is a small uptick in unemployment associated with a higher minimum wage, it is typically statistically insignificant and creates a transfer of wealth from employers to employees thus driving demand. But don't let macroeconomics get in the way of your Randian world view.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[bryan1945]

And the employers just raise their prices for everyone. But don't let reality get in the way of your macroeconomic theory world.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[martin-boundary]

"Minimum wage" is a modern invention. It's a stupid idea that doesn't work.

LOL. It only prevents us from having riots in the streets like in the good ol' days of robber baron capitalism. You know, even rich people understand that if there are too many destitute poor people around them, sooner or later there's going to be a fight, and the poor are numerically superior...

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

Living wage is not a bad idea in theory, however. A job market can only provide so many jobs for a population. Fewer jobs offering living wages translates to people needing multiple jobs in order to survive. The search for multiple jobs drives down the number of jobs available in the market. Some argue that job seekers can just move to a better job market. That's actually not a simple thing to do. Realistically, your next closet non-exhausted job market is likely in another part of your state, unless you live in a highly developed state with several urban centers. But then, those markets tend to have higher costs of living, which further increases the need for a living wage.

The bit in the article summary about Apple's exploitation of cheap labor being a reason to avoid shopping at an Apple Store is completely idiotic. $11/hr is low in a lot of places. $11/hr is high in a lot of other places, but those places are far away. But if $11/hr is exploitative, then I hope this guy never sets foot in a Walmart, a convenience store, or a diner.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Richy_T]

What does "need" have to do with it? If the hiring of the employee offers a feasible value proposition at the lower wage compared to the higher wage, that is reason enough to do it. For example at $4/hr, it might improve profits to have someone load a rivet hopper. At $8/hr you might just make the ($25/hr) riveter do it himself.

As an additional bonus, the hopper loader might gain enough experience/interest to become a riveter himself instead of sitting at home, collecting food stamps and watching Oprah all day.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should anyone give a damn about teenagers - who have mommy and daddy paying the bills - finding a job? The priority needs to be providing work for adults.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

Because there are those that need to live on that wage and those that don't and the difference should not be the pay per hour but the hours worked in total.

And this is coming from a orphan that on summer break from a top 5 university with honors and still can't find a job that pays more than £6/hr ($8/hr)
That means that the teenager with glowing credentials still has to work a 40hr week to pay rent, and due to everyone following your philosophy nowhere actually offers full time to teens.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

But minimum wage is a poor way to achieve wealth transfers.

At best it results in inflation (with no effect on low wage earners in real terms).

At worst it causes increased unemployment and a less productive workforce (due to workers who previously earned more than minimum wage, no longer preferring their current job when they can get the minimum wage jobs for the same pay). The supply and demand situation is really bad for raising minimum wage: generally minimum wage jobs pay so little because there are plenty of workers ready to fill that job; raise the salary and you get... even more workers wanting to fill that job!

While I'm there with you on the need to help the poor, I don't think wage controls are the way to do it.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Eli Gottlieb]

That has an easy fix: just require a living wage for everyone employed full-time, as compensation for the fact that a full-time worker can't afford the time to just get another job.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[painandgreed]

"Minimum wage" is a modern invention. It's a stupid idea that doesn't work.

LOL. It only prevents us from having riots in the streets like in the good ol' days of robber baron capitalism. You know, even rich people understand that if there are too many destitute poor people around them, sooner or later there's going to be a fight, and the poor are numerically superior...

Reminds me of a quote I read once:

"The poor were for Social Security because it beat starving to death.
The middle class were for Social Security because it was better than nothing.
The rich were for Social Security because it beat being drug into the street and killed."

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

Minimum wage actually raises unemployment and makes it harder for low skilled people to enter the job market. It's a documented fact. It was started by racist democrats to prevent blacks from getting jobs, and for that purpose, its worked quite well. Read Thomas Sowell.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[sgtrock]

"Minimum wage" is a modern invention.

Yeah, minimum wage is a modern idea all right. It's only 4,000 years old after all.

Government is the problem....not the solution.

Tell you what, why don't you go live in a government free zone like Somalia for a while. I think you'll find the experience enlightening.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

"Minimum wage" is a modern invention. It's a stupid idea that doesn't work.

Yes, we'll just take your assertion against the evidence or studies that show it does.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

"riots in the streets like in the good ol' days of robber baron capitalism"

You are a fool and one need only look at the data to understand why.

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2011.htm

There are around 300 million people in this country and roughly 1% of them are earning minimum wage - or below.

So you are saying were it not for the minimum wage, these 1% would make less money, to the point of rioting in the streets to right this condition.

*All* the minimum wage does is to reduce the number of jobs available to low skilled workers. If a man wants to take a job at a lower wage who are you to inject your standards into the transaction and prevent this man from doing as he pleases with his time?

You are a fool.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

All minimum wage does is set a floor on the value of a "minimum" employee. If an employee doesn't return more value than his wage, he won't be hired.. As minimum wage climbs, less valuable employees won't be hired, will be laid off, etc.

Minimum wage is actually very bad for low skill employees, and very good for high skill ones.

I'm not necessarily opposed to a minimum wage, because the total lack of one may create a race to the bottom, but the idea that a minimum wage should be a "living wage" (whatever the hell that means) is a really bad idea if you want a growing economy.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't seem to understand that most companies are paying less than living wages unless a union forces them to do so. When I was a teenager, I made 25% more than non union workers. Very soon, most comparable businesses were paying more in response.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[Anonymous Coward]

Your intellect and grasp of modern economics is... breathtaking.

Minimum wages are NOT living wages. They're just a floor beneath which society chooses not to sink, because some of us actually did learn how people were treated in the U.S. through the first couple of decades of the 20th century. Minimum wage is a mark below which we identify as despicable exploitation of desperate people.

With your logic, we would remove the minimum wage and see a skyrocketing population of people living on the street, all gainfully employed, mind you, at wages competitive with third world shitholes.

Shame on you, you privileged, smug, arrogant piece of crap. Compared to government, people like you are the problem.

Re:Why do YOU think everyone needs a living wage

[scot4875]

What, so you think that everyone should be in competition with teenagers for jobs? That's great -- we can just have everybody living with their parents (who, presumably, have the 'real' jobs) until they find their own 'real' job that makes them a full citizen.

And why do you think teenagers don't deserve a living wage? They already don't generally get very many hours and don't get any other benefits, why should they also be denied a decent hourly rate?

Oh, wait, I'll strawman you here. It's because you think you're better than them, and that you deserve more and they deserve less. I cannot come up with any other explanation that doesn't derive from your own sense of self-importance and entitlement at the expense of others, and I think your posting history easily confirms this.

--Jeremy

gosh!

[pbjones]

a US company 'exploiting' workers? who would have thunk it? As a base rate for a basic sales position, it sounds better than flipping burgers.

Wow, that was stupid

[SuperKendall]

If you can't figure out why the New York Times considers New York City labour issues to be news

Well probably like the rest of the planet he understands the New York Times is an international newspaper, not a city rag.

And did you post that after the part about them talking about New Hampshire, not New York? Or did you just miss that yourself?

Not a Times reader I guess.

as someone who has worked retail for 7 years...

[Anonymous Coward]

... put myself through school with it... and getting ready to leave the industry for good real soon....
i have to say, i am finding it amusing that many people replying here seem to think retail jobs are actually designed to let you earn a living and live on your own.. from my experience, only retail employees that really manage to do that (and actually have any comfort in their lives) are either at management level or work on commission (and are good at their jobs).... most retail employees that i know (and i know a LOT of them) either still live at home with parents or have a second job.. Where i work, the starting wage for a non-commission employee is $10/hour and you'll be very lucky to get a 2-5% raise every year (and by no means is this a "low end" store chain)... there are also wage caps for jobs... "as a you can earn a maximum of $x"... meaning you can be the best employee in the world and stay for 20 years and you'll never make more than that $x.. and that $x is very low...
so.. i am sure Apple is ripping off their employees nicely.. but so is every other retailer and retail chain in North American.. so don't get mad at Apple.. get mad at an entire industry that's ripping off hundreds of thousands of people that work their asses off and still can't earn a decent living.

Re:as someone who has worked retail for 7 years...

[lilfields]

I don't know how many retail stores you've worked out, or been to...but most people don't "work their asses off," mostly it involves standing around and usually avoiding the customer. Granted there are some that do work their ass off, but they aren't in that position for long. Again, walking around a retail store doesn't require any sort of knowledge other than a cash register, why should this be a high paying job? You aren't doing anything remotely complicated. If someone is willing to work at this price, then let them work. If you aren't, seek employment elsewhere.

Is this what the pundits call "liberal outrage"?

[shiftless]

It's the nauseating entitlement mentality. OMG, the outrage of only getting paid $12 an hour! Says more about the fucking worthlessness of our currency than anything. Yeah, blame the company for cutting costs. Don't blame the employee who chose to take that job. It's not like when selecting between employment at Apple for $12/hr, vs these supposed alternatives at $15/hr, the "cool factor" of working at Apple played into the decision one bit. No, the person was forced into signing on by all that mind control Apple advertising obviously!

Yes, it's all that god damned slave driving employer's fault for daring to employ people to provide a helpful service to the community. The audacity of those fucking assholes, taking otherwise unemployed people off the streets and paying them a wage that would have 99% of third world people shitting bricks at their good fortune, with the other 1% being the overprivileged brats who, like their American cousins, grew up with too fucking much food on the table on a regular basis to appreciate that life is fucking hard and the winners are those who take advantage of the opportunities which present themselves, not those who sit around bitching and moaning with their hands out wanting something free.

To the summary author: Give me a fucking break. Either go out and start a business providing a useful product and service, or shut the fuck up and get back to work. Your union-enforced smoke break is almost up.

Shouldn't You Compare Apples to Apples?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do I get to wear t-shirts and shorts at Tiffany's? If not, does Tiffany's pay my wardrobe and dry cleaning expenses? Does Tiffany's offer part time employees healthcare benefits? I'm not so sure the price difference is exactly equal given the different environments.

Gosh

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosh, if the NY Times thinks it can price labor better than Apple, we wecome it to open up retail outlets and sell Apple hardware. Have they done this, no, I didn't think so. I love the holier than thou people that think they can make better decisions, but then, fail to do anything productive other than whine and say, I could do it better than you. The short answer is, no, you could not. The proof is that they never have, and never will; while the people that are complaining about have a proven track record.

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[Mabhatter]

How true. When I was hired at McDonald's 20 years ago, you could not have visible tattoos on anybody, any jewelry for men, and women could only have stud earrings (one per ear, no necklaces, etc). The majority of the time hey wouldnt bother to HIRE people that interviewed outside that norm. That was BRAND policy.

Any office job was the same thing. If you got tattoos, they had to cover under tees or you would be wearing long sleeves forever.

Re:Living Wage

[MagusSlurpy]

So since crime has been dropping in the US since 1990, that means we're closer to having a true living wage than we have been in 20 years?

meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Australia's minimum wage is $15.51.

Considering we are more then 1 for 1 then the US dollar.... what a piss hole the US is.

hows that trillion dollar debt going?

Re:Living Wage

[kenh]

What about working a second job? Why isn't that an option?

Every job isn't worth a living wage, requiring employers to pay a living wage makes those low-paying jobs go away.

WHat effect does "no job" have on the crime rate?

Better than their tech support

[arekin]

A large number of Apple's tech support advisers make 10.00 an hour, and are contracted through temp services so that apple doesn't have to pay insurance. They also can be released from there employment without reason simply because Apple chooses to. I've heard horror stories from friends that work at the local apple care call center and they have mentioned people being fired and given no warning, having never received any corrective action.

A story of middle America

[Anonymous Coward]

I have been doing what you are describing for nine years. Minimum wage -> two jobs -> better paying one -> another second job; repeat. When your pay increases slower than the cost of living your progress gets wiped out and you must work 60+ hours a week again to stay even.

Nobody trains anyone anymore. You have to train yourself. I had a job that I could get a raise to $12 an hour if I got a crane operator's certification on my own dime for a few thousand. I did figuring someone will be willing to pay me more. The average wage is double that. Then I learned the hard way that if you were not born before 1980 or don't have a college degree, even cutthroat blue collar employers wont hire you. Too young, not enough experience or education and not enough time and money to get either.

Effort isn't enough. My only saving grace is a willingness to live for six years in little more than a shack that had no floor in one room while saving money. Now I live with relatives and affording college--barely, and elated to do some nice cozy IT work again since 2002.

I had ten jobs over the last nine years going from the best opportunity to the next along the way to here and met many people that did not have the drive and luck I have. Slashdot is worlds away from places where people see basic internet access as a luxury that reduces the food they can afford. Welcome to blue collar America.

Re:Rich MILF bonus

[kenh]

Yeah, because rich MILFs are attracted to low-paid retail clerks. In turtlenecks. At the mall.

And yes, they are rich, because they are spending money in an Apple store...

Re:Neither. Retail is hell.

[MagusSlurpy]

That's the beauty of working at the Apple store, though. Everyone comes in so stoned that they're polite.

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[MagusSlurpy]

Here are several scruffy (and one neck-bearded) Apple associates, and here is one with what looks like dreds, and here are several with arm ink.

Why pay them more?

[non0score]

The point is, an Apple store sales employee doesn't require much skills. They just stand there and people throw money at them. They don't even need to try and sell products to customers!

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[Anonymous Coward]

Ditto here in California. Lots of Apple store retail employees with body piercings and tattoos.

Foxconn employees would jump at that

[Alain Williams]

Since the makers of Apple bling are now paid $285 a month, something that you could earn in 24 hours at $11.91/hour.

Re:Living Wage

[makomk]

What about working a second job? Why isn't that an option?

It is. In theory I think this makes the problem worse.

Normally, the price of goods or labour is set by supply and demand - naively you'd expect supply to decrease and demand to increase with increasing prices, such that there's some equilibrium point in the middle where the two match. If people deal with pay that's not sufficient to live on by getting second jobs when they wouldn't otherwise then that assumption doesn't hold; a decrease in the cost of labour leads to an increase in the supply of labour. It's quite likely that this increase in the supply of labour would totally overwhelm any increase in demand, causing a downward spiral where lower wages lead to people needing more jobs leading to further decreases in wages. So lowering or removing the minimum wage might well make things worse!

Re:Living Wage

[makomk]

Actually you'd expect supply to increase and demand to decrease with increasing prices. D'oh! Not sure how I missed that. The rest is still correct though.

Move

[tkrotchko]

Then move away from NYC. NTC is an expensive place to live.,

Historically people move to where the opportunities are or where economically it makes sense to live.

Just wanting to live in NYC doesn't mean you are able to.

Re:Rich MILF bonus

[microcars]

but they always do it with the Pizza Delivery guy!
are you telling me those are not documentaries?

Have they ever worked retail?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have the people that wrote this article ever worked retail? I worked retail in college (10 years ago, but still) and I wasn't making $11/hr till I was a key holder for the store.

Why would apple have a fan base?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would apple still have a fan base? They are no longer the hip trendy cool guy you turn to to be part of some clic, they are the mega-corp that has a hand in everyone's affairs. Really, at this point, Blackberry is now the little guy everyone laughs at, and Apple is now the metaphorical Microsoft.

Be trendy, boycott the big mega-corps (google/apple/microsoft) !!

Garbage

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's an idea. If you don't like the pay find another job! I am a manager for a small company in Iowa and I make the equivalent of 15 an hour in salary and I love my job, I could make probably double if I went to a larger companybut not with the job satisfaction I have.

Re:Rich MILF bonus

[pianophile]

Yeah, because rich MILFs are attracted to low-paid retail clerks..

I'm sure it depends. How hot is the clerk? How bored and/or neglected is the MILF?

Quote from the article

[gnasher719]

By the standards of retailing, Apple offers above average pay â" well above the minimum wage of $7.25 and better than the Gap, though slightly less than Lululemon, the yoga and athletic apparel chain, where sales staff earn about $12 an hour. The company also offers very good benefits for a retailer, including health care, 401(k) contributions and the chance to buy company stock, as well as Apple products, at a discount.

Doesn't look that badly paid then.

Only m0r0ns think that Foxcon == Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Foxcon manufactures MILLIONS of products for THOUSANDS of companies. Apple is just the most successful one.

Fact, out of 13 suicides (of off 800 thousand employees), only one was officially working on Apple products.

$12 in retail is low?

[l3v1]

Sorry people, but I don't think $12 as a starting salary in a retail job is low. I know some people in retail jobs that earn lower than that, and not as a starting salary, but as a regular one. And no, it's not a salary you could live on, if you're living alone. Yes, this is a problem, but saying this $12 starting wage is lower than the average or that they exploit people with it, is a bit over the edge. Retail jobs are generally not the best paying jobs in the world, as you should know, and I suspect tech retail jobs are among the better ones in the general retail arena. So, while I can understand how low salary is not good for you, don't really think this is something to whine about.

Shocking

[kelemvor4]

I'm not joking. $11.91/hr to start? I assumed they would be paid minimum wage, like mcdonalds employees. I'm surprised they get paid so much to operate a cash register. Humorous that the article suggest they should be paid even more! Their badge may say genius, but in the end they're just cashiers.

In other news, office depot is paying their cashiers below the $11.91 baseline. Let's go protest!

Not your average retail positions

[Douglas Goodall]

The store employees are expected to know about the full line of products, and advise customers about options and configurations that might suit them. The store employees in effect are providing pre-sales technical support and should be paid appropriately. But then again Apple underpays their engineers also. Go figure.

Apple store: affordable uniform

[peter303]

Apple is chinos plus one of their store shirts. Tiffany's you have to dress upscale, go to the cleaners each week, etc.

Supply and Demand

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't seem to have much problem getting employees, what is the problem? I have seen several TV shows with companies claiming they can not hire workers in 2012, and the problem for every one of them is either the pay is too low, or they want insane skills and are unwilling to train. Simply supply and demand, econ 101.

Where do those figures come from?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know where they got that "average" number from, but when I started doing sales in an Apple Store, they started me at $8.80/hr. When I was promoted to Genius a year later, they offered $16/hr. After almost 8 years, consistent positive performance reviews, a raise when they did away with bonuses, and transferring to one of the most expensive areas of the country, I was still making less than $23/hr. Advancement beyond Genius is virtually impossible - in almost 8 years, I can probably count the times I've seen it happen on one hand. While people in flagship stores often seem to make more, I certainly wasn't the lowest-paid. At one point, I found out that a Genius who was hired after me was only making $12/hr, and this was in a "top market" part of California. Besides, it's not like Apple Retail can't afford to recognize their employees for their performance - they pretty consistently have by far the highest sales per square foot of any retailer out there.

What?

[Anonymous Coward]

has gone up dramatically since the 1990s

What has gone up? You're missing the beginning of your sentence.

Most religions don't pay very well

[slazzy]

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-05-21/tech/29982282_1_apple-stores-steve-jobs-brain

New York Times versus Apple Inc.

[JBaustian]

Since last year, about the time of Steve Jobs' death, the New York Times has been on an anti-Apple kick. First with the allegations about labor conditions at the factories in China, now about the labor conditions in the Apple Stores. It is almost as if someone on the editorial staff decided that Apple was too big and too successful and it was the duty of the NYT to take them down.

Or maybe someone in management at the Times decided to short Apple stock.

Heh

[Anonymous Coward]

"That's what's great about the free market, it prevents businesses which are inefficient or not economically viable from continuing to operate."

If only that were true.

Re:Sister is an RN

[Anonymous Coward]

an RN - you know - the people in the hospital who stand around talking to each other while ignoring you?

FTFY

Bullshit article

[nessman]

If you're 22 yrs old and bringing home (and by that I mean your mom and dad's home since most college grads these days wouldn't know how to sign an apartment least if their live depended on it) $25,000 USD a year - and you can't make ends meet - then you're obviously a dumb fucking dummy who can't balance a checkbook and learn to live within your means.

With that - you can still rent a small apartment, pay insurance on the used Toyota mom and dad handed down to you, eat 3 decent meals a day and still take your girlfriend out to Applebees for dinner once a month on an Apple Store salary.

Most Apple Store customers know what they want, did their homework, and all they need is someone to swipe their credit card and hand them their new iWhatever. You can pay someone minimum wage to do that.

Suck it up... young 20-something's aren't cut out for a full-time white collar job making $60k a year.

Otherwise, quit your crummy Apple Store job, wear cheap makeup and women's clothes, and suck dick in an alley for $20 a pop.

Happy enough

[Anonymous Coward]

Coincidentally, I was speaking to an Apple Store employee this evening at a concert; she was working on security at the gig for extra cash.

I had a longish chat with her about the Apple job and she said she was happy with the money, the hours and the share scheme. They were also financing a final year of college for her to study business management which involved flying her to the US.

I didn't get any sense that she felt exploited.

This is UK not US.

Apple Store Employees Soak Up the Atmosphere, But

[Anonymous Coward]

I worked in Apple Retail for 5 years, started at a low wage, and was given yearly reviews and raises based on performance, full benefits after becoming full time (after a year), and stock options. No shit, stock options for retail employees. turns out this was the biggest fringe benefit as I started at the store in 2004. ended up over 100 shares in all, purchased at a great price (pre-tax contribution). Now these are serious equity for me. After a hiatus and other jobs that I got in part by skills honed by working at Apple retail (broadcast editor, sound designer), I now work again at Apple.... Corporate. Of interest statistically might be that of the 100 or so people that worked at my store there was perhaps 15% teenagers. Most of these people were adults supporting themselves.

$11/hr isn't that bad

[lilfields]

Uh, $11/hr in some part of the country is actually decent pay considering it's just a retail store. I know factory workers that start out at $10/hr. I am normally critical of Apple, but starting at $11/hr isn't bad at all. It requires almost no knowledge what-so-ever, it's just a retail store. It's not like they're running a server farm.

Compression against the wall

[SuperKendall]

Lots happened - with less money going around, teenagers are the first to be let go, and the last to be hired because they don't have a lot of skills yet the minimum wage is absurdly high making hiring them a poor choice.

College grads are having trouble for the same reason. Why not just hire a somewhat more expensive older worker rather than paying too much to train someone who might not work out?

The truth of it is there if you just think about it at all.

Re:Compression against the wall

[mk1004]

College grads are having trouble for the same reason. Why not just hire a somewhat more expensive older worker rather than paying too much to train someone who might not work out?

So ask some of those "somewhat more expensive" older workers how easy it is finding work is right now.

Your logic sucks on that one, which makes me question your entire argument.

I'm confused

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this a story, because it is about Apple?

Guess what? $11.91 is pretty good for retail - more than I made back in the day. If you want to say retail wages aren't high enough in general, fine, but I think $12 is pretty damned good for having a low-skilled, no-college-required job.

Unless things have changed drastically in the US since the last time I was there, $12 is close to twice minimum wage!
Since minimum wage is the norm for retail jobs, and Apple is paying close to twice that, it seems their job is a great job (Plus! you get a 25% employee discount!)

this is a biased and flaming article...

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly, starting at $12/hr is BAD? Get the hell out of here... fine you know the product, but frankly there aren't that many products to know!

I have been working as an electrical engineer for 10 years. Based on my 45-50hr work week, I'm being paid about $32/hr if I multiply that 45-50 times the actual number of weeks I work in a year (I do not count vacation, so it that raises my per hour number).

So to hear that an Apple Genius can make ~$30/hr is actually great news to me because it means maybe replacing my current salary isn't impossible after all as all the engineering jobs move to China and the IT jobs move to India.

Re:Have you seen the people working at Apple store

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never seen anyone with two-inch gauges and tattoos from wrist to shoulder working at Tiffany.

I'm somewhat surprised that Apple hires them

That's a hip look that Apple is looking for. As long as they are polite and smile in a non-threatening manner they become the equivalent of a boy-band--idiots think they're hip/edgy, everyone else realizes it's all just a homogenized act.

They're the modern day hippies.

You walk into a PC store (do they have those?) to find guys in button shirts with ties. Haven't you seen the humorous cartoons and side-by-side photo mock ups?

Re:Is this what the pundits call "liberal outrage"

[Anonymous Coward]

Your nauseating whining about other people bitching and moaning makes me sick.

My Genius pay in 2002...$19.25/hr.

[LanMan04]

That's because she works at the Genius Bar....genius.

Data Point: When I was a Mac Genius back in 2002, my starting pay (with a newly-earned BS in InfoSystems) was $19.25.

I know that was 10 years ago, but thought it might be useful.

And management were total cocks about everything. No overtime, ever. Back-to-backs where you'd close the store on night and have to be there for opening the next day. 10-day work stretches with a 4 days off, then another 10 days in a row.

Even as a Mac Genius you were treated as a low form of retail worker life. One of my bosses, who previously managed an Old Navy (such tech skills...) used to regularly bitch at the Geniuses about how long it took us to work through our repair queue...."they're just computers, how hard can it be!" she would quip.

No drug test, though!

Man up

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm 24 and have been out of college for two years now and am employed in a software development job making good pay for that profession. However, before that, I was paid $9.50/hr as a lab technician and $6.65/hr as a programming tutor. All whiny hipsters complaining that Apple is screwing them to sell their favorite products while they employ slave labor in Asia to manufacture said products can stop complaining right about...................now. Yes, I'm 24 and already have my 'old man walking through the snow' stories; deal with it.

Mod parent up

[shiftless]

This is a serious post, not a troll. Iran is not planning to nuke anyone, as much as the media and government insists so. Get a clue mods!

All Apple Store Employees are overpaid

[Anonymous Coward]

I think allApple Store employees are all highly overpaid. I have been in our local Apple store many times in the last two years, and have never gotten good help, although their arrogance was plentiful!

undo

[spectrokid]

undo mod