>At 05:18 PM 12/18/2004, Doug Henwood wrote:
>>John Thornton wrote:
>>
>>>In spite of all this Cobbs goal is own her own Temp Service so she can
>>>help hundreds of people have an even more marginal existence than hers
>>>while she profits from it? This is warped. She wants to make a $350 a
>>>month car payment and pay $400 for health-insurance and she aspires to
>>>pay someone maybe $800 to $1000 a month while hiring them out to a
>>>company for maybe one and a half times that and pocket the difference.
>>>Something is seriously wrong with this aspiration in my view. Am I being
>>>harsh on her? I don't think so.
>>
>>This goes way back in the American class system - the only hope for
>>escape from the pressures of working class life is by becoming a business
>>owner.
>
>Most people don't even understand that what they're doing is exploiting
>people just like her. First of all, _SHE_ was considering taking a
>$7.00/hr job. _She_ doesn't reckon she's that much different from the
>people who might be taking temporary jobs at $7.00/hr. Her husband makes
>how much as a librarian assistant and has a part time job at what was it $5.45.
>
>As for spending to much money, give me a fuckin' break. I figure it takes
>me a bare minimum of $1500/month to live and that's with absolutely
>nothing -- no fast food quickies, no meals out, no meat that costs more
>than $2/lb., no expensive fresh fruits and vegetables, no savings, no
>health care. That's for _two_ people. Her rent, if she has a house is
>probably, easy, %1500/month in Miami.
>Kelley
I never said I thought she was spending too much money although others have certainly hinted at it or else stated it explicitly. I can see how someone might read my post thinking that was part of the point I was making but it isn't. My question is how she justifies her "requirement" to spend those sums while simultaneously advocating paying others too little to do the same. This is assuming she runs the temp service the way most do and admittedly I do not know she is going to do this. Nothing in any of her quotes leads one to believe she is intending on opening a temp service as described by Alex in SF. I don't begrudge her a nice car and good food and healthcare. I think everyone should have those things more or less. I have reservations about automotive consumption but that is a different issue. In the current alignment of things she is no more or less "entitled" to a nice car than anyone else. What she spends her money on is none of my fucking business. I have been criticized for having 13 cats when I could give the money spent of cat food to hungry people. We all do what we can and I derive immense pleasure from my little cat monastery. It keep me grounded and comforts me and fuck anyone that doesn't like it. I almost always have to fight at least one of them for access to the keyboard so I can even blame them for spelling errors : ) The article mentions she lives in an apartment but rent can be as much or more than a house payment. I was until only very recently a small business owner. Without going into too much detail I extracted no more wealth than anyone else from the enterprise. We all shared all the duties of running the business so the arrangement seemed natural to me but there was always an adjustment period for new employees because decisions concerning running the business and hiring and firing done by consensus and involving all those affected wasn't something they were accustomed to. If this is what Cobb has in mind then I have unfairly criticized her but I see no evidence for that. She appears to want to earn a living by hiring others labor out and keeping a part of their remunerations in return for merely administering them. That strikes me as total BS. Owning a business does not entitle one to higher remuneration for the same work performed. If I risk more in opening the business it is only because at that moment I had more to risk. If one partner puts in $20,000, another $15,000 and a third $12,000 if it is all they have then the risk is equal. Failure means a total loss to all three partners. If it fails, which it did, I don't risk being any worse off than the others affected by its closing. If I wind up losing the house, which is looking more possible by the month, I will wind up in an apartment just like millions of others. Damn I'm long winded. I need a class in economy of words to learn brevity. I also have been posting way to much personal shit and need to put and end to that. No longer being employed may have something to do with that as I defining myself in a more personal way rather than including my job as part of who I am. Something I hated but found myself doing anyway since it is so prevalent in our society. The fast food quickies has me intrigued though. I never thought of Taco Bell as an aphrodisiac.
John Thornton