StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Here is an interesting blog.

https://medium.com/@taliajane/an-open-l ... .7zibzkgl9

Talia Jane wrote:I haven’t bought groceries since I started this job. Not because I’m lazy, but because I got this ten pound bag of rice before I moved here and my meals at home (including the one I’m having as I write this) consist, by and large, of that. Because I can’t afford to buy groceries. Bread is a luxury to me, even though you’ve got a whole fridge full of it on the 8th floor. But we’re not allowed to take any of that home because it’s for at-work eating. Of which I do a lot. Because 80 percent of my income goes to paying my rent. Isn’t that ironic? Your employee for your food delivery app that you spent $300 million to buy can’t afford to buy food. That’s gotta be a little ironic, right?

I must note that no mortgage loan wouild be approved if the debt-to-income was even 60%, let alone 80%.

Here is her twitter.

https://twitter.com/itsa_talia

So she's whining because she took a job, knowing how much it paid, and it's not enough?

And her way of asking for a raise is embaressing the company in public?

Yeah...she's a dumbass.

Ace Pace wrote:So she's whining because she took a job, knowing how much it paid, and it's not enough?

And her way of asking for a raise is embaressing the company in public?

Yeah...she's a dumbass.

Plus, the Bay Area is expensive.

There are affordable places in California, such as the Valley that extends from Bakersfield to Redding. For a quieter scene, the Sierra Nevada foothills are even cheaper.

Ace Pace wrote:So she's whining because she took a job, knowing how much it paid, and it's not enough?

And her way of asking for a raise is embaressing the company in public?

Yeah...she's a dumbass.

Maybe she is but companies paying peanuts are still assholes.

salm wrote:

Ace Pace wrote:So she's whining because she took a job, knowing how much it paid, and it's not enough?

And her way of asking for a raise is embaressing the company in public?

Yeah...she's a dumbass.

Maybe she is but companies paying peanuts are still assholes.

No one is forcing her to work for that company.

Perhaps not. Perhaps she´s force to take it because there´s nothing else and this is in the US where the social safety net is rather thin.

And obviously nobody is forcing the company to not be assholes.
Just because there are people who either out of necessity or idiocy take jobs they don´t want or should not take doesn´t mean that the companies in question are not assholes.
At least if you believe that compaines should have more social responsibility besides "make money no matter how".
If you don´t blelive the latter then it´s probably the government who is an asshole and tolerates such definciencies.

salm wrote:Perhaps not. Perhaps she´s force to take it because there´s nothing else and this is in the US where the social safety net is rather thin.

And obviously nobody is forcing the company to not be assholes.
Just because there are people who either out of necessity or idiocy take jobs they don´t want or should not take doesn´t mean that the companies in question are not assholes.
At least if you believe that compaines should have more social responsibility besides "make money no matter how".
If you don´t blelive the latter then it´s probably the government who is an asshole and tolerates such definciencies.

I'm working from the context of the U.S. (where I don't live), where companies are not required to do anything except make money and not break the law.
The downside of the states is that you can work and still not have enough money for rent. The upside is asumming she has marketable talents in the valley, she can probably find a job in a cheaper area. No one forces her to work in that area.

Here are my thoughts, as a poor person in America who is supporting two adults on a similar income:

1) Apparently, this is her first job and she's just starting to live on her own. Do we seriously expect people to get this 100% correct right out of the gate? I know I fucked up a few times at her age and experience level - thank goodness I had family to kick me a few bucks when I needed it and occasionally give me a "you fucked up, here's how you fix it" lecture. Or just advice. Or just listened to me try to work out a strategy.

2) She needs to apply for food stamps (she may not qualify) and hit those food pantries and soup kitchens regardless of whether or not she gets the food stamps. There is a skill set to surviving on the bottom of the socio-economic ladder and damn few people have any experience or training in it prior to hitting that rung of the ladder.

3) Yes, she needs a better job. Yes, at CVS or a lot of other places, because where she is (was) working is exploitative even if it's legal. At least she has some work experience under her belt.

4) She needs a cheaper living arrangement, even if she lives in an expensive area. That might mean renting a room instead of an apartment. My first apartment was a single-room 10x12 shoebox, there were certainly downsides (roaches, among other things) but I could afford it AND food at the same time.

5) If the car isn't drivable she needs to either fix it or get rid of it, because an undrivable car is a liability.

That's just off the top of my head - meanwhile, I have to go off to my pays-very-little-job so I can keep a roof over our heads and food on the table.

Ace Pace wrote: I'm working from the context of the U.S. (where I don't live), where companies are not required to do anything except make money and not break the law.
The downside of the states is that you can work and still not have enough money for rent. The upside is asumming she has marketable talents in the valley, she can probably find a job in a cheaper area. No one forces her to work in that area.

Sure. But all of this still doesn´t change anything about the assholish character of this company. I mean, there are Amercian companies who treat their employees decently even though they don´t have to.
It just comes down to a business decission. Do you want to pay small wages but in return get less motivated and less competent employees as well as a high turn over or do you invest in your employees, pay more money but get better and more loyal employees?
Both strategies can be successful from a business stand point but one of them is an asshole strategy and this company appears to be pursueing it.

There is no reason for these kind of low-paid customer service call centre positions to be located in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country. In fact as I understand it the CEO said that they plan to move the department to Arizona. SF can and probably should bump their minimum wage again, however doing so will only increase the comparative advantage and workforce specialisation effects.

Ace Pace wrote:

salm wrote:Perhaps not. Perhaps she´s force to take it because there´s nothing else and this is in the US where the social safety net is rather thin.

And obviously nobody is forcing the company to not be assholes.
Just because there are people who either out of necessity or idiocy take jobs they don´t want or should not take doesn´t mean that the companies in question are not assholes.
At least if you believe that compaines should have more social responsibility besides "make money no matter how".
If you don´t blelive the latter then it´s probably the government who is an asshole and tolerates such definciencies.

I'm working from the context of the U.S. (where I don't live), where companies are not required to do anything except make money and not break the law.
The downside of the states is that you can work and still not have enough money for rent. The upside is asumming she has marketable talents in the valley, she can probably find a job in a cheaper area. No one forces her to work in that area.

It's really not as simple as you make it out to be. The problem with the US is that most of the jobs are located in areas that are expensive to live in. If you don't have a car you're basically fucked.

General Zod wrote: If you don't have a car you're basically fucked.

Not quite true, there IS mass transit in many urban areas. How good it is, and how affordable it is, and how close it can get you from your living to your work, are different questions...

That said. There are a few questions that have to be asked about the writer. Why is she living in an area with such high cost of living if she knowingly took a job with pay that wouldn't cover her cost of living? Is there no family help to be had? Relatives she could rent a room from for a few months?

Broomstick is absolutely right when she says there's a skill set to living at a certain income level. You have to make ends meet wherever you can and grab whatever assistance you can qualify for. Pride is a thing, but so is not eating.

Elheru Aran wrote:

General Zod wrote: If you don't have a car you're basically fucked.

Not quite true, there IS mass transit in many urban areas. How good it is, and how affordable it is, and how close it can get you from your living to your work, are different questions...

That said. There are a few questions that have to be asked about the writer. Why is she living in an area with such high cost of living if she knowingly took a job with pay that wouldn't cover her cost of living? Is there no family help to be had? Relatives she could rent a room from for a few months?

Read that again in the context of the rest of my post. Most of the places with good mass transit are not typically affordable to live in, and the places that are affordable typically don't have jobs for certain skill-sets. That leaves you with the options of unreasonably long commutes, or being forced to get a car which isn't always an option.

Elheru Aran wrote: Is there no family help to be had? Relatives she could rent a room from for a few months?

This is not a good option. You should be able to live on the income your job provides you with without burdening other people.
There are companies that rely on such bullshit, usually for internship positions, and they are the scum of the earth.

salm wrote:

Elheru Aran wrote: Is there no family help to be had? Relatives she could rent a room from for a few months?

This is not a good option. You should be able to live on the income your job provides you with without burdening other people.
There are companies that rely on such bullshit, usually for internship positions, and they are the scum of the earth.

Obviously it's not the best option for a long term solution. But short term, I think it would benefit this specific person by getting her a cheaper place to live so that she can either a.) find a different job which doesn't give her the shaft so badly or b.) allow her to save some money, get her vehicle repaired, and build a cushion against future financial hardship.

It does also depend somewhat on how good her relationship is with her (extended) family. That's a solution which can be kind of dependent upon that factor.

EDIT to add: This is a decent solution for *single* young people, and becomes less and less viable as you progress through couples, couples with children, and so forth, as that becomes a progressively greater burden.

However, it's obvious that something about this woman's circumstances need to change, and the greatest current expense she has, that's beggaring her right now, is her living situation. So she needs to change either her job or her living situation.

Elheru Aran wrote:

salm wrote:

Elheru Aran wrote: Is there no family help to be had? Relatives she could rent a room from for a few months?

This is not a good option. You should be able to live on the income your job provides you with without burdening other people.
There are companies that rely on such bullshit, usually for internship positions, and they are the scum of the earth.

Obviously it's not the best option for a long term solution. But short term, I think it would benefit this specific person by getting her a cheaper place to live so that she can either a.) find a different job which doesn't give her the shaft so badly or b.) allow her to save some money, get her vehicle repaired, and build a cushion against future financial hardship.

It does also depend somewhat on how good her relationship is with her (extended) family. That's a solution which can be kind of dependent upon that factor.

EDIT to add: This is a decent solution for *single* young people, and becomes less and less viable as you progress through couples, couples with children, and so forth, as that becomes a progressively greater burden.

However, it's obvious that something about this woman's circumstances need to change, and the greatest current expense she has, that's beggaring her right now, is her living situation. So she needs to change either her job or her living situation.

Speaking from personal experience it's almost impossible to save up enough money to make those kind of changes when the rent is your single biggest expense and you don't have any sort of financial cushion left when you live in one of the world's most expensive cities.

General Zod wrote: Speaking from personal experience it's almost impossible to save up enough money to make those kind of changes when the rent is your single biggest expense and you don't have any sort of financial cushion left when you live in one of the world's most expensive cities.

Exactly, which is why she needs IMO to get out of where she's living and look elsewhere for someplace to live. This might entail living with family or friends for some time, but frankly, if it costs so fucking much to live there and she doesn't have the scratch for it, she needs to reassess whether it's worth it. Either her job, her living situation, or both, need to change.

Elheru Aran wrote:

General Zod wrote: Speaking from personal experience it's almost impossible to save up enough money to make those kind of changes when the rent is your single biggest expense and you don't have any sort of financial cushion left when you live in one of the world's most expensive cities.

Exactly, which is why she needs IMO to get out of where she's living and look elsewhere for someplace to live. This might entail living with family or friends for some time, but frankly, if it costs so fucking much to live there and she doesn't have the scratch for it, she needs to reassess whether it's worth it. Either her job, her living situation, or both, need to change.

Moving somewhere else might put her in an even worse situation than she is now. There's no real easy way of assessing whether or not a new city is going to be worth moving to until you're actually there.

General Zod wrote: Moving somewhere else might put her in an even worse situation than she is now. There's no real easy way of assessing whether or not a new city is going to be worth moving to until you're actually there.

Fact of the matter is she's screwed either way, though. She can try continuing to live on a utter shoestring, or she can try to change her circumstances in *some* fashion. Temporarily relocating to cheaper living arrangements would be one way to do that, and it seems to be the best option as obviously she can't save enough to afford a month or two of unemployment if she quits her current job to look for another. So she's stuck with the job (unless someone throws her a favor after this article), which means her living arrangements need to change.

In her current situation, she is going to have to make some decisions on what she wants to keep and what she can do without. That includes her current residence and her job. If she decides she wants to keep both, she's going to end up not eating, not buying clothes as they wear out, not being able to fix/buy a car, not paying the bills...

Elheru Aran wrote:

General Zod wrote: Moving somewhere else might put her in an even worse situation than she is now. There's no real easy way of assessing whether or not a new city is going to be worth moving to until you're actually there.

Fact of the matter is she's screwed either way, though. She can try continuing to live on a utter shoestring, or she can try to change her circumstances in *some* fashion. Temporarily relocating to cheaper living arrangements would be one way to do that, and it seems to be the best option as obviously she can't save enough to afford a month or two of unemployment if she quits her current job to look for another. So she's stuck with the job (unless someone throws her a favor after this article), which means her living arrangements need to change.

In her current situation, she is going to have to make some decisions on what she wants to keep and what she can do without. That includes her current residence and her job. If she decides she wants to keep both, she's going to end up not eating, not buying clothes as they wear out, not being able to fix/buy a car, not paying the bills...

Considering the city there may not be cheaper living arrangements without going homeless, which should be the real issue here. Not her personal choices. (Fact is most of the homeless people in San Francisco used to have homes there until their landlords priced them out.)

General Zod wrote: Considering the city there may not be cheaper living arrangements without going homeless, which should be the real issue here. Not her personal choices. (Fact is most of the homeless people in San Francisco used to have homes there until their landlords priced them out.)

Hence why I suggest lodging with friends or family. But yes, that's also true. That's a problem outside of her personal control, though, and is more a larger social issue.

EDIT: Of course, if lodging with friends or family isn't an option, then yeah, she's pretty much screwed if she chooses to maintain her current situation.

Elheru Aran wrote:

General Zod wrote: Considering the city there may not be cheaper living arrangements without going homeless, which should be the real issue here. Not her personal choices. (Fact is most of the homeless people in San Francisco used to have homes there until their landlords priced them out.)

Hence why I suggest lodging with friends or family. But yes, that's also true. That's a problem outside of her personal control, though, and is more a larger social issue.

EDIT: Of course, if lodging with friends or family isn't an option, then yeah, she's pretty much screwed if she chooses to maintain her current situation.

I'm not sure why you keep describing it as a "choice" when it clearly isn't or she wouldn't be in it.

General Zod wrote:I'm not sure why you keep describing it as a "choice" when it clearly isn't or she wouldn't be in it.

Reading the original article (well, blog, whatever):

--Picked 'somewhere close' to her dad, rather than 'somewhere affordable'
--Deliberately used a credit card to move and accumulated debt on it (despite, ironically enough, stating a desire to avoid student loans)
--Sounds very much like she didn't do the math between her take-home pay and the cost of living in whatever area she moved into

So yeah, it kind of was a series of bad choices that got her into her current situation from the sound of it. It happens to anybody, but it looks like she jumped feet-first into debt as a result of wanting to get out of a bad situation at home after graduating college and not thinking it through properly before undertaking a somewhat impulsive move.

Elheru Aran wrote:

General Zod wrote:I'm not sure why you keep describing it as a "choice" when it clearly isn't or she wouldn't be in it.

Reading the original article (well, blog, whatever):

--Picked 'somewhere close' to her dad, rather than 'somewhere affordable'
--Deliberately used a credit card to move and accumulated debt on it (despite, ironically enough, stating a desire to avoid student loans)
--Sounds very much like she didn't do the math between her take-home pay and the cost of living in whatever area she moved into

So yeah, it kind of was a series of bad choices that got her into her current situation from the sound of it. It happens to anybody, but it looks like she jumped feet-first into debt as a result of wanting to get out of a bad situation at home after graduating college and not thinking it through properly before undertaking a somewhat impulsive move.

I'm not talking about the choices that got her there, I'm talking about acting like she has a choice of going anywhere else. I mean it's pretty clear she already tried to escape one bad situation and wound up in a shittier? Just as shitty? situation.

salm wrote:Perhaps not. Perhaps she´s force to take it because there´s nothing else and this is in the US where the social safety net is rather thin.

And obviously nobody is forcing the company to not be assholes.
Just because there are people who either out of necessity or idiocy take jobs they don´t want or should not take doesn´t mean that the companies in question are not assholes.
At least if you believe that compaines should have more social responsibility besides "make money no matter how".
If you don´t blelive the latter then it´s probably the government who is an asshole and tolerates such definciencies.

they also have the social responsibility to not lie, cheat, and steal, and a social responsibility to abide by tyheir contracts.

General Zod wrote: Speaking from personal experience it's almost impossible to save up enough money to make those kind of changes when the rent is your single biggest expense and you don't have any sort of financial cushion left when you live in one of the world's most expensive cities.

she can not take an advance to her credit card to move to a cheaper place like Red Bluff or Placerville?

salm wrote:This is not a good option. You should be able to live on the income your job provides you with without burdening other people.
There are companies that rely on such bullshit, usually for internship positions, and they are the scum of the earth.

How much value does a call center job create?

Starglider wrote:There is no reason for these kind of low-paid customer service call centre positions to be located in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country.

Indeed, the job markets for such positions in such areas are almost limited to young, single people still living with their parents, or retirees receiving SSI or pension income.