"Boo hoo," the ABC host says to their struggles The post ‘The View’ Host Joy Behar Scoffs at Young People Feeling ‘Left Behind by the Economy’: ‘Oh Please, Get a Job!’ appeared first on TheWrap.
Every now and then, there's an article about some dumb shit a person on The View says. My reaction is always surprise that The View is still even a thing.
I don't really understand who their target audience is. They would've been conservative 20 years ago, but today I think they just cater to saying whatever middleclass boomers want to hear.
A combination of that and knowing that comments like that will get articles like this, garnering them more attention and views. Ragebait may have become a recent Big Problem in the algorithms of social media, but it's been around forever. Howard Stern and Jerry Springer built their fortunes on it.
It's a fossilized turd. My guess is, there's so much fierce competition for eyeballs these days, if the advertisers think 200 people are actually watching it, they get pretty excited.
Boomer with 30 million dollars earned by having uneducated conversations with uneducated women to entertain uneducated women tells young people to just "get a job".
Many people would be surprised how many homeless people have (hard science) degrees or used to be very succesful. Bad luck, medical debt, (mental-)health issues, company goes bankrupt due to circumstances beyond your control, etc.
The world isn't fair. You can work really hard, and end up in the oven of a concentration camp, despite what the slogan above the gate said.
Of course, if you're a relatively talentless hack who's won the equivalent of the lottery despite not really deserving it that much, it's nicer to think that you deserve it because of your inate talent. Vanity. It's the Devil's favourite sin.
Master's degree in microbiology with a serious disability here. If not for my wife, I'd have been on the streets since it took 23 doctors to get a diagnosis. This lady can get fucked.
Also without any warning or planning -- could be cancer, could be a freak accident. You never know if/when a medical emergency might happen, so you're always in an odd state of financial limbo even though it may not appear that way. You could be doing just fine squirreling away a few hundred or thousand here and there and one trip to the ER will quickly take back most of that nest egg. Even with insurance, it's absurd how much you can still be on the hook for. What's the alternative though, forgo medical treatment?
As an almost 50 year old gen x who is on disability I will never bad mouth the younger generations for having a hard time financially. I am right there with you. I'll never own my own home, the only reason I can afford my rent is because I've been in the same apartment for 10 years. I'm paying less for a 2 bedroom apartment than it costs to rent a single room these days. I'm going to have to live here until I die because I'll never be able to afford to move.
Groceries have skyrocketed just since covid and they weren't cheap to begin with either. Even before covid I was paying more for a week's worth of groceries than I was for a months worth of groceries in the 90s.
Times aren't just tough, they're fucking impossible.
Fuck the view lol. Everyone that gets a job on that show turns into a jackass, braying their bullshit at top volume. It's the worst side of television.
Oh no man, she's had a rough life - started at Good Morning America as a receptionist and basically turned that into a comedy career, she's a working stiff lol. Behar was born Josephine Victoria Occhiuto in 1942. Something tells me she's a bit out of touch here in the 21st century.
Now that's just not accurate. Either way she's a giant piece of shit, it's only a question of how ignorant she is and whether or not she's choosing to be that way.
I haven't seen it in ages, and I can't critique the approach, but the maker of SuperSize Me tried to spend 30 days doing a minimum wage job. Iirc, it wasn't great and they had so much debt by the end of it.
I wish these people could get a similar perspective.
McDonald's made an article about how to live on a McDonald's wage with average costs. They couldn't make it work so the first line in their budget was to get a second job.
Love how the breakdown of monthly expenses that McDonald's provided includes "Heating: $0"
Warmth really is a luxury when you think about it though...right? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
They were basically saying it's perfectly normal to work 70-hour weeks and still hardly be able to cover their made-up costs of living (actual costs are much higher in my area, and presumably in most others as well). Oh, and I'm using heat--so I'm pretty much gonna be in debt for life. Guess we should have gone to college/less avocado toast/whatever. But that's just business! Don't hate the player, hate the game! Blah blah blah (งツ)ว
Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a great book about this called Nickel and Dimed. She was a full time journalist and set out to get a job at a diner and find a place to live on the salary.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_and_Dimed
This is why it infuriates me so much when people argue that some jobs, "Aren't meant to pay well and live on."
From the social standpoint: then if that's your argument, anyone looking to support themselves had better be able to find a job that pays better for the skills they have. This not being the case, it suggests that these people are in fact trying to support themselves, they've just found themselves on the wrong side of the capitalist meat grinder, and the argument of the job being one that "isn't supposed to support you" is nothing more than a distraction so you don't have to say the real reason: because you'd rather have the person that serves your diner breakfast be trapped in an endless cycle of poverty than pay an extra dollar for your meal. You're complicit in the process and you like it.
From the individual standpoint: ignoring for a moment the questions of who gets to decide these sorts of things and where the cutoff lies...isn't it really just creating a convenient circular excuse for greed? These jobs have low pay because they're not meant to support oneself on...but the reason they're not meant to support oneself on is because they have low pay? And that's good enough of an explanation?! People, especially older boomers, like to paint with broad strokes and imply that service industry jobs are "for teenagers in the summer and college kids putting themselves through school", as a way to somehow justify low pay. Now regardless of the demographics of the employee (and we won't even touch the idea of working at any job, much less service industry, to pay for college as you attend in this day and age)... regardless of all that...doesn't it make sense that whoever is doing the work, if the same work is being done the pay should be the same? Granted there's room for seniority, experience, skill, dependability, etc. but the point I'm getting at here is: isn't it ridiculous to say that a kid should be paid less for doing a given job just because they're a kid?
And regardless of where you stand on the exploitation of child labor, either answer leads you back to the same point: either it's not okay to exploit kids, so kids should make the same as an adult for the same work, so we can pay these workers fairly...or you think it is okay to exploit child labor, in which case, that only makes it okay to short the kids' pay...not the adults. Either way, the only explanation left for subsistence pay for adults is: the system is victimizing the working poor like an elephant sized parasite latched onto an ant, and justifying it by suggesting that if the ant doesn't like it they should just try, you know, making more money.
I remember a young journalist in my country that tried to do that a long time ago. He was a rich spoiled kid who got into the newspaper by nepotism and wanted to make a name for himself. He had no clue what it was like to live on minimum wage (which is earned by the majority here). On the first few days he was already way beyond the budget. He actually went to the restaurant "just once". Readers were laughing how clueless he was and he'd be starving before the 3rd week. It didn't happen because the column mysteriously vanished after week 2.
If I cared any less about what she thinks I wouldn't have commented about not caring what she thinks. Really I only care because a lot of old ladies will parrot this nonsense.