Yes! This has been an outrage. What this does is pit the "haves" against the "have nots" once again, especially for young people in college or grad students. It means that you have to be able to afford to live with no income while working full time. It is much more likely that they are people whose rent and food are paid for by the bank of Mom and Dad, or students who go into debt for the "opportunity". Among the worst offenders include government at all levels, as they only can "hire"( is that the right term for having someone work for you for the mere experience of it all?). Congress, the White House, law firms, etc they are taking on interns who by definition are likely coming from means, and this is the norm. Most Americans as college students learned how difficult it was to earn minimum wage as teens and college students. And of course now it is rare for students not to be working part time during the school year at some job for pay (federal work study...washing pots and pans, filing and helping out in labs, cleaning etc) Summer jobs included working at fast food, retail, theme parks, light factory work, nannying, lifeguarding, detasseling corn in southern Minnesota, resort work etc). You ended up appreciating that if you were fortunate enough to complete your degree, you maintained a high degree of respect for people who labor in these jobs. Internships are now almost required by employers. How can people who have nobody to pay their expense afford to work for nothing? Would love to know why politicians think they should hire people for nothing. It just means kids who need to work for a living will not become involved in politics. Haves versus have nots. Would love to hear how anyone can defend this practice.
Posted on: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 23:25:16 +0000