I agree with the parameters that Barbara Ehrenreich has set for her experiment (regarding whether or not a person can live on minimum wage). The rules that Ehrenreich designed for experiment allow her to fully experience the effects of living on minimum wage. She does not have any advantage over those who must make the most with what they have. For instance, the first rule that Ehreinreich creates for herself prevents her from relying on previously learned skills. In her search for jobs, she would refrain from applying for jobs that she was already skilled in, or applying her education to the performance of her jobs. This would put her at the same level as those who were trying to sustain a living, without a high education. Ehreinreich also decided that she would have to perform her job to the best of her ability so she would not risk the chance of losing it. This would also put her on the same basis as those living on a low-income. Lastly, in order to conduct an effective experiment, Ehreinreich decided that she would have to find the cheapest living accommodation. This would allow her to efficiently save money and sustain a living while in poverty.
2. What potential biases may exist, how does Ehrenreich try to account for these biases—and eliminate them from her study?
Ehrenreich presents the biased opinions that she is superior to other applicants for low-wage jobs, simply because she is educated. Ehrenreich accounts for these biases by verifying that she has an education, but also refuting the argument that she is superior to others. She eliminates the biases from her study, by claiming that her education is not relevant in the low-wage jobs she performs. She also firmly states that low-wage workers are no different from those who are educated. She does not have an advantage over low-wage workers because she does not have experience in the jobs that she applies for. Ehreinreich also claims that low-wage workers share the same feelings as educated workers, and should be treated equally. Overall, Ehrenreich refuses to agree that she is superior to low-wage workers and has an advantage over them, as a result of her education.
3. What do you think her findings will be? Why?
I think that Barbara Ehreinreich will find that it is not possible for her to put herself in the same position as those forced to live on a low-wage income. In other words, Ehreinreich has an advantage over those forced to live on a low-wage income, and has the option to “cheat”. Ehreinreich is a white female with the ability to speak English and communicate well with others in an American society. Although she may not indicate her intelligence or experience in certain areas to her employees, she already has the advantage of being a white, English speaking citizen. This is a desirable trait for many employees who wish to have their workers to communicate with their buyers. In addition, Ehreinrich has the opportunity to “cheat” if need be. If this author cannot pay for a meal, she has the choice of using her credit card to pay for it. Also, she is picky with her accommodations and has the choice to end the project if she becomes homeless. Those who are truly living on a low-income do not have the option to return to a comfortable life. Therefore, Barbara Ehreinrich would not be truly experiencing the results of living off of a low-income. She would not be forced to make critical decisions, and see if she could survive on her own. Ultimately, the results may not be entirely accurate, if she claims that she was able to survive on a low-salary.
No comments:
Post a Comment