oski003 said:
okaydo said:
Perhaps lifeguards are too expensive. Government is silly.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/english.elpais.com/society/2022-06-16/lifeguards-in-los-angeles-earned-up-to-us500k-per-year.html%3foutputType=amp
New York City was only paying $16 an hour for lifeguards, which is $1 more than minimum wage. As a result, there was a "iifeguard shortage" because there weren't enough people available at that extremely low salary for living in the New York City area. Adams was criticized because amid the lifeguard shortage, he tried and failed to boost police spending by nearly $200 million.
At $16 an hour, you're probably going to live in a place that's going to cost you 3 weeks of your monthly salary for your monthly rent.
That "shortage" resulted in closed pools. We would all agree that keeping pools open to keep youths busy is a good thing. And closing pools is a bad thing, right?

Days after the 4th of July, Adams announced that lifeguard salaries were being raised to $19.46 an hour.

Now what does this have to do with Los Angeles County lifeguards? I have no idea. Los Angeles County lifeguards are just different animals.
Ok, some people (with manager-sounding titles) make six figures.
But the Los Angeles County lifeguards are part of the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Their mission goes way beyond saving people from drowning.
I think the problem is that lifeguards are looked as equivalent to the fry cook at McDonald's, 7-Eleven clerk, teacher or other jobs that people consider lowly.
But they provide an important service (even moreso in L.A. County).