Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Intercept)   Basic math says minimum wage should be $24 an hour   (theintercept.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Minimum wage, United States Senate, federal minimum wage, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Minimum wage in the United States, United States Congress, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, minimum wage  
•       •       •

1698 clicks; posted to Business » on 25 Jul 2021 at 8:45 AM (19 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

 
2021-07-25 8:57:34 AM  
50 votes:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


static.tvtropes.orgView Full Size
 
2021-07-25 9:52:11 AM  
17 votes:
Downside is do you want to pay $15 for a Big Mac?
 
2021-07-25 7:50:35 AM  
15 votes:
Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.
 
2021-07-25 8:53:17 AM  
11 votes:
If everyone pushes hard enough, we might get it to $9.25 in a few years, after a year of $8-ish to help job creators acclimate.
 
2021-07-25 9:00:31 AM  
11 votes:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


"Al, Let's Have Sex. Uh, No Peg." *flush*
Youtube 2GrdgPzi3-Q
 
2021-07-25 9:26:59 AM  
11 votes:
I'd like to see someone take out the top .05% and recalculate the median wage..
 
2021-07-25 9:42:09 AM  
11 votes:
$24? Psshaw. Why not make it farking $50? Or $100? I mean, surely the buying power of a dollar will remain exactly the same and we'll all be UMC. Better start building more Whole Foods, yoga studios and Porsche dealers stat.
 
2021-07-25 10:14:30 AM  
11 votes:

Chief Superintendent Lookout: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

You know, the so-called "job creators" kept saying if wages were increased that automation would be more commonplace.  Notice how increased automation hasn't happened? It's all a BS scare tactic.


It is happening... MSM won't tell you.
 
2021-07-25 11:00:19 AM  
11 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-07-25 9:40:36 AM  
10 votes:

bighairyguy: I don't think the Constitution allows for math.


cough 3/5 cough
 
2021-07-25 9:41:54 AM  
8 votes:

rustypouch: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

There's a few ways to deal with this issue. The ones that come immediately to mind involve everyone working less. UBI, or a shortened work week, for example? What if full time was 25-30 hours a week?


Wages go up, product manufactured costs more, sales drop, workers laid off...  reality.
 
2021-07-25 9:47:08 AM  
8 votes:
Why do you want to steal money from the shareholders and executives?

They deserve it more than those stinky nasty worker poors.
 
2021-07-25 11:48:05 AM  
8 votes:
Want better paying jobs???
Outlaw all but the absolute most basic manufacturing and services performed outside of North America.
Once all Manufacturing has been brought back to North America the unions would reorganize and force wages to be where they're supposed to be.
Orrrrr if thats too difficult.
Mandate into law that companies much profit share quarterly with the employees.
No reason for Apple or Google to just sit on top of 8 Trillion each when they can spread that out to the employees who in turn would spend and so on.
But its also Sunday morning and I've been drinking so take it with a grain of vodka.
 
2021-07-25 9:23:25 AM  
7 votes:
Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...
 
2021-07-25 3:41:41 PM  
7 votes:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


Regular guy? Do you think a regular guy could score four touchdowns in a single game for Polk High?

I don't think so.
 
2021-07-25 9:17:10 AM  
6 votes:
$24/hour for 40 hours, 52 weeks a year is just under $50k. Google tells me the median wage in the US is ~$51k.

Upping the minimum to what the median is now is going to cause a lot of issues. You'd hope it would result in everybody's wages going up accordingly, but somehow I doubt it would be that easy.
 
2021-07-25 9:31:57 AM  
6 votes:
I don't think the Constitution allows for math.
 
2021-07-25 10:20:27 AM  
6 votes:

OlderGuy: Chief Superintendent Lookout: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

You know, the so-called "job creators" kept saying if wages were increased that automation would be more commonplace.  Notice how increased automation hasn't happened? It's all a BS scare tactic.

It is happening... MSM won't tell you.


There's also a way to melt belly fat with this one weird trick.
 
2021-07-25 12:31:15 PM  
6 votes:

sleze: If $24 is just enough to live on in San Francisco, it is higher than needed in Pascagoula.  If $24 is just enough to live on in Pascagoula, it is no where near enough to live on in San Francisco.

There should be a national BASELINE minimum wage PLUS COLAs for specific areas.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-07-25 3:14:55 PM  
6 votes:
Or..this os a novel idea...

Lower the freaking price on EVERYTHING!
There is no way the justification of price inflation can be proven.
$40k for a base pickup?
$12 for a Hamburger meal at sonic. ( I miss you brown bag special).
$800+ for a cellphone?
 
2021-07-25 12:15:27 PM  
5 votes:

sleze: If $24 is just enough to live on in San Francisco, it is higher than needed in Pascagoula.  If $24 is just enough to live on in Pascagoula, it is no where near enough to live on in San Francisco.

There should be a national BASELINE minimum wage PLUS COLAs for specific areas.


You're arguing that people shouldn't live well in places. That's your argument.
 
2021-07-25 12:40:17 PM  
5 votes:
It's wild to me that people will seriously try to argue that $24 is too much money for people in certain parts of the country, when billionaires exist.

The minimum wage shouldn't merely be enough for people to barely scrape by. It should be enough for them to live well on, as people who live well can afford to spend more money. And they have better mental and physical health. Poverty is literally bad for your health.
 
2021-07-25 12:55:06 PM  
5 votes:

trialpha: $24/hour for 40 hours, 52 weeks a year is just under $50k. Google tells me the median wage in the US is ~$51k.

Upping the minimum to what the median is now is going to cause a lot of issues. You'd hope it would result in everybody's wages going up accordingly, but somehow I doubt it would be that easy.


My wife has a Masters and her CPA, she makes just over $60K.  DRTFA, but whatever is being used for the calculation is garbage. Per the CPI, minimum wage should be around $15. Yes, some things have gone up more, others have gone up less.
 
2021-07-25 6:47:53 PM  
5 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-07-25 9:51:53 AM  
4 votes:

Linux_Yes: edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.

And then ronnie and his wall street boys took over.....


But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.
 
2021-07-25 10:00:18 AM  
4 votes:

NuclearPenguins: OlderGuy: rustypouch: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

There's a few ways to deal with this issue. The ones that come immediately to mind involve everyone working less. UBI, or a shortened work week, for example? What if full time was 25-30 hours a week?

Wages go up, product manufactured costs more, sales drop, workers laid off...  reality.

Have you ever been right about anything?


LOL
 
2021-07-25 10:09:54 AM  
4 votes:

OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...


You know, the so-called "job creators" kept saying if wages were increased that automation would be more commonplace.  Notice how increased automation hasn't happened?  It's all a BS scare tactic.
 
2021-07-25 1:51:38 PM  
4 votes:
Productivity gains are largely driven by expenditure of capital these days. If you want to participate, buy stocks.
 
2021-07-26 9:40:35 AM  
4 votes:

Saturn5: Maybe universal basic income is the answer and then do away with minimum wage completely.  If an employer wants to hire someone, they'll have to pay enough to make working worthwhile compared to getting paid to do nothing.


This right here.  Anyone who disagrees with this is completely wrong.
 
2021-07-26 12:43:25 PM  
4 votes:

Linux_Yes: edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.

And then ronnie and his wall street boys took over.....


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-07-25 9:38:48 AM  
3 votes:
What should be and what the GOP allows are exact opposites.
 
2021-07-25 10:19:07 AM  
3 votes:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


I'm a little skeptical.

I'm not old enough to "remember" that, but since you are stating it as fact, is there any sort of citation?

Or is this hyperbole?

Marcos P: 40 hours a week in a factory could also support a family...


This sounds a little more realistic (although I note mortgage isn't mentioned).
 
2021-07-25 10:27:21 AM  
3 votes:

OlderGuy: Chief Superintendent Lookout: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

You know, the so-called "job creators" kept saying if wages were increased that automation would be more commonplace.  Notice how increased automation hasn't happened? It's all a BS scare tactic.

It is happening... MSM won't tell you.


I guess it's fortunate for you that freedomeagle88.facebook was around to give you the real news while the rest of us muddle along with the lieberal mainstream msm media.
 
2021-07-25 1:08:38 PM  
3 votes:
Pay for productivity should hold. The one hr guy using quickbooks to handle all pay should be paid as much as a dozen folks doing it by hand 30 years ago.  Engineers should probably be paid 6 times more.  Not sure productivity at service level jobs has increased by a whole multiplier in the same time.
 
2021-07-25 2:04:03 PM  
3 votes:

sleze: austerity101: sleze: If $24 is just enough to live on in San Francisco, it is higher than needed in Pascagoula.  If $24 is just enough to live on in Pascagoula, it is no where near enough to live on in San Francisco.

There should be a national BASELINE minimum wage PLUS COLAs for specific areas.

You're arguing that people shouldn't live well in places. That's your argument.

No.  My argument is that the minimum wage is supposed to be the minimum wage to effectively live.  That differs greatly between a place where a 2 bedroom/2 bath house costs $75K to buy and and another place where it costs $1.3m to buy.  IMO, in Pascagoula, $24/hour is probably too high and in San Francisco, it is probably not enough.


You're wrong about the minimum wage, which was explicitly, explicitly intended not as a mere subsistence wage, but one on which people could live comfortably. Your whole argument is based on, "What's the absolute least we can pay people to barely take care of their needs?", and I'd argue it's time to toss that heinous paradigm and start paying people well across the board.

You're concerned that people in one part of the country will get too much money. That's the crux of your argument. You're trying to figure out how to pay people less.
 
2021-07-25 7:07:20 PM  
3 votes:

rustypouch: vpc: AsparagusFTW: every job from white collar to blue collar is on the line and soon.

I disagree. Every job that has repetitive, identical tasks that can be automated will increasingly see those changes. Jobs that are 100% repetitive and identical are on the line. Jobs that require critical thinking, decision making in rapidly changing circumstances, or telling the robots what to do are not.

I also disagree. I work jobs that cannot be automated. I'm outside building things in the summer, and teach people to ski in the winter.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-07-25 8:59:03 AM  
2 votes:
Basic math seldom turns a profit.
 
2021-07-25 9:03:32 AM  
2 votes:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


And then ronnie and his wall street boys took over.....
 
2021-07-25 9:04:40 AM  
2 votes:

fragMasterFlash: Basic math seldom turns a profit.


Lazy sit at home stock owners are not interested in basic math.
 
2021-07-25 10:11:44 AM  
2 votes:

kdawg7736: Downside is do you want to pay $15 for a Big Mac?


Someone bought into the lie hard.

That isn't how our system works. When you actually listen to the executives they occasionally give up the game. They will say that the prices reflect "what the market with bear." which means there is a maximum price they can charge for a good or service and they charge that price whether they pay no taxes and low wages or pay their fair share in taxes and a living wage. The only difference is the profit that executives and shareholders get to skim off the top. Since the amount the wealthy have today far exceeds what they had in the gilded age it could use some trimming.
 
2021-07-25 10:35:27 AM  
2 votes:

kdawg7736: Downside is do you want to pay $15 for a Big Mac?


Thats proven murcan propaganda.

Ud pay a 25 cents more. At most

Ever heard of Economies of scale??
 
2021-07-25 10:37:09 AM  
2 votes:

Eddie Hazel's E string: trialpha: $24/hour for 40 hours, 52 weeks a year is just under $50k. Google tells me the median wage in the US is ~$51k.

Upping the minimum to what the median is now is going to cause a lot of issues. You'd hope it would result in everybody's wages going up accordingly, but somehow I doubt it would be that easy.

Not all hourly positions are full time. Not even close. Many workers also work only seasonally. I appreciate your line of thinking, but raising minimum wage to $24 / hr doesn't suddenly make the minimum income $50K.


24 is a bit high
Except for expensive large cities
 
2021-07-25 11:25:34 AM  
2 votes:

lynxi: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

automation reckoning is coming sooner or latter utopia or dystopia is our chose to make now


When I was furloughed I took a quick job at Amazon. First thing I told my parents when I called them was "Tech is coming for every job. You hear about it in the news, I just saw it."

There is an excellent book on the subject called Price of Tomorrow by Booth. His thesis is that since tech is coming for everything we are essentially fighting a deflationary force with inflationary monetary policy and they dont jive until collapse. Great read.

Even in accounting and finance im seeing it with software. It can play out a million ways but every job from white collar to blue collar is on the line and soon.
 
2021-07-25 12:15:59 PM  
2 votes:

vpc: AsparagusFTW: every job from white collar to blue collar is on the line and soon.

I disagree. Every job that has repetitive, identical tasks that can be automated will increasingly see those changes. Jobs that are 100% repetitive and identical are on the line. Jobs that require critical thinking, decision making in rapidly changing circumstances, or telling the robots what to do are not.


I also disagree. I work jobs that cannot be automated. I'm outside building things in the summer, and teach people to ski in the winter.
 
2021-07-25 12:40:16 PM  
2 votes:
While automation has been an issue for a long time, today it is mostly used as misdirection.
Whenever someone talks about lowering wages ,they act like you need to accept what you get or they will automate those jobs.
For the most past ,that is just a scare tactic to get you to shut up.

You can see the real issue by looking at how much companies are investing in slavery around the world and the elimination of human rights.
 
2021-07-25 2:05:37 PM  
2 votes:
Like, what does "too high" as a minimum wage even mean? What are you afraid of, that poor people won't be so poor any more?
 
2021-07-25 3:45:15 PM  
2 votes:

wildlifer: Or..this os a novel idea...

Lower the freaking price on EVERYTHING!
There is no way the justification of price inflation can be proven.
$40k for a base pickup?
$12 for a Hamburger meal at sonic. ( I miss you brown bag special).
$800+ for a cellphone?


You can only squeeze so much from the employees, that CEO compensation has to come from somewhere.
 
2021-07-25 7:34:52 PM  
2 votes:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


pbs.twimg.comView Full Size
 
2021-07-25 8:46:37 PM  
2 votes:

trialpha: adamatari: I worked in a factory and made more with a 2 year than I ever made with my 4 year degree (over $50k). If I had kept it up, I would easily be over $60k. But I would also be working overtime in a factory, doing physical, dangerous work.

Yes, your physical, dangerous job paid more than an easier/safer job. As it should.

The problem is if if you increase the minimum wage too much, you suddenly have a bunch of physical, dangerous jobs, or jobs requiring lots of education, etc. being paid less than safer, easier jobs. You need to adjust the wages of the dangerous jobs as well, or your going to have problems.


.....So?

It Just means that you'll have to pay the person who is risking their lives on your behalf more... And that you need to pay the person who is up to their elbows in your toilet cleaning it what they're actually worth, rather than the few bucks you've been getting away with until now.

"I don't want to be fair to you because then I would need to start being fair to all these other people too, so FARK ALL OF YOU!" doesn't exactly make you look like the knight in shining armor here. Calling essential workers "heroes" while patting yourself on the back for "recognizing" them is nothing but an insult.

You're literally advocating perpetuating institutional injustice so you won't be mildly inconvenienced yourself.
 
2021-07-25 9:01:41 PM  
2 votes:

137 Is An Excellent Time: Fact: At no point since the inception of the minimum wage could someone working 40 hours a week support any more than a basic standard of living in a one-bedroom apartment with the bare essentials of living. At no point in time could someone support a family on minimum wage. At no point could someone afford to buy a house on minimum wage.

The initial minimum wage under FDR was the equivalent of $4/hr in 2021.

Now, this isn't to say it shouldn't be raised - it absolutely should be, but the idea that it needs to be raised to the equivalent of today's median wage is not just idiotic, it's revisionist history at its worst.


Fact. $4/hr would allow you to eat and pay your bills when FDR enacted it.
 
2021-07-25 11:06:17 PM  
2 votes:

Saturn5: Yes, minimum wage should be raised, but to hear some people it should be high enough for a family of 4 to own a house and 2 cars in the suburbs for a job that has a skill level to fit a high school kid working part time after school.

Minimum wage jobs were never intended to be 20 year career positions.  They were supposed to be low or no skill jobs where anyone can get a job without experience and learn on the job, then move up to higher paying positions as your skills improve. 

Before we can decide how much minimum wage should be, as a nation we should probably first decide who a typical minimum wage job is targeted towards.


Why shouldn't any job be enough to afford to raise a family? To argue that is to argue that any parent who has to have one of those jobs doesn't deserve to afford things. How do you justify that standpoint?

You can't say "These jobs are for teenagers/single people." You just can't do that, because that's not how the job market works.
 
2021-07-26 9:27:00 AM  
2 votes:

lizyrd: Oliver Twisted: Mcavity: I'd like to see someone take out the top .05% and recalculate the median wage..

I doubt it would have a huge impact.  I do believe you are confusing income with wealth.

I doubt it would have a huge impact, but for no other reason than what "median" means.


Please don't make me relive my statistics classes.
 
2021-07-26 9:50:23 AM  
2 votes:
price go up at grocery store at begining of the month because more people get their checks.

rising the min wage will only change stuff for 1-2 year before price adjust again to make you poor.

it's maximum wages/wealth that is needed.
 
2021-07-25 9:32:10 AM  
1 vote:

OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...


automation reckoning is coming sooner or latter utopia or dystopia is our chose to make now
 
2021-07-25 9:48:24 AM  
1 vote:

OlderGuy: rustypouch: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

There's a few ways to deal with this issue. The ones that come immediately to mind involve everyone working less. UBI, or a shortened work week, for example? What if full time was 25-30 hours a week?

Wages go up, product manufactured costs more, sales drop, workers laid off...  reality.


Have you ever been right about anything?
 
2021-07-25 9:50:42 AM  
1 vote:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


Thank you, Al.

Now go back to drooling in the corner.
 
2021-07-25 9:54:15 AM  
1 vote:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


40 hours a week in a factory could also support a family...
 
2021-07-25 9:58:19 AM  
1 vote:

kdawg7736: Downside is do you want to pay $15 for a Big Mac?


Or reduce the executive compensation of the company by 30% and keep prices the same?
 
2021-07-25 9:58:28 AM  
1 vote:

trialpha: $24/hour for 40 hours, 52 weeks a year is just under $50k. Google tells me the median wage in the US is ~$51k.

Upping the minimum to what the median is now is going to cause a lot of issues. You'd hope it would result in everybody's wages going up accordingly, but somehow I doubt it would be that easy.


Not all hourly positions are full time. Not even close. Many workers also work only seasonally. I appreciate your line of thinking, but raising minimum wage to $24 / hr doesn't suddenly make the minimum income $50K.
 
2021-07-25 10:10:10 AM  
1 vote:

OlderGuy: rustypouch: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

There's a few ways to deal with this issue. The ones that come immediately to mind involve everyone working less. UBI, or a shortened work week, for example? What if full time was 25-30 hours a week?

Wages go up, product manufactured costs more, sales drop, workers laid off...  reality.


or

Wages go up - product manufactured costs go up - slightly, sales rise as more can afford products, company expands hiring more workers to meat increased demand,, reality - according to Henry Ford..
 
2021-07-25 10:20:06 AM  
1 vote:
Automation gets cheaper every year. Anything that can be automated eventually will be. Keeping wages low so that people don't get replaced by automation just delays the inevitable.
 
2021-07-25 10:33:52 AM  
1 vote:

pehvbot: Linux_Yes: edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.

And then ronnie and his wall street boys took over.....

But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.


By paying labor less and using offshore tax shelters
And reducing employee healthcare, etc

Yea it was golden for sit at home stock owners.....

Labor creates wealth. Labor came before wealth and deserves the higher regard.
A. Lincoln
 
2021-07-25 10:38:22 AM  
1 vote:

Chief Superintendent Lookout: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

You know, the so-called "job creators" kept saying if wages were increased that automation would be more commonplace.  Notice how increased automation hasn't happened?  It's all a BS scare tactic.


Imagine that
Rich stock owners lying......
 
2021-07-25 10:41:10 AM  
1 vote:

Mcavity: OlderGuy: rustypouch: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

There's a few ways to deal with this issue. The ones that come immediately to mind involve everyone working less. UBI, or a shortened work week, for example? What if full time was 25-30 hours a week?

Wages go up, product manufactured costs more, sales drop, workers laid off...  reality.

or

Wages go up - product manufactured costs go up - slightly, sales rise as more can afford products, company expands hiring more workers to meat increased demand,, reality - according to Henry Ford..


Only demand for goods and services creates jobs.  And people have to have enough disposable income to buy goods and services.

Lazy rich sit at home stock owners do not create jobs

Thread over
 
2021-07-25 10:44:40 AM  
1 vote:

DON.MAC: kdawg7736: Downside is do you want to pay $15 for a Big Mac?

Do you know how much less work it takes to make a Big Mac today than it did 30 years ago?  The frozen to cooked stage is about 1/10 the labor.  Separating the styrofoam box compared to the new cardboard boxes takes significantly less time.  They are already using robotic drink dispensers and they have experimental robots that can do most of the back kitchen cooking. Most orders around here are now self entered so no one needs to be at the cash register. If they can find a way to get a robot to clean the kitchen and dining areas, they will be running a pace with one person if they can.


And AI is replacing white collar jobs too.
 
2021-07-25 10:47:40 AM  
1 vote:

Mcavity: I'd like to see someone take out the top .05% and recalculate the median wage..


I find it incredibly fitting that someone posted this in a thread about basic math, and it got a bunch of smarts.
 
2021-07-25 10:53:24 AM  
1 vote:

OlderGuy: Chief Superintendent Lookout: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

You know, the so-called "job creators" kept saying if wages were increased that automation would be more commonplace.  Notice how increased automation hasn't happened? It's all a BS scare tactic.

It is happening... MSM won't tell you.


th.bing.comView Full Size
 
2021-07-25 11:02:43 AM  
1 vote:

Flowery Twats: Dr.Fey: edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.

I'm a little skeptical.

I'm not old enough to "remember" that, but since you are stating it as fact, is there any sort of citation?

Or is this hyperbole?

Marcos P: 40 hours a week in a factory could also support a family...

This sounds a little more realistic (although I note mortgage isn't mentioned).

I'll give you another data point: the wife put herself through state university by working summers in a factory and 15 hrs a week at work study.  4 years and a degree on part time work. Try that now. And yet, lots of kids in the 70s were doing the same thing.


I'm with ya, and thank you.

I'm mostly skeptical about the shoe salesperson thing, though even that is kind of a "buggy-whip" problem, comparing the '70s to today.

A shoe salesperson in my world is either a teen wearing a hamulating zebra stripe shirt in a mall Footlocker or a person in a suit at Macy's, and I am likely to simply order shoes on-line regardless.

I suppose being a shoe salesperson in the '70s might be no different than being a low-end IT person these days.  While the latter seems to me to have more status, I really have no idea if that's the case.  It's my own myopic view from living in the present day.
 
2021-07-25 11:08:53 AM  
1 vote:

OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...


Automating all the jobs no one wants + UBI + good wages for the jobs that remain = Zero poverty, everyone does what they want to do, companies still make tons of money since they're not paying the robots, everyone's happy

The Agrarian Revolution required the invention of money as barter was no longer feasible as a primary trade method, the Industrial Revolution required overtime pay and minimum wage to not leave people starving (and revolting) in the streets, and the Digitial Revolution requires UBI, socialized medicine, and stronger wages.

Civilization will advance with or without us. I'd like to see with.
 
2021-07-25 11:14:58 AM  
1 vote:

ImOscar: [Fark user image 425x500]


That poster's less of a joke than it initially looks like, especially with the numbers they picked... but automation is going to eliminate 50-60% of the needed labor in 20-25 years, so 20-hour work weeks may actually be the norm at that point, it's not unreasonable to demand that your 20 hours be spread over no more than 4 days, and given 20-25 years of inflation and the fact that wages will nearly double since the same work is done with half of the time, the minimum wage is probably going to be $50+/hour at that point, so the $69 isn't even much of an exaggeration. So yeah, the poster is, obviously a 420 69 joke, and that's why those specific numbers are there... but the general concept's surprisingly close to what I'd expect a Scandinavian country to look like in a couple of decades.
 
2021-07-25 11:22:24 AM  
1 vote:

edmo: Before the usual arguments start, just remember in the late 70s a regular guy could sell shoes and support a wife, two kids, and a mortgage payment.


Well, no, a guy who managed a shoe shop, maybe a senior assistant could do that.

But that was a more responsible job back then. If you ran a shop as part of a chain, it was largely your shop to run. You did the hiring, set policy, did the ordering of things etc etc. What happened between the 70s and today is that more and more of that was managed centrally. They literally send out plans to branches of what is going to go on what shelf, track sales and stock and order it for the stores.

Lots of jobs go from high status to low status because of automation and improved processes.

On top of all that, more women in the workplace, bringing in a salary for longer has pushed up housing costs. The family with 1 salary are trumped by a family with a salary and a part time wife.
 
vpc
2021-07-25 11:43:42 AM  
1 vote:

AsparagusFTW: every job from white collar to blue collar is on the line and soon.


I disagree. Every job that has repetitive, identical tasks that can be automated will increasingly see those changes. Jobs that are 100% repetitive and identical are on the line. Jobs that require critical thinking, decision making in rapidly changing circumstances, or telling the robots what to do are not.
 
2021-07-25 11:58:51 AM  
1 vote:

lynxi: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

automation reckoning is coming sooner or latter utopia or dystopia is our chose to make now


Dystopia for the many is utopia for the few
 
2021-07-25 12:16:22 PM  
1 vote:

lynxi: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

automation reckoning is coming sooner or latter utopia or dystopia is our chose to make now


Automation is dramatically increasing workers productivity, except 90% of that value increase is going to the idle rich.  Who are blowing the money on space travel, mega-yachts (used for tax evasion), and lobbyists to undermine labor.
 
2021-07-25 12:37:06 PM  
1 vote:

OlderGuy: Chief Superintendent Lookout: OlderGuy: Higher wages = more automation = less jobs available..  vicious circle, indeed...

You know, the so-called "job creators" kept saying if wages were increased that automation would be more commonplace.  Notice how increased automation hasn't happened? It's all a BS scare tactic.

It is happening... MSM won't tell you.


You're saying we shouldn't raise wages because it will cause automation.

And you're saying automation is already happening, despite the fact that we haven't raised wages.

So your second claim completely contradicts your first claim. So which is it? Is it painful being that stupid?
 
2021-07-25 12:46:21 PM  
1 vote:
You can accept all the shiatty wages and subhuman treatment you want - they will still automate your job if they possibly can.
That's the only determiner - whether or no they can do it - if they can, they will, and all the capitalist cock in creation sucked won't save your job.
 
2021-07-25 12:50:00 PM  
1 vote:

austerity101: It's wild to me that people will seriously try to argue that $24 is too much money for people in certain parts of the country, when billionaires exist.

The minimum wage shouldn't merely be enough for people to barely scrape by. It should be enough for them to live well on, as people who live well can afford to spend more money. And they have better mental and physical health. Poverty is literally bad for your health.


Yes, I completely agree with you. I think the people making those arguments have a misconception about the way certain economic factors impact others, as you can see in this thread. They start to panic about what they believe would change in the marketplace due to the wage increase.
 
2021-07-25 1:13:51 PM  
1 vote:

drewogatory: $24? Psshaw. Why not make it farking $50? Or $100? I mean, surely the buying power of a dollar will remain exactly the same and we'll all be UMC. Better start building more Whole Foods, yoga studios and Porsche dealers stat.


I love this bullshiat argument. If we pay people a higher minimum wage then they will have luxury goods and that makes me less special.

No they won't be buying fancy sports cars or luxury watches. They might get to pay for rent food and medication. I mean all in the same month, that would be weird. People might be able to go from 3 roommates to just one. Single parent families might be able to go for a week's vacation to Disney every other year or so.

Maybe that means some people will have to have only 2 vacation houses. Maybe that watch drawer only holds 6 priceless pieces instead of twenty.

But hey f*ck em. I got look out for me. Right?
 
2021-07-25 1:16:52 PM  
1 vote:

austerity101: sleze: If $24 is just enough to live on in San Francisco, it is higher than needed in Pascagoula.  If $24 is just enough to live on in Pascagoula, it is no where near enough to live on in San Francisco.

There should be a national BASELINE minimum wage PLUS COLAs for specific areas.

You're arguing that people shouldn't live well in places. That's your argument.


No.  My argument is that the minimum wage is supposed to be the minimum wage to effectively live.  That differs greatly between a place where a 2 bedroom/2 bath house costs $75K to buy and and another place where it costs $1.3m to buy.  IMO, in Pascagoula, $24/hour is probably too high and in San Francisco, it is probably not enough.
 
2021-07-25 1:19:35 PM  
1 vote:
Screw linking it to productivity gains -- link it to CEO pay/compensation/bonus/stock holdings raises.
 
2021-07-25 2:31:47 PM  
1 vote:

austerity101: You're wrong about the minimum wage, which was explicitly, explicitly intended not as a mere subsistence wage, but one on which people could live comfortably.


You might want to really be sure to avoid reading the explicit reason why the minimum wage was enacted.
 
2021-07-25 2:47:19 PM  
1 vote:

BMFPitt: Saiga410: Pay for productivity should hold. The one hr guy using quickbooks to handle all pay should be paid as much as a dozen folks doing it by hand 30 years ago.  Engineers should probably be paid 6 times more.  Not sure productivity at service level jobs has increased by a whole multiplier in the same time.

Why?


I want a 6x raise
 
2021-07-25 5:01:03 PM  
1 vote:
Yes. Now that you know that wage slavery exists and that the money which should've gone to improve lower class & lower middle class incomes has been siphoned off them by the rich since the '80s, what, do you think, is going to be done about it?

Very farking little. The whole point of the $15 minimum wage isn't to correct the obvious inequity, but to set a new wage slavery standard. Until the minimum wage is somehow tied to the GDP in a meaningful way - ideally through a guaranteed basic income - raising it even to $15 an hour is a shallow gesture meant to mollify, not mitigate. The theater around raising the minimum wage is meant to make you thankful for it. That's it.
 
2021-07-25 5:57:03 PM  
1 vote:

majestic: kdawg7736: Downside is do you want to pay $15 for a Big Mac?

How much does a Big Mac cost in those socialist shiatholes like Norway?


Fark user imageView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size


What's going on at US McDonalds:

Fark user imageView Full Size


If crew members are paid the same, the cost is likely in the ballpark.
 
2021-07-25 5:59:44 PM  
1 vote:

austerity101: Like, what does "too high" as a minimum wage even mean? What are you afraid of, that poor people won't be so poor any more?


Economically, that's exactly the problem. Look at what having slightly extended protections over the pandemic did - suddenly a lot of people are refusing to do hard work, at long hours, for poor wages.

The economy of "cheap stuff" relies on cheap labor to provide it, not just overseas but cheap labor in manufacturing and services that cannot be provided overseas. The method of creating the cheap labor has been to destroy unions and worker protections. This had the added advantage that while wages stagnated, rents rose, forcing low wage workers to work longer hours, which meant more cheap goods and services.

So yes, the fear is poor people will be richer and richer people will be less rich. Although the economy isn't strictly zero sum, there is no question there is a trade-off between wages and costs, and between relative wages.
 
2021-07-25 6:53:08 PM  
1 vote:
Have Biden issue and EO stating that pay for everybody is $50 an hour.  No more, no less.  And no other forms of pay.  Also, for those unable or unwilling to work, have the government pay them $50 dollars an hour also.

Problem solved.
 
2021-07-25 7:38:52 PM  
1 vote:

kdawg7736: Downside is do you want to pay $15 for a Big Mac?


If only it were possible to make more than 2 big macs an hour!

Salaries make a very small portion of the cost of doing business...   Your big mac may go up $0.20 -- if you think that's too expensive and it's not worth it to lift millions of people out of poverty, then you're absolutely part of the problem.
 
2021-07-25 8:55:54 PM  
1 vote:

trialpha: adamatari: I worked in a factory and made more with a 2 year than I ever made with my 4 year degree (over $50k). If I had kept it up, I would easily be over $60k. But I would also be working overtime in a factory, doing physical, dangerous work.

Yes, your physical, dangerous job paid more than an easier/safer job. As it should.

The problem is if if you increase the minimum wage too much, you suddenly have a bunch of physical, dangerous jobs, or jobs requiring lots of education, etc. being paid less than safer, easier jobs. You need to adjust the wages of the dangerous jobs as well, or your going to have problems.


Bullshiat.

The physical, dangerous jobs usually pay less. EMTs, nurses, firefighters, roofers, Amazon workers, warehouse and factory workers... They aren't paid as much as their supervisors, much less their VPs or CEO.

You will move those goalposts every time to defend an unconscionable wage that nobody can live on. Nobody who does the jobs that are necessary for society to work - the janitors, stockers, and cashiers - the "low skill" jobs - none of them will ever be worthy of a decent life to you and yours.

Because it's about status. It's about social hierarchy. It's about keeping people in the place they "deserve". That's why public housing couldn't be nice, and why it had to be left to rot then destroyed, while public housing in Singapore is high quality. That's why the minimum wage can never go up. That's why the US can't have universal healthcare, even though nearly every other advanced economy has it.

Nothing good is acceptable because "where will the money come from" while Jeff Bezos rides a dick into space.
 
2021-07-25 9:21:03 PM  
1 vote:

137 Is An Excellent Time: majestic: 137 Is An Excellent Time: Fact: At no point since the inception of the minimum wage could someone working 40 hours a week support any more than a basic standard of living in a one-bedroom apartment with the bare essentials of living. At no point in time could someone support a family on minimum wage. At no point could someone afford to buy a house on minimum wage.

The initial minimum wage under FDR was the equivalent of $4/hr in 2021.

Now, this isn't to say it shouldn't be raised - it absolutely should be, but the idea that it needs to be raised to the equivalent of today's median wage is not just idiotic, it's revisionist history at its worst.

Fact. $4/hr would allow you to eat and pay your bills when FDR enacted it.

Prove it. $2 a day ($.25c/hr) for an 8-hour shift in 1938.

For reference:

[cdn.iwastesomuchtime.com image 540x720]

New house: 15,600hrs of labor
Average income: 3.33x minimum wage
New car: 3440hrs of labor
Average rent: 108hrs of labor
Tuition: 1680hrs of labor
Movie Ticket: 1 hour of labor
1 gallon gasoline: 24 mins of labor
1 postage stamp: 7.2 mins of labor

10lbs Sugar: 2.3hrs of labor
Gallon of Milk: 2hrs of labor
Pound of Coffee: 1.5hrs of labor
Pound of Bacon: 1.3hrs of labor
Dozen Eggs: 0.7hrs of labor


Was everybody going to Harvard back then? I suppose you are correct, though. We should never, ever again try to make sure people make enough to live on.
 
2021-07-25 10:05:08 PM  
1 vote:

Excelsior: You're literally advocating perpetuating institutional injustice so you won't be mildly inconvenienced yourself.


You seem to believe that I'm advocating not increasing the minimum wage. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that if it is done so without modifying the wages of everyone else, you're going to get problems.

What you're really looking for is to reduce wealth inequity. ie. increase the minimum wage, and the wages of normal people, while reducing corporate profits and others at the top. This is noble, but the people at the top are going to put up a fight, and they control.... well, everything.
 
2021-07-25 11:07:58 PM  
1 vote:

majestic: Saturn5: Yes, minimum wage should be raised, but to hear some people it should be high enough for a family of 4 to own a house and 2 cars in the suburbs for a job that has a skill level to fit a high school kid working part time after school.

Minimum wage jobs were never intended to be 20 year career positions.  They were supposed to be low or no skill jobs where anyone can get a job without experience and learn on the job, then move up to higher paying positions as your skills improve. 

Before we can decide how much minimum wage should be, as a nation we should probably first decide who a typical minimum wage job is targeted towards.

Nobody has said that.


And why should skill level determine how difficult your life is going to be? No one should have to struggle. Literally no one. Including those with lesser skills.

Our baseline should be nothing less than "Can live without worrying how to pay for one's necessities." Housing, transportation, healthcare, food. And it shouldn't be paycheck to paycheck. Everyone deserves to be able to save money. Everyone.
 
2021-07-26 12:53:27 AM  
1 vote:
Any time we want, we can choose to get back on the path to a different, fairer, better country.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Demand that our corporate overlords to treat the 99% like human beings loud enough and the 99% will end up in mass graves.
 
2021-07-26 9:13:39 AM  
1 vote:

austerity101: Saturn5: Yes, minimum wage should be raised, but to hear some people it should be high enough for a family of 4 to own a house and 2 cars in the suburbs for a job that has a skill level to fit a high school kid working part time after school.

Minimum wage jobs were never intended to be 20 year career positions.  They were supposed to be low or no skill jobs where anyone can get a job without experience and learn on the job, then move up to higher paying positions as your skills improve. 

Before we can decide how much minimum wage should be, as a nation we should probably first decide who a typical minimum wage job is targeted towards.

Why shouldn't any job be enough to afford to raise a family? To argue that is to argue that any parent who has to have one of those jobs doesn't deserve to afford things. How do you justify that standpoint?

You can't say "These jobs are for teenagers/single people." You just can't do that, because that's not how the job market works.


Pay has never been based on how much the employee "needs" because everyone's needs are different.  Pay is typically based on the difficulty of the job, either it's physical demands, skills, or required level of training.
Low or no skill jobs typically go to teenagers or those just starting out because they haven't developed skills that warrant higher paying jobs yet.  That is exactly how the job market works.

The primary goal shouldn't be how to make minimum wage as comfortable as possible, but how to help people learn and build skills that move them beyond entry-level minimum wage jobs as quickly as possible. Minimum wage is the starting point, not the end goal.
 
2021-07-26 9:24:05 PM  
1 vote:

Eddie Hazel's E string: austerity101: It's wild to me that people will seriously try to argue that $24 is too much money for people in certain parts of the country, when billionaires exist.

The minimum wage shouldn't merely be enough for people to barely scrape by. It should be enough for them to live well on, as people who live well can afford to spend more money. And they have better mental and physical health. Poverty is literally bad for your health.

Yes, I completely agree with you. I think the people making those arguments have a misconception about the way certain economic factors impact others, as you can see in this thread. They start to panic about what they believe would change in the marketplace due to the wage increase.


Most of the time it is people in skilled trades who think that someone making $24/hr would make all of their "hard work" meaningless.

But it reminds the rest of us that the reason they are in a skilled trade is because critical thinking wasn't their strong suit.

My buddy who is an electrician was biatching about Florida raising their minimum wage to $15 in a couple years. I told him, "$15/he isn't enough to do anything more than work and exist in our area"

His response was along the lines of "I worked hard to do what I do, I dont want some buger-flipper to make that much".

I looked at him and said, "start charging more".

He said, "well then no one can afford me"

I said, "if those people you were just biatching about made more money, you wouldn't have that problem."

His brain exploded and he shut up.
 
Displayed 94 of 94 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.