hidingrpolitics
Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2013
- Messages
- 88
- Reaction score
- 45
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Minimum wage should not be a "living wage". It should be an "I just got my first job, they gave me a chance even though I have no experience" wage.
Tell that to the companies that pay minimum wage to people who do not fit that description.
Tell that to the companies that pay minimum wage to people who do not fit that description.
I see this term thrown around all the time when it comes to minimum wage. I'm curious as to what this means.
Does living wage mean the minimum wage necessary to survive? Or is there a minimum amount of amenities one must also have such as a computer, car, television, etc.?
Minimum wage in America is more than what 90% of the rest of the world makes and even adjusting for purchasing power, living in the US is better than most of the rest of the world. I have a friend who makes less than minimum wage working for a charity and she says she gets by fine and doesn't accept food stamps because she doesn't want to set a bad example for the kids she mentors. Does this mean she is making a "living wage", or does living wage constantly change depending on a person's spending habits? And before the trolls come in and accuse me of partisanship, I am just telling a true anecdote that I understand is not proof of anything. I'd just like clarity on what criteria defines "living wage" and whether this means any less money will mean no longer living.
So 16 year olds should earn enough to live on their own and support a family because these older unskilled workers chose those jobs? At their age their resume didn't qualify them for a job at retail/fast food that doesn't pay minimum wage like Chipotle?
I see this term thrown around all the time when it comes to minimum wage. I'm curious as to what this means.
Does living wage mean the minimum wage necessary to survive? Or is there a minimum amount of amenities one must also have such as a computer, car, television, etc.?
Minimum wage in America is more than what 90% of the rest of the world makes and even adjusting for purchasing power, living in the US is better than most of the rest of the world. I have a friend who makes less than minimum wage working for a charity and she says she gets by fine and doesn't accept food stamps because she doesn't want to set a bad example for the kids she mentors. Does this mean she is making a "living wage", or does living wage constantly change depending on a person's spending habits? And before the trolls come in and accuse me of partisanship, I am just telling a true anecdote that I understand is not proof of anything. I'd just like clarity on what criteria defines "living wage" and whether this means any less money will mean no longer living.
I see this term thrown around all the time when it comes to minimum wage. I'm curious as to what this means.
Does living wage mean the minimum wage necessary to survive? Or is there a minimum amount of amenities one must also have such as a computer, car, television, etc.?
Minimum wage in America is more than what 90% of the rest of the world makes and even adjusting for purchasing power, living in the US is better than most of the rest of the world. I have a friend who makes less than minimum wage working for a charity and she says she gets by fine and doesn't accept food stamps because she doesn't want to set a bad example for the kids she mentors. Does this mean she is making a "living wage", or does living wage constantly change depending on a person's spending habits? And before the trolls come in and accuse me of partisanship, I am just telling a true anecdote that I understand is not proof of anything. I'd just like clarity on what criteria defines "living wage" and whether this means any less money will mean no longer living.
Oversimplification of reality.
Then again, that's basically libertarianism in a nutshell.
Tell that to the companies that pay minimum wage to people who do not fit that description.
Actually, what should be told to those who are getting minimum wage and don't fit that description, "what are you doing that you're only worth minimum wage"?
Frankly, I really don't understand why people care so little about the prospects of young people getting their first jobs. I guess to the liberal/progressive, the young don't deserve to work.
Ocean, IMO, it's not that they feel they don't "deserve" to work. The fear is... To paraphrase: "How are you going to keep them down on the farm (liberal giveaway plantation) after they've seen Paree" (making money they've earned while learning a skill and becoming responsible for their own life, and/or staying in school rather than dropping out and becoming dependent on above mentioned plantation largesse). :lamo:
:thumbs:
Among a number of part time jobs I got in High School ($1.65/hr) was dish washer in a restaurant, and gas station attendant (yes, full service, with windows washed, thank you very much). Those were jobs people like me had when they were 16+. What are kids supposed to do today to get jobs, earn some money, gain some work experience, etc.? If minimum wage is a living wage, young people won't have a chance.
I guess the way some want it, young people need to borrow $100k from the government to go to college to go after whatever the government thinks they will be allowed to major in. Then they can come out and do some public service to work off the debt, and who knows what else. I guess wash dishes, since that will provide them a living.
I worked my way through college and grad school. I didn't borrow money. I cleaned office buildings at night, and did whatever it took.
That's how it used to work. That's how people learned they needed to work on their skills and knowledge to get ahead - or not.
As you know, it wasn't great all the time, and we never got paid what we thought we were worth, but who is?
And to carry your excellent post one step further, I don't recall ever being told that everyone gets a trophy just for showing up, either. We were told that we were taught everything we needed to know in a competitive world, and to always do our best, and make our school proud. (this was high school). It worked! By the time we got to college, we understood hard work, good grades, and what we needed to do to be considered a worthy hire by an employer. How times have changed! :screwy:
I see this term thrown around all the time when it comes to minimum wage. I'm curious as to what this means.
Does living wage mean the minimum wage necessary to survive? Or is there a minimum amount of amenities one must also have such as a computer, car, television, etc.?
Minimum wage in America is more than what 90% of the rest of the world makes and even adjusting for purchasing power, living in the US is better than most of the rest of the world.
I have a friend who makes less than minimum wage working for a charity and she says she gets by fine and doesn't accept food stamps because she doesn't want to set a bad example for the kids she mentors.
Does this mean she is making a "living wage", or does living wage constantly change depending on a person's spending habits?
And before the trolls come in and accuse me of partisanship, I am just telling a true anecdote that I understand is not proof of anything. I'd just like clarity on what criteria defines "living wage" and whether this means any less money will mean no longer living.
...
There are certain things you need to maintain the job. The reality is you can live on a lot less if you don't work. If you work you have to maintain certain levels of dress and cleanliness, you have to have transportation, you need some regular place to store your clothing and sleep, you need to have nourishment so you can keep working, and I would say medicine because you get exposed to illnesses and other people to pass on sickness to. That is the reality of working dude, and perhaps you should figure that one out. But the reality is that by working for an employer you enable that employer to make money off of your efforts. The workers of any business allow it to make much more money than the owners could ever make on their own individual effort. perhaps you should start thinking about things like that. The lower end workers tend to do the most work, and be the most essential to the daily operations which make the higher ups much more money. For this they do deserve part of that american dream of living a higher quality life. I am not talking about a mansion and a hummer, but it would be nice if they could get beyond merely surviving and enjoy some things like a night out once and a while, or some hobbies. At the very least we, as the taxpayers, should not have to subsidize the food minimum wage workers earn because they are way below the poverty level.
Companies are not in the business of making their workers rich. Sorry to burst your socialist bubble, but their single purpose is to make as much money as possible. They pay the workers just as much as they need to keep them happy. Not happy? Leave.Tell that to the companies that pay minimum wage to people who do not fit that description.
Progressives think "living wage" is something comparable to "rich people." See...if a "rich" person owns a yacht, they think a "poor" person is entitled to a boat. A "rich" person has a mansion? Then a "poor" person deserves a house."Living Wage" is a progressive buzzword that insinuates businesses and corporations force their employees to starve to death in the streets because they can't afford food or shelter. It's not a real number. It's whatever progressives want it to be. I've heard some people state that everyone should be paid a living wage and that the living wage should be $20.00 or more an hour.
Living Wage is the minimum amount of income needed to be considered middle class. Just slightly over "working poor".
To be considered middle class, one should have enough income to be able to afford decent shelter (running water, some form of HVAC, electricity, and few leaks in the roof), transportation, communication tools (tv, phone, possibly internet in this day), healthcare and enough "extra" income to save for a "rainy day"/retirement/kids education/downpayment on a house, or to be able to afford some modest luxuaries (weekly night on the town or once a year vacation trip).
Certainly minimum wage entry level workers shouldn't expect a true living wage, but anyone who managed to graduate high school and keep a job for more than a year or two should be paid closer to a living wage than minimum wage.
I have broken down some reasonable cost estimates before, and came up with something like $40k/yr for an individual and $60k for a family of three or four. Thats pretty close to our median wage and median family income. Essentially, at this point in history, around half our population makes less than a living wage.
I don't think that the issue is to whether or not minimum wage should be a living wage as it is having as many people in that living wage category as possible. Theoretically, if we equally distributed all income (including income from investments and business profits), it would work out to something like $125k per worker (gdp/employed people). So while there will always be people who are poor due to mental ability and mental illness issues, and there will always be some poor people because they chose to be poor, it's entirely possible, with our current level of production and productivity, that the vast majority of our population (maybe something like 90%) could potentially make a living wage - assuming that we had a far lower amount of income disparity. It's a goal for our society to strive for.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?