What Constitutes a Minimum Living Standard in the US

[Logophile]

What do we consider as Americans a minimum living standard?? I think that's a more important question that what a minimum wage should be, because once we define necessities in 2021, we can define what an average American should expect, minimally, to live on, and government aid to act accordingly. Is a television a necessity?? Is the internet?? I ask these questions in earnest. Are we just about food, shelter and clothing or is the basic American standard defined as so much more?? Thanks!!

 

[Peter]

Good question which I suspect will have a lot of different answers.
I suppose being able to afford somewhere to live with enough money to pay basic expenses.
The house doesn't need to be fancy and the appliances can be second hand if well maintained and maybe a tiny bit left over so they can go out for cheap nactivities now and then.

I suppose that depends on where you live as well as in the UK London is way more expensive than anywhere else.

 

[swing_voter]

Well, part of the problem is $10 an hour is great in Podunk Iowa. It's not so hot in San Francisco.


.

 

[bluesmoke]

A living wage (LW) is a wage that is high enough to maintain a normal standard of living (Cost of Living or COL).

A standard of living is the amount and quality of goods and services available to a given population, such as in a regional area, incl basic material factors such as income, gross domestic product (GDP), life expectancy, and economic opportunity.

It would be the COL by region that would be the “min wage” since costs vary enough by region, not just state, to make a diff in the standard of living and thus what should be the min wage. Wages would be adjusted annually by COLA.

A living wage would put many earners above the max allowable income for gov benefits and thus lower that cost to the govt.

An example of what some part of a LW system might look like in terms of hourly wages:

http://livingwage.mit.edu/

Another take on COL:

Cost of Living in Seattle, WA | PayScale

There are also sources for "value of a dollar" by state.

 

[Rogue Valley]

The family can eat healthy, have a decent home, pay the bills, take a vacation every year, a college fund for the kid, save money for retirement, and have a rainy day account for emergencies.

 

[lwf]

What do we consider as Americans a minimum living standard?? I think that's a more important question that what a minimum wage should be, because once we define necessities in 2021, we can define what an average American should expect, minimally, to live on, and government aid to act accordingly. Is a television a necessity?? Is the internet?? I ask these questions in earnest. Are we just about food, shelter and clothing or is the basic American standard defined as so much more?? Thanks!!

Healthy food, private shelter with heat and cooling, clothing, internet access, unlimited access to healthcare, and unlimited access to quality education or career training including all necessary education materials and transportation.

 

[cpwill]

The family can eat healthy, have a decent home, pay the bills, take a vacation every year, a college fund for the kid, save money for retirement, and have a rainy day account for emergencies.

I do financial counseling - very basic stuff - on the side. The issue with setting a consumption standard is that your will get families on lower incomes who manage that, and families on higher incomes who don't. :-/

 

[Logophile]

In this day and age, I think having access to the internet is a necessity that wasn't a necessity in the prior century. However, the necessity of owning a car - once a necessity unless living in a city - is now waning. Telephone companies were forced to give access to their services to all citizens. Not sure what the situation will be in the next decade. Is entertainment a necessity?? If you asked most Americans, I'm willing to bet they would say yes. Entertainment offsets boredom and loneliness, which may offset destructive behaviors. Are moderately fashionable clothes a necessity, or will a pair of drab jeans and a t-shirt suffice?? And is air conditioning considered a necessity?? Thanks!!

 

[Cynical]

What do we consider as Americans a minimum living standard?? I think that's a more important question that what a minimum wage should be, because once we define necessities in 2021, we can define what an average American should expect, minimally, to live on, and government aid to act accordingly. Is a television a necessity?? Is the internet?? I ask these questions in earnest. Are we just about food, shelter and clothing or is the basic American standard defined as so much more?? Thanks!!

It really depends on if one has a child and how many.

 

[ttwtt78640]

What do we consider as Americans a minimum living standard?? I think that's a more important question that what a minimum wage should be, because once we define necessities in 2021, we can define what an average American should expect, minimally, to live on, and government aid to act accordingly. Is a television a necessity?? Is the internet?? I ask these questions in earnest. Are we just about food, shelter and clothing or is the basic American standard defined as so much more?? Thanks!!

Are you advocating for a (federal?) BIG or UBI program?

 

[molten_dragon]

Generally, I'd say that a basic standard of living would be the things on the first two levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. In terms of good and services, I'd say access to food, water, clothing, shelter, utilities (including internet), transportation, education, and medical care.

 

[KevinKohler]

On a macro level, the rate should be set to have a maximum positive economic effect. IE, set so that lower income people, of which there are a LOT, can afford to participate in their economy, but that isn't unduly detrimental to their employer. Thats the tricky part. Determining that line.

On a micro level...basic human needs are, a place to live, food to eat, power and water, internet (only way to get a job these days), transportation, and minimal entertainment (tv, a book or 2, etc).

Which means that amount, in both micro and macro, is going to WILDLY vary based on location.

 

[Logophile]

Are you advocating for a (federal?) BIG or UBI program?

No, not really. I'm trying to establish what an American standard of living is - or should be - in 2021, because it seems to me that the claims of both poverty and wealth are surprisingly relative, and therefore, we as a society are just throwing money and/or denying money predicated on archaic ideas. I am not a proponent of big government or high taxation. I think it is an anathema to our foundation. However, in order to address "poverty," for example, we have to address what it is, just as we have to address what wealth is. Right now - given the epidemic - checks were issued predicated on numbers that seemed to be pulled out of the sky. American poverty is - and should be - viewed very differently than what defines poverty in other countries. We are - or at least should be - held as the beacon of prosperity. So, what I'd like to do is define what a basic living standard means in the USA now, and then, perhaps, look at a UBI solution, but predicated on offering basic goods and services, not money, with those goods and services issued on what we construe to be true need in this day and age. Money is too easily and too unwisely spent, and that's true of all of us at times, which is why I don't advocated currency, unless paid into and thus returned, like social security. It would have the added benefit of bringing us nearer to a war time economy, where the government purchased from American companies producing on American soil. Thanks!!

 

[ttwtt78640]

On a macro level, the rate should be set to have a maximum positive economic effect. IE, set so that lower income people, of which there are a LOT, can afford to participate in their economy, but that isn't unduly detrimental to their employer. Thats the tricky part. Determining that line.

On a micro level...basic human needs are, a place to live, food to eat, power and water, internet (only way to get a job these days), transportation, and minimal entertainment (tv, a book or 2, etc).

Which means that amount, in both micro and macro, is going to WILDLY vary based on location.

Yep, which is used by some federal laws (e.g. the Davis-Bacon Act and GS locality pay), yet not by others (e.g. the federal MW and Social Security benefits).

One thing which you have not included, yet is included in the federal poverty level, is the number of people in a household. That poses a major problem for those who pick any fixed hourly rate as the correct MW value. Few employers (other than the US Military) base pay on the individual employee’s household situation.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No, not really. I'm trying to establish what an American standard of living is - or should be - in 2021, because it seems to me that the claims of both poverty and wealth are surprisingly relative, and therefore, we as a society are just throwing money and/or denying money predicated on archaic ideas. I am not a proponent of big government or high taxation. I think it is an anathema to our foundation. However, in order to address "poverty," for example, we have to address what it is, just as we have to address what wealth is. Right now - given the epidemic - checks were issued predicated on numbers that seemed to be pulled out of the sky. American poverty is - and should be - viewed very differently than what defines poverty in other countries. We are - or at least should be - held as the beacon of prosperity. So, what I'd like to do is define what a basic living standard means in the USA now, and then, perhaps, look at a UBI solution, but predicated on offering basic goods and services, not money, with those goods and services issued on what we construe to be true need in this day and age. Money is too easily and too unwisely spent, and that's true of all of us at times, which is why I don't advocated currency, unless paid into and thus returned, like social security. Thanks!!

Using Social Security (retirement benefits?) as your example (UBI solution?) is rather odd, since it’s monthly payment (to the elderly and/or disabled) is based on prior earnings and does not vary based on where one is currently living. It is also paid in currency and then ‘means tested’ by taking some of it back (via federal income tax) if one makes “too much” other income.

 

[Logophile]

Using Social Security (retirement benefits?) as your example (UBI solution?) is rather odd, since it’s monthly payment (to the elderly and/or disabled) is based on prior earnings and does not vary based on where one is currently living. It is also paid in currency and then ‘means tested’ by taking some of it back (via federal income tax) if one makes “too much” other income.

Actually, I'm not using it as an example. I probably didn't make myself clear. That program is and would remain separate to any other kind of federal assistance. I don't consider social security government aid per se. It was directly paid into, so I don't include it as assistance. I edited since you quoted. I think it would be a big boost to the economy to bring us nearer to a war time economy - essentially WWII - to have goods and services purchased by the federal government from American companies producing on American soil. Thanks!!

 

[KevinKohler]

Yep, which is used by some federal laws (e.g. the Davis-Bacon Act and GS locality pay), yet not by others (e.g. the federal MW and Social Security benefits).

One thing which you have not included, yet is included in the federal poverty level, is the number of people in a household. That poses a major problem for those who pick any fixed hourly rate as the correct MW value. Few employers (other than the US Military) base pay on the individual employee’s household situation.

Adding people to the household (dependants? Out of work adults, etc?) is where a lot of contention comes from, centering around the word deserve, and earned.

Complications, complications.

All, cart before the horse. Fix the tax code first.

 

[Logophile]

Yep, which is used by some federal laws (e.g. the Davis-Bacon Act and GS locality pay), yet not by others (e.g. the federal MW and Social Security benefits).

One thing which you have not included, yet is included in the federal poverty level, is the number of people in a household. That poses a major problem for those who pick any fixed hourly rate as the correct MW value. Few employers (other than the US Military) base pay on the individual employee’s household situation.

Again, if money is not given, only goods and services, then establishing need and addressing that need is vastly simpler. If there are two kids, both need to eat. Groceries will be delivered accordingly. It may sound draconian, but it's really not. Those kids will get fed properly. They'll have their own computer and they'll have proper clothes. What they won't have are luxuries. That's where the incentive to better both themselves in the future or for their parents to aspire to more begins. Thanks!!

 

[KevinKohler]

Again, if money is not given, only goods and services, then establishing need and addressing that need is vastly simpler. If there are two kids, both need to eat. Groceries will be delivered accordingly. It may sound draconian, but it's really not. Those kids will get fed properly. They'll have their own computer and they'll have proper clothes. What they won't have are luxuries. That's where the incentive to better both themselves in the future or for their parents to aspire to more begins. Thanks!!

And who decides? What they eat, i mean?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Actually, I'm not using it as an example. I probably didn't make myself clear. That program is and would remain separate to any other kind of federal assistance. I don't consider social security government aid per se. It was directly paid into, so I don't include it as assistance. I edited since you quoted. I think it would be a big boost to the economy to bring us nearer to a war time economy - essentially WWII - to have goods and services purchased by the federal government from American companies producing on American soil. Thanks!!

That still leaves the matter of what basis would be used to decide how much each household (or person) would receive. One of the big flaws in many current “safety net” programs is that the benefits change based on other (household) income. If the “safety net”benefits drop $1 for every $2 of other income earned then one would effectively be working for 1/2 of the nominal hourly pay rate.

 

[ttwtt78640]

1) Adding people to the household (dependants? Out of work adults, etc?) is where a lot of contention comes from, centering around the word deserve, and earned.

Complications, complications.

2) All, cart before the horse. Fix the tax code first.

1) Whether we are discussing a household or (working?) individual makes a huge difference in the basic cost of living. Also whether or not we are trying to fix a deficit between earned income and basic living expenses or just trying to cover basic living expense and letting any earned income be used for adding “luxuries”.

2) The tax code (which includes a wide variety of taxes and user fees) is indeed a complex mess, but seems beyond the scope of this thread (unless one is advocating for a negative tax rate to serve as a UBI).

 

[ttwtt78640]

Again, if money is not given, only goods and services, then establishing need and addressing that need is vastly simpler. If there are two kids, both need to eat. Groceries will be delivered accordingly. It may sound draconian, but it's really not. Those kids will get fed properly. They'll have their own computer and they'll have proper clothes. What they won't have are luxuries. That's where the incentive to better both themselves in the future or for their parents to aspire to more begins. Thanks!!

What you are describing seems to be a household UBI which is increased for each additional person in a household. That seems very similar to the federal poverty level system - an established base level (for one person) which is then increased (by a fixed amount) for each additional person in the household,

 

[Logophile]

That still leaves the matter of what basis would be used to decide how much each household (or person) would receive. One of the big flaws in many current “safety net” programs is that the benefits change based on other (household) income. If the “safety net”benefits drop $1 for every $2 of other income earned then one would effectively be working for 1/2 of the nominal hourly pay rate.

Which brings us around to what I was asking initially. What constitutes a basic standard of living in 2021?? Without that answer, we can't realistically address any other nuances. For example, do I think everybody needs a personal computer and a small cell phone as part of a basic standard of living today?? Yes, I do. But I don't think anybody needs computer games. Wants, maybe, but doesn't need. IF all you give an individual is basic necessities, he or she will strive for more. That is human nature. And in terms of your "cut off" point, there doesn't have to be with providing only basic necessities but not money. If a person strives for more, there will be a grace period before he or she is reassessed. I'd give it two years. Thanks!!

 

[bluesmoke]

The family can eat healthy, have a decent home, pay the bills, take a vacation every year, a college fund for the kid, save money for retirement, and have a rainy day account for emergencies.

But when your economic philosophy is that the cost of such is better spent at the top of the pyramid...

 

[Logophile]

What you are describing seems to be a household UBI which is increased for each additional person in a household. That seems very similar to the federal poverty level system - an established base level (for one person) which is then increased (by a fixed amount) for each additional person in the household,

Except that it's not working. If it was, we wouldn't have poverty, right?? A UBS system doesn't work if it's not addressing the times we live in or if it is merely doling out dough. And, it's expensive with no benefit to society. For example, food stamps - in my view - are not a realistic way of feeding a family. Grocery delivery is, and that delivery can be done by a person who may be unemployed for an extra benefit, another words, a moderate income on top of aid and a leg up on a job. Thanks!!