Analyzing A Practical Minimum Wage

But asking someone to work 80hrs a week is evil. Much better to give them welfare if they agree to keep their hrs to 30 a week. That way they have more time to smoke weed and play video games.

It is not at all unreasonable to expect to earn a basic living at 40 hours per week. Overtime and second jobs should be there to afford the "extras" or be there to dig yourself out if you have a sudden emergency, like a car-wreck, or a sudden illness not covered by insurance.
Why should you get to earn a basic living at 40hrs a week? WTF does basic living mean? I worked a heluva lot more than 40hrs a week to get where I am today. Why should you be able to take my income to make your life easier than mine?
 
Why not suggest that individuals not pay income tax so that they can keep their productivity, instead of suggesting that the government mandate businesses pay a higher bare minimum to teenagers and dumb fucks?

That's a rhetorical question, BTW.

If we cut welfare in half with a living standard wage increase, that also cuts a major tax liability.
 
Who needs a 100 USD pair of boots??

Where the fuck are you coming up with these necessity numbers? Good grief.

A decent pair of workboots are going to cost you 80 to 100 bucks. Now go read the article, like I said. They were quite detailed in how they came up with their numbers.

Yeah, I saw how they got their numbers. By guessing, making assumptions and then guessing some more. It's fucking 'tarded, friend.

Completely fucking tarded.

No one NEEDS to buy 100 USD boots. You can get boots for much, much cheaper than that if you're of low income.

You think we need to raise the minimum wage so that people can have expensive shit, based off completely arbitrarily gained figures about the spending of an individual.

Good god it's just whack-a-mole with you types on this board.

I spent $25 on a pair of boots at Kmart a few months ago. The boots blew out in a few weeks and I wound up at the podiatrist and the chiropractor. Yes, I need to spend a hundred bucks on a decent pair of work boots.

So because you're a poor shopper for quality at a good price, that must mean everyone else is too.

I bought a pair of awesome bots that retail for 60 USD for 40 USD on sale and they are now two years old and just need to be replaced.

Authoritarians are not only frustratingly arrogant, they are dumb as fuck to boot.

Finding a good bargain like that is luck. You can't base average living expenses on luck.
 
But asking someone to work 80hrs a week is evil. Much better to give them welfare if they agree to keep their hrs to 30 a week. That way they have more time to smoke weed and play video games.

It is not at all unreasonable to expect to earn a basic living at 40 hours per week. Overtime and second jobs should be there to afford the "extras" or be there to dig yourself out if you have a sudden emergency, like a car-wreck, or a sudden illness not covered by insurance.
Why should you get to earn a basic living at 40hrs a week? WTF does basic living mean? I worked a heluva lot more than 40hrs a week to get where I am today. Why should you be able to take my income to make your life easier than mine?

40 hours a week has been the basic standard for full time work, for a long time, and for a lot of reasons. You're just trying to move the goalposts now in this discussion.

A basic living means just what is itemized in the OP.

So you're saying that someone working a min wage job has an easier life than you? I have worked a lot more than 40 hours a week to get where I am at too, but my life is a hell of a lot easier than someone who is trying to get my on min wage. And if I had to work 80 hours a week just to survive, I never would have gotten where I am today.
 
It's not luck to be a smart consumer. Like i said, 'tarded. The whole argument you have here is for toilet tank cold IQs.
 
Why not suggest that individuals not pay income tax so that they can keep their productivity, instead of suggesting that the government mandate businesses pay a higher bare minimum to teenagers and dumb fucks?

That's a rhetorical question, BTW.

If we cut welfare in half with a living standard wage increase, that also cuts a major tax liability.
HUH?

When you raise minimum wage all that does is reduce the number of hours welfare recipients can earn before they have to stop working. Right now it's 30hrs. Increase minimum wage and they will stop working at the number of hrs they are allowed to work and still receive welfare benefits.
 
But asking someone to work 80hrs a week is evil. Much better to give them welfare if they agree to keep their hrs to 30 a week. That way they have more time to smoke weed and play video games.

It is not at all unreasonable to expect to earn a basic living at 40 hours per week. Overtime and second jobs should be there to afford the "extras" or be there to dig yourself out if you have a sudden emergency, like a car-wreck, or a sudden illness not covered by insurance.
Why should you get to earn a basic living at 40hrs a week? WTF does basic living mean? I worked a heluva lot more than 40hrs a week to get where I am today. Why should you be able to take my income to make your life easier than mine?

40 hours a week has been the basic standard for full time work, for a long time, and for a lot of reasons. You're just trying to move the goalposts now in this discussion.

A basic living means just what is itemized in the OP.

So you're saying that someone working a min wage job has an easier life than you? I have worked a lot more than 40 hours a week to get where I am at too, but my life is a hell of a lot easier than someone who is trying to get my on min wage. And if I had to work 80 hours a week just to survive, I never would have gotten where I am today.
Why are you insisting we make your wage the minimum wage? Do you have some desire to have the lowest income in the country? You want everyone making less than you to be fired? WTF?
 
HUH?

When you raise minimum wage all that does is reduce the number of hours welfare recipients can earn before they have to stop working. Right now it's 30hrs. Increase minimum wage and they will stop working at the number of hrs they are allowed to work and still receive welfare benefits.

Where do you come up with 30 hours?

If you made the min wage a living wage, they wouldn't need welfare in the first place.
 
HUH?

When you raise minimum wage all that does is reduce the number of hours welfare recipients can earn before they have to stop working. Right now it's 30hrs. Increase minimum wage and they will stop working at the number of hrs they are allowed to work and still receive welfare benefits.

Where do you come up with 30 hours?

If you made the min wage a living wage, they wouldn't need welfare in the first place.
If you earn more than 30xmin wage a week you exceed the income maximum required to receive the bulk of welfare checks. Well known fact...
 
It's not luck to be a smart consumer. Like i said, 'tarded. The whole argument you have here is for toilet tank cold IQs.

Buying a substandard product is not being a smart consumer. I need good boots for work. Not some kmart crap.

I didn't buy a substandard product. I bought excellent quality boots at a sale price because i know how to shop, when to shop and what quality is and is not. Apparently you're just not that smart, so i certainly do not want to hear your opinion on a "living wage" (whatever the fuck that is suppose to mean).
 
If you earn more than 30xmin wage a week you exceed the income maximum required to receive the bulk of welfare checks. Well known fact...

30 times min wage is not the same thing as 30 hours a week. Are you drunk?
 
It's not luck to be a smart consumer. Like i said, 'tarded. The whole argument you have here is for toilet tank cold IQs.

Buying a substandard product is not being a smart consumer. I need good boots for work. Not some kmart crap.

I didn't buy a substandard product. I bought excellent quality boots at a sale price because i know how to shop, when to shop and what quality is and is not. Apparently you're just not that smart, so i certainly do not want to hear your opinion on a "living wage" (whatever the fuck that is suppose to mean).

You know when I shop? When I need a new pair of boots. And I am not going to waste money trying out some crap product, when I know this brand is comfortable and durable. Sometimes I get lucky and they are on sale when I need them.
 
On this page, we will itemize a sample budget for a single person in order to analyze what a fair standard would be for a minimum-wage worker. It is our position that a person working eight hours a day, five days a week, at any job, should be able to support themselves to a minimum basic standard of living. This practical wage is necessary in order to elevate the class of working poor to contributing members of society. Working for anything less than what is needed to subsist on independently, is nothing short of slavery.

All figures are based on national averages, for a Federal standard.


RENT ------------------------------$1000
BASIC UTILITIES --------------$200
ADVANCED UTILITIES ------$150
FOOD ------------------------------$300
NON-FOOD GROCERY -----$50
CLOTHING -----------------------$75
TRANSPORTATION ----------$500
HEALTHCARE -----------------$350
MISCELLANEOUS -----------$400
------------------------------------------------------
Average Basic Monthly Expenses $3,025

A full-time job at 40 hours per week is 173.2 hours per month calculating 4.33 weeks in each month. To find a reasonable minimum wage, we divide the average basic monthly expenses figure, by the number of hours worked. For the average American worker to support themselves without government assistance or by borrowing beyond their means, that worker must earn...

$17.47 per hour

Of course, that figure must be after all taxes and contributions are taken, or that anyone earning that amount must be exempt from all such garnishments and liability. A person who cannot even afford to pay their own way, cannot afford to pay taxes. Forcing them to pay taxes that will jeopardize their basic standard of living, is unsound economics and in the long run will only force other taxpayers to subsidize those workers, in turn jeopardizing their own living standard, in a perpetual cycle that we see happening today as more workers descend into deep poverty.

If $17.47 per hour seems unreasonable to you, or just downright impossible, consider a few more facts. There was a time when a grocery clerk, or a department store salesperson could actually support themselves on what they earned. That is not so today.

Using data by the U.S. BLS, the average productivity per American worker has increased 400% since 1950. One way to look at that is that it should only take one-quarter the work hours, or 11 hours per week, to afford the same standard of living as a worker in 1950 (or our standard of living should be 4 times higher). Is that the case? Obviously not. Someone is profiting, it’s just not the average American worker. -Source

Based on consumption growth since 1968, the minimum wage today would have to be $25.05 to represent the same share of the country's total consumption. Based on national income growth, the minimum wage should be $22.08. Based on personal income growth, it should be $21.16. -Source

After adjusting for inflation, minimum wage workers today are paid about 26 percent less than they were in 1974.

At the top 1 percent of the American income distribution, average incomes rose 194 percent between 1974 and 2011. Had U.S. minimum wages risen at the same pace as U.S. maximum wages, the minimum wage would now be $26.96 an hour. -Source



Here is a detailed description of how we arrived at our sample budget figures:

Read more: Analyzing a Practical Minimum Wage Minimum Wage Workers Union of America

You say this isn't left or right issue, but anytime anyone uses the 1968 figure as a baseline, you are essentially either (a) ignorant or you are (b) biased. I don't believe it to be (a), so it must be (b) - you are biased. This is shameful and deceitful economics in my opinion. It economic-activism at its worst.

"Let's use the highest inflation-adjusted minimum wage as my baseline."

That's not telling the truth. If you type in $0.25 and change the year to 1938, the year minimum wage began, then you will find the inflation adjusted minimum wage is $4.21/hr
 
You say this isn't left or right issue, but anytime anyone uses the 1968 figure as a baseline, you are essentially either (a) ignorant or you are (b) biased. I don't believe it to be (a), so it must be (b) - you are biased. This is shameful and deceitful economics in my opinion. It economic-activism at its worst.

"Let's use the highest inflation-adjusted minimum wage as my baseline."

That's not telling the truth. If you type in $0.25 and change the year to 1938, the year minimum wage began, then you will find the inflation adjusted minimum wage is $4.21/hr

This article has nothing to do with the 1968 baseline. That is only one example.
 
It's not luck to be a smart consumer. Like i said, 'tarded. The whole argument you have here is for toilet tank cold IQs.

Buying a substandard product is not being a smart consumer. I need good boots for work. Not some kmart crap.

I didn't buy a substandard product. I bought excellent quality boots at a sale price because i know how to shop, when to shop and what quality is and is not. Apparently you're just not that smart, so i certainly do not want to hear your opinion on a "living wage" (whatever the fuck that is suppose to mean).

You know when I shop? When I need a new pair of boots. And I am not going to waste money trying out some crap product, when I know this brand is comfortable and durable. Sometimes I get lucky and they are on sale when I need them.

So this must mean everyone else is this poor at shopping, right? i mean your entire fucking premise here is in creating a blanket benchmark on the habits of individuals. Yet you can only manage to cite you own personal experiences and then want to STILL prescribe a national mandate that coincides with it.

Do even know what you're saying?

'tarded, son. 'tarded.
 
So this must mean everyone else is this poor at shopping, right? i mean your entire fucking premise here is in creating a blanket benchmark on the habits of individuals. Yet you can only manage to cite you own personal experiences and then want to STILL prescribe a national mandate that coincides with it.

Do even know what you're saying?

'tarded, son. 'tarded.

That article has nothing to do with what I pay for a pair of boots. That was my own example. And this article is about a lot more than the cost of a pair of boots dude.
 
Using data by the U.S. BLS, the average productivity per American worker has increased 400% since 1950. One way to look at that is that it should only take one-quarter the work hours, or 11 hours per week, to afford the same standard of living as a worker in 1950 (or our standard of living should be 4 times higher). Is that the case? Obviously not. Someone is profiting, it’s just not the average American worker. -Source

You say productivity has increased 400%, but did you know the minimum wage has increased nearly 900% since 1950?
 

Forum List

Back
Top