• circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    $50 is decent. It’s a living wage. It is not exorbitant and there’s plenty of incentive for workers aiming higher.

    One of my most hated “arguments” is the notion that “well, I’m an experienced worker and I’ve only made $15/hr forever. Therefore I will actively fight against raising wages because my wages were always low”. What self-defeating bullshit. If the minimum wage had been indexed to anything having to do with cost of living for the last half century, $50 would be about right.

    • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s $100k/yr roughly.

      That seems insane for a minimum wage, but then again when rent is $2500+ for a one bedroom…

      Presumably all other salaries would be pressured into increases. Or you’d have people quiting their jobs to work at McDonald’s.

      • circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        That’s exactly it. Cost of living has outpaced wages for 50+ years. $100k might sound like a “made-it” salary, but it’s actually not that compared to buying power of previous generations.

        • LocoOhNo@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          My sister and her husband make $65k a year each and they’re living paycheck to paycheck. If $130k a year doesn’t pay for a mortgage, car payments, and raising your kids, what are we even bothering for?

          We’re overdue for a demonstration, nationwide.

          • Good_morning@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            You’re right, but also that number could be $180k and I doubt you’d see much difference, they’d have more expensive cars, maybe a nicer house, and take a fancy vacation but still be at the same place at the end of the month. Not to detracg from the cost of living crisis, just that some of it is simply the lifestyles we choose to spend on

        • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          When I look at what $5 in 1990 is worth today, it’s $11.80 (allegedly).

          Min wage was $3.80 then so that would make it $9.24 now.

          What am I missing?

          I guess that’s just inflation. What else should go into the minimum wage calculation. (Also this assumes $3.80 was fair back in 1990)

          • circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            9 months ago

            What am I missing?

            Have you tried living off $9.24 an hour? That’s about $370 a week before taxes.

            Average rent in the US was $1372 a month 2023, which means just buying power isn’t enough to figure this out. Many people who already own property miss the fact that it’s largely impossible not to rent forever for anyone born after 1990, and extremely hard for anyone born after 1980 (on average – it differs for cheaper areas, which won’t be cheaper for much longer based on trends).

            I’d argue we have multiple factors. Inflation is a huge one, but cost of living has in many ways outpaced inflation. Those two alone are additive, which is why even the current California minimum wage of $15.50 is not enough.

            Let’s leave it as an amorphous amount for now, and I’ll ask a different question: what about a potential $50 minimum wage upsets you? What makes that a bad idea, in your view (and if you don’t believe it is, apologies in advance!).

            • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              That makes sense. I don’t know why people are down voting me like it’s reddit. It was a good faith question.

              If you look at # of hours to pay average rent it was 118 hours in 1990 min wage versus 189 with today’s. You literally have to work more that 40 hours a week to just pay rent. It wasn’t my h better in the

              I’m on board with higher minimum wage but the entire system should be looked at. Housing quadrupling in cost(to rent) seems like it should be an even bigger concern than stagnate min wage. It’s not zero sum but Jesus Christ that’s nuts.

              I don’t have a problem with a $50 min wage on the face of it. My concerns would be: does that drive inflation higher?(I read that it doesn’t, but I’m not sure how it wouldn’t) would that just make rent higher? Would the price of things skyrocket just because companies can go after the extra money? We already saw shitty corps using inflation as cover for profiteering.

              Basically what is the consequence of such a drastic increase? Would it start a race condition?

              Obviously companies across the country would potentially go under and be forced to raise compensation(which is fantastic imo). Id feel bad for some small businesses but at the same time, I think it was Roosevelt who said, if you can’t afford to pay a decent wage you can’t afford to be in business.

              And I have no sympathy for big companies like Walmart who pay people scraps and depend on the government to fill in the gaps with food stamps and welfare.

          • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            What am I missing?

            Most major inflation indices omit things like the cost of food and housing. So, they are only marginally useful in looking at the financial experiences of the populace.

      • Rakonat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        9 months ago

        Sounds insane until you consider the purchasing power of the dollar over the last few decades. These boomers railing against wave hikes cause they retired in 15/hour would have effectively been making 70 or more today. You need a 6 figure salary today to enjoy a life comparable to what your grandparents or great grandparents enjoyed on a single salary bringing home 10/hour