7 ms·

Minimum wage workers can't afford a 1 bedroom apartment or studio where I live.

sdinsn 7y ago
So perhaps they should split a 2/3 bedroom with roommates? If someone makes the absolute legal minimum, why does every expect them to live alone?
- antidaily 7y ago
  With kids, though?
  - viklove 7y ago
    If you're working a minimum wage job, maybe don't have kids?
    - Broken_Hippo 7y ago
      So, if you had kids while you had a decent job and the place closes, you should give away the kids because your replacement job is minimum wage? Is it the same if you wind up disabled and suddenly become a low earner? Or, I know, celibacy for everyone and hope you don't get raped? Free abortions when birth control fails, if you can afford birth control and aren't unlucky enough to have issues with it? Do you happen to know the income level when kids are affordable? Is this well above the average wage in the area (or in general)? Is this higher or lower than low-level military salary? Knowing this sort of number would really help folks out.
      - leetcrew 7y ago
        > So, if you had kids while you had a decent job and the place closes, you should give away the kids because your replacement job is minimum wage? suddenly becoming unable to provide for your kids through no fault of your own is quite different from deciding to have children when you know (or should know) you already have no ability to support them. in both cases, we need to at least do something to help the children, but we have to structure it carefully to avoid encouraging the latter. > Do you happen to know the income level when kids are affordable? no, but I can look at what I spend to sustain myself every month. if I can't comfortably double that, I'm probably not ready to have my first child.
        notacoward 7y ago
        > I can look at what I spend to sustain myself every month ...and in doing so you make certain assumptions which might not be true for others. Like that your circumstances can only get better, never worse. The GP specifically asked about the latter, in the form of job loss. What if you decided that you were ready to have that child, quite reasonably acccording to those assumptions, and then those assumptions turned out to be incorrect. Would you blame yourself the way you seem to be blaming others?
        leetcrew 7y ago
        I wasn't very clear. if you make a reasonable effort to plan ahead and something totally unforseen causes you to be unable to support your children, that really sucks and I would be happy to contribute tax dollars to help people in this situation. I don't think minimum wage is the best way to solve this though; probably direct aid would be more suitable. also, my heuristic is meant to be more like a bloom filter. you can't know for sure when you are ready to support a small human for the next eighteen years, but it's not hard to tell when you are definitely not ready. making barely enough to support your single self is a pretty strong signal.
        notacoward 7y ago
        That seems much more reasonable. Thank you for clarifying.
    - plufz 7y ago
      I don’t think that would ever function. Poor people ARE going to have children too, even if you could argue that they can’t provide well enough for the kids. Are there any countries in the world where poor people don’t have children? Personally - even though having children is no right - I much rather live in a society where it is possible to have children even if you have a very low income. Like you can in my country (Sweden). We still have a well functioning market economy.
- atonse 7y ago
  Or maybe we can actually pay people a wage allowing them to lead some semblance of a decent life? Why does it fall on them, instead of the actual businesses paying them?
  - sdinsn 7y ago
    > some semblance of a decent life Having roommates is fine and not a big deal.
    - notacoward 7y ago
      Maybe not for you. For the 37-year-old average retail worker, who might have kids and might not have many other skills, maybe not so much. Not everyone is like you. In particular, many people in the demographic we're talking about might not be like anyone you've ever spent any time with.
      - sdinsn 7y ago
        I'm aware not everyone is like me. And also not everyone is a "37-year-old retail worker". If you want to dismiss my comment, that's fine, but you should delete your own to avoid hypocrisy.
        notacoward 7y ago
        > I'm aware not everyone is like me. You are now. Didn't seem to be previously. > you should delete your own to avoid hypocrisy. I wasn't the one over-generalizing from personal experience. I didn't say "it's no big deal" as though that would be true for everyone. There's no hypocrisy, so spare us all the whataboutism.
        sdinsn 7y ago
        I was plenty aware before. I was sharing my personal experiences. Someone who is a 37year old retail worker is free to share theirs as well. It appears like you are a bad actor and will dismiss anything that violates your 'reality'.
- titusjohnson 7y ago
  Why do you think a company should be allowed to not pay a livable wage?
  - sdinsn 7y ago
    > a livable wage If someone can live in a 2/3 BR with roommates, that sounds pretty livable to me. I used to live in a house with 6 other people during college. I lived just fine.
    - titusjohnson 7y ago
      This is kind of a tone-deaf comment, don't you think? It manages to highlight its posters success (went to college, left), humble brag about how frugal & uncomfortable the poster situation once was (lived with 6 roommates), and dismiss other experiences (I was just fine) in two sentences. The common definition of a livable wage is enough income to "secure food, shelter, clothing, health care, transportation and other necessities of living in modern society"[1]. If you _need_ to procure the assistance of others to live, you're not making a livable wage. So if you need food stamps for food, you're not making a livable wage. The same is true for housing. If you _need_ to live with roommates because you cannot afford even a studio on your own, you're not making a livable wage. Sure, you were just fine during your stint co-habitating with near-strangers. But we're not talking about temporary inconveniences. We're talking about an alternate situation where you had failed to launch and 10 years later, are still stuck with random roommates, still grinding the same shitty jobs, still trying to save but failing because the most you can pack away is $50/mo, and there's always something that needs to be fixed or bought that takes those savings up. We're talking about how public policy should be able to help you help yourself. There is nothing remotely livable about $290/week (federal minimum), just in case you may have forgotten how small that number is. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage
      - sdinsn 7y ago
        It seems like you are trying to dismiss my comment based on silly ideas and projection. Overall, your comment is incredibly ignorant and offensive. > It manages to highlight its posters success I did not intend to do that, I was clearly just providing context to my situation. > humble brag I don't see how I was bragging. > how frugal & uncomfortable the poster situation once was I never stated I was uncomfortable; I was perfectly comfortable. Of course it was more frugal than living alone; that's the entire point of this conversation. > and dismiss other experiences I wasn't dismissing other experiences, I was sharing my own. > If you _need_ to live with roommates because you cannot afford even a studio on your own, you're not making a livable wage. I absolutely disagree with that definition. A roommate is not "assistance". > There is nothing remotely livable about $290/week (federal minimum) State and local minimums are far higher. Areas that do not have a local minimum wage are often magnitudes cheaper and are more affordable than areas with higher cost of livings and higher wages.
- Broken_Hippo 7y ago
  This isn't something that is common in all areas if you are over a certain age - namely, when other folks start having children or living with romantic interests. Seriously. Especially in a small town. And it doesn't work if you don't have friends that are in a similar situation. The more prudent thing is to make sure that the single person can afford a one-bedroom apartment. Unfortunately, these are often not much cheaper than a two bedroom. Where I lived in the states, a studio wasn't much cheaper either, mostly because they were all in apartment complexes instead of divided up houses.

So perhaps they should split a 2/3 bedroom with roommates? If someone makes the absolute legal minimum, why does every expect them to live alone?

antidaily 7y ago
With kids, though?
- viklove 7y ago
  If you're working a minimum wage job, maybe don't have kids?
  - Broken_Hippo 7y ago
    So, if you had kids while you had a decent job and the place closes, you should give away the kids because your replacement job is minimum wage? Is it the same if you wind up disabled and suddenly become a low earner? Or, I know, celibacy for everyone and hope you don't get raped? Free abortions when birth control fails, if you can afford birth control and aren't unlucky enough to have issues with it? Do you happen to know the income level when kids are affordable? Is this well above the average wage in the area (or in general)? Is this higher or lower than low-level military salary? Knowing this sort of number would really help folks out.
    - leetcrew 7y ago
      > So, if you had kids while you had a decent job and the place closes, you should give away the kids because your replacement job is minimum wage? suddenly becoming unable to provide for your kids through no fault of your own is quite different from deciding to have children when you know (or should know) you already have no ability to support them. in both cases, we need to at least do something to help the children, but we have to structure it carefully to avoid encouraging the latter. > Do you happen to know the income level when kids are affordable? no, but I can look at what I spend to sustain myself every month. if I can't comfortably double that, I'm probably not ready to have my first child.
      - notacoward 7y ago
        > I can look at what I spend to sustain myself every month ...and in doing so you make certain assumptions which might not be true for others. Like that your circumstances can only get better, never worse. The GP specifically asked about the latter, in the form of job loss. What if you decided that you were ready to have that child, quite reasonably acccording to those assumptions, and then those assumptions turned out to be incorrect. Would you blame yourself the way you seem to be blaming others?
        leetcrew 7y ago
        I wasn't very clear. if you make a reasonable effort to plan ahead and something totally unforseen causes you to be unable to support your children, that really sucks and I would be happy to contribute tax dollars to help people in this situation. I don't think minimum wage is the best way to solve this though; probably direct aid would be more suitable. also, my heuristic is meant to be more like a bloom filter. you can't know for sure when you are ready to support a small human for the next eighteen years, but it's not hard to tell when you are definitely not ready. making barely enough to support your single self is a pretty strong signal.
        notacoward 7y ago
        That seems much more reasonable. Thank you for clarifying.
  - plufz 7y ago
    I don’t think that would ever function. Poor people ARE going to have children too, even if you could argue that they can’t provide well enough for the kids. Are there any countries in the world where poor people don’t have children? Personally - even though having children is no right - I much rather live in a society where it is possible to have children even if you have a very low income. Like you can in my country (Sweden). We still have a well functioning market economy.
atonse 7y ago
Or maybe we can actually pay people a wage allowing them to lead some semblance of a decent life? Why does it fall on them, instead of the actual businesses paying them?
- sdinsn 7y ago
  > some semblance of a decent life Having roommates is fine and not a big deal.
  - notacoward 7y ago
    Maybe not for you. For the 37-year-old average retail worker, who might have kids and might not have many other skills, maybe not so much. Not everyone is like you. In particular, many people in the demographic we're talking about might not be like anyone you've ever spent any time with.
    - sdinsn 7y ago
      I'm aware not everyone is like me. And also not everyone is a "37-year-old retail worker". If you want to dismiss my comment, that's fine, but you should delete your own to avoid hypocrisy.
      - notacoward 7y ago
        > I'm aware not everyone is like me. You are now. Didn't seem to be previously. > you should delete your own to avoid hypocrisy. I wasn't the one over-generalizing from personal experience. I didn't say "it's no big deal" as though that would be true for everyone. There's no hypocrisy, so spare us all the whataboutism.
        sdinsn 7y ago
        I was plenty aware before. I was sharing my personal experiences. Someone who is a 37year old retail worker is free to share theirs as well. It appears like you are a bad actor and will dismiss anything that violates your 'reality'.
titusjohnson 7y ago
Why do you think a company should be allowed to not pay a livable wage?
- sdinsn 7y ago
  > a livable wage If someone can live in a 2/3 BR with roommates, that sounds pretty livable to me. I used to live in a house with 6 other people during college. I lived just fine.
  - titusjohnson 7y ago
    This is kind of a tone-deaf comment, don't you think? It manages to highlight its posters success (went to college, left), humble brag about how frugal & uncomfortable the poster situation once was (lived with 6 roommates), and dismiss other experiences (I was just fine) in two sentences. The common definition of a livable wage is enough income to "secure food, shelter, clothing, health care, transportation and other necessities of living in modern society"[1]. If you _need_ to procure the assistance of others to live, you're not making a livable wage. So if you need food stamps for food, you're not making a livable wage. The same is true for housing. If you _need_ to live with roommates because you cannot afford even a studio on your own, you're not making a livable wage. Sure, you were just fine during your stint co-habitating with near-strangers. But we're not talking about temporary inconveniences. We're talking about an alternate situation where you had failed to launch and 10 years later, are still stuck with random roommates, still grinding the same shitty jobs, still trying to save but failing because the most you can pack away is $50/mo, and there's always something that needs to be fixed or bought that takes those savings up. We're talking about how public policy should be able to help you help yourself. There is nothing remotely livable about $290/week (federal minimum), just in case you may have forgotten how small that number is. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage
    - sdinsn 7y ago
      It seems like you are trying to dismiss my comment based on silly ideas and projection. Overall, your comment is incredibly ignorant and offensive. > It manages to highlight its posters success I did not intend to do that, I was clearly just providing context to my situation. > humble brag I don't see how I was bragging. > how frugal & uncomfortable the poster situation once was I never stated I was uncomfortable; I was perfectly comfortable. Of course it was more frugal than living alone; that's the entire point of this conversation. > and dismiss other experiences I wasn't dismissing other experiences, I was sharing my own. > If you _need_ to live with roommates because you cannot afford even a studio on your own, you're not making a livable wage. I absolutely disagree with that definition. A roommate is not "assistance". > There is nothing remotely livable about $290/week (federal minimum) State and local minimums are far higher. Areas that do not have a local minimum wage are often magnitudes cheaper and are more affordable than areas with higher cost of livings and higher wages.
Broken_Hippo 7y ago
This isn't something that is common in all areas if you are over a certain age - namely, when other folks start having children or living with romantic interests. Seriously. Especially in a small town. And it doesn't work if you don't have friends that are in a similar situation. The more prudent thing is to make sure that the single person can afford a one-bedroom apartment. Unfortunately, these are often not much cheaper than a two bedroom. Where I lived in the states, a studio wasn't much cheaper either, mostly because they were all in apartment complexes instead of divided up houses.