5 ms·

Everyone deserves a living wage

by glenda 7y ago

jerf 7y ago
When I was in high school and part-time shelving books at the local town library, no I didn't. Not for that work. Pocket money for a teenager was about the right amount of pay. Not everyone is a single mother trying to make ends meet for her two children. We should not make economic policy as if they are. "So why don't we take care of them?" Single mothers trying to make ends meet have access to a wide array of social programs already. We are already not abandoning them to the tender mercies of minimum wage and nothing else.
- glenda 7y ago
  Sure, but the majority of people with jobs need them to survive. I'm happy that wasn't an issue for you in high school though.
- peterwwillis 7y ago
  So, out of the 350 million people in this country, we should set national economic policy based on 1 of them (you as a teenager)
  - hodr 7y ago
    Yes. Let's go with this logic. Do you know what percentage of people in this country make minimum wage (or less)? According to the BLS it's 2.3% of wage earners, which are 58% of workers, which are 78% of the population of adults. So, 1.04% of the adult population of the US makes minimum wage. In your logic, why should we set national economic policy based on 1%?
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - peterwwillis 7y ago
      Can you restate this please? It doesn't make sense; how are 2.3% of wage earners actually 58% of workers actually 78% of the adult population actually 1% of adult population? From [1]: 1.8 million workers made the federal minimum wage or less. But that does not say how many people made less than $15 an hour, which is considered a living wage. According to the NELP in 2016, 42% of US workers make less than $15 per hour. Nearly half of US workers. [2] So raising the minimum wage would support nearly half the US workforce to be able to, you know, live. I think setting economic policy with this in mind makes more sense than only considering what teenagers need. [1] https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm [2] https://raisetheminimumwage.com/fight-for-15/ https://raisetheminimumwage.com/fight-for-15/
      - hodr 7y ago
        Restated: 78% of adults work. 58% of workers are "wage earners" (paid hourly, not salary) 2.3% of wage earners earn minimum wage. Therefore 0.0230.580.78 = 0.0104, or just over 1% of adults earn minimum wage.
- intopieces 7y ago
  Exceptions to minimum wage laws already exist for the case you mentioned, so there is no issue with raising the federal minimum wage to account for the increased cost of living for those that depend on it for this.
- smileysteve 7y ago
  > When I was in high school and part-time > Not everyone is a single mother trying to make ends meet In the meantime, student loans are at an all time high! Whether or not you had college paid for by somebody else who saved or even if you didn't need to go; Teenagers need more than pocket money, afterall, in 2 years they will, for the median, be committing to loan terms that will take 10+ years to pay off, if they ever do.
  - hodr 7y ago
    Isn't that an argument for addressing the costs of tuition, and not an argument for artificially setting the value of labor?
    - smileysteve 7y ago
      Not in isolation. A 16 year old's upcoming expenses are a car, car insurance, tuition, housing, food, and more... And if possible should be contributing to a retirement account as well. A 16 year old also may not have a college opportunity and may decide to go straight to work, may decide to go straight to having a family with a high school sweetheart. At that point, the 16-18 year old needs a liveable wage too.
      - radford-neal 7y ago
        No, 16-year-olds should not be contributing to retirement accounts. The return on investment in such an account will be far less than the return from investing that money in increasing their own human capital. This could be by buying good books to read, buying a computer to learn to program on, or paying for movie tickets to go out on a date with someone who may be their future spouse.
gdix 7y ago
Sounds nice on a bumper sticker but not really a point of view that stands up to scrutiny.
- fwip 7y ago
  Just to be clear, the counterpoint you support is: "Some people don't deserve a living wage."
mamon 7y ago
But not every job has to provide it. Teenager working part time at McDonalds does not have to earn $100k, they just need to earn enough to buy them new pair of jeans, or few beers for Saturday night party. It is up to them to eventually move from such low skill, low pay jobs to an actual career.
- fwip 7y ago
  You've built a man out of straw, and now brag that you managed to topple it.
- smileysteve 7y ago
  > they just need to earn enough to buy them new pair of jeans, or few beers for Saturday night party. It would be nice if they could pay for a semester or 2 (or 8) of college instead of using student loans. You also assume that their parents are able to put healthy food on the table every night; which statistically, doesn't hold for 100% of Americans.
hodr 7y ago
Well that's blatantly false. Everyone willing to minimally contribute to society should have an expectation of a living wage. Able bodied people that choose to do nothing deserve to receive nothing.

Everyone deserves a living wage

by glenda 7y ago

Everyone deserves a living wage

jerf 7y ago

When I was in high school and part-time shelving books at the local town library, no I didn't. Not for that work. Pocket money for a teenager was about the right amount of pay. Not everyone is a single mother trying to make ends meet for her two children. We should not make economic policy as if they are. "So why don't we take care of them?" Single mothers trying to make ends meet have access to a wide array of social programs already. We are already not abandoning them to the tender mercies of minimum wage and nothing else.

glenda 7y ago
Sure, but the majority of people with jobs need them to survive. I'm happy that wasn't an issue for you in high school though.
peterwwillis 7y ago
So, out of the 350 million people in this country, we should set national economic policy based on 1 of them (you as a teenager)
- hodr 7y ago
  Yes. Let's go with this logic. Do you know what percentage of people in this country make minimum wage (or less)? According to the BLS it's 2.3% of wage earners, which are 58% of workers, which are 78% of the population of adults. So, 1.04% of the adult population of the US makes minimum wage. In your logic, why should we set national economic policy based on 1%?
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - peterwwillis 7y ago
    Can you restate this please? It doesn't make sense; how are 2.3% of wage earners actually 58% of workers actually 78% of the adult population actually 1% of adult population? From [1]: 1.8 million workers made the federal minimum wage or less. But that does not say how many people made less than $15 an hour, which is considered a living wage. According to the NELP in 2016, 42% of US workers make less than $15 per hour. Nearly half of US workers. [2] So raising the minimum wage would support nearly half the US workforce to be able to, you know, live. I think setting economic policy with this in mind makes more sense than only considering what teenagers need. [1] https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2017/home.htm [2] https://raisetheminimumwage.com/fight-for-15/ https://raisetheminimumwage.com/fight-for-15/
    - hodr 7y ago
      Restated: 78% of adults work. 58% of workers are "wage earners" (paid hourly, not salary) 2.3% of wage earners earn minimum wage. Therefore 0.0230.580.78 = 0.0104, or just over 1% of adults earn minimum wage.
intopieces 7y ago
Exceptions to minimum wage laws already exist for the case you mentioned, so there is no issue with raising the federal minimum wage to account for the increased cost of living for those that depend on it for this.
smileysteve 7y ago
> When I was in high school and part-time > Not everyone is a single mother trying to make ends meet In the meantime, student loans are at an all time high! Whether or not you had college paid for by somebody else who saved or even if you didn't need to go; Teenagers need more than pocket money, afterall, in 2 years they will, for the median, be committing to loan terms that will take 10+ years to pay off, if they ever do.
- hodr 7y ago
  Isn't that an argument for addressing the costs of tuition, and not an argument for artificially setting the value of labor?
  - smileysteve 7y ago
    Not in isolation. A 16 year old's upcoming expenses are a car, car insurance, tuition, housing, food, and more... And if possible should be contributing to a retirement account as well. A 16 year old also may not have a college opportunity and may decide to go straight to work, may decide to go straight to having a family with a high school sweetheart. At that point, the 16-18 year old needs a liveable wage too.
    - radford-neal 7y ago
      No, 16-year-olds should not be contributing to retirement accounts. The return on investment in such an account will be far less than the return from investing that money in increasing their own human capital. This could be by buying good books to read, buying a computer to learn to program on, or paying for movie tickets to go out on a date with someone who may be their future spouse.

gdix 7y ago

Sounds nice on a bumper sticker but not really a point of view that stands up to scrutiny.

fwip 7y ago
Just to be clear, the counterpoint you support is: "Some people don't deserve a living wage."

mamon 7y ago

But not every job has to provide it. Teenager working part time at McDonalds does not have to earn $100k, they just need to earn enough to buy them new pair of jeans, or few beers for Saturday night party. It is up to them to eventually move from such low skill, low pay jobs to an actual career.

fwip 7y ago
You've built a man out of straw, and now brag that you managed to topple it.
smileysteve 7y ago
> they just need to earn enough to buy them new pair of jeans, or few beers for Saturday night party. It would be nice if they could pay for a semester or 2 (or 8) of college instead of using student loans. You also assume that their parents are able to put healthy food on the table every night; which statistically, doesn't hold for 100% of Americans.

hodr 7y ago

Well that's blatantly false. Everyone willing to minimally contribute to society should have an expectation of a living wage. Able bodied people that choose to do nothing deserve to receive nothing.