13 ms·
Min wage would be $44 / hour if it had grown at same rate as Wall Street bonuses
- xupybd 6y agoWhy do we get so upset at wall street but not at Hollywood? I'm not saying you shouldn't be questioning why there is such a big wealth gap, I'm asking why celebrities get a pass.
- apexalpha 6y agoBig movie studio's and producers generally don't get a bail-out when they fail, but just go bankrupt. Plus, most of Wall street gets their money from bonuses, which seems tied to taking risk with or against 'our' money.
- xupybd 6y agoYeah true, I think the bail outs are the most absurd government actions. Corruption at a grand scale.
- jb775 6y agoStories like this are clearly intended to support the politics behind raising the min wage...and Business Insider is a known propaganda machine for the left. What the story intentionally doesn't point out is that a hike in minimum wage wouldn't impact Wall Street bonuses whatsoever (or business exec salary/bonuses). The cost would be shifted to non-unionized middle class workers, such as software devs via wage stagnation and reduced benefit quality while at the same time inflation would soar causing reduced purchasing power of that salary. You think people at the top care if there's one big lower class?
- frashelaw 6y ago> corporate business newspaper is a mouthpiece for the "left" you mean liberals, who are by no measure left: they simply want woke capitalism. leftists want to end capitalism.
- ewindal 6y agoSocialists and leftwards want to end capitalism. There’s a large spectrum of leftists that don’t want that, ie. social democracy.
- EdwinLarkin 6y agoIn my opinion the existence of radical left or socialists is a testament of capitalism. These forces exist as a regulation force on the market.
- chrissnell 6y agoYes, but the minimum wage is the minimum wage. This isn't designed to be something that you start at and stay at your whole life.
- aahortwwy 6y agoWhen it comes to public policy I think it's better to focus on how things turn out in reality rather than how they were intended or designed to turn out.
- throw123123123 6y agoHow can you decide what it is going to turn out like without doing it?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y agoWell, without standing on one side or the other, humans typically do have tools to attempt to predict potential outcomes. For example, you normally would not put a fork into a socket while telling me you can't decide what to do without doing it. I am not saying analogy is applicable here, but there are some studies suggesting simply 'raising' minimum wage will not work the way some proponents argue.
- skywal_l 6y agoHumans have predicted inflation for years (decades) due to increase in money supply. So human can be wrong sometimes...
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y agoSure. There is no denying that. I will only add that the predictions I think you are referring to never made it beyond numbers on a sheet ( bond buying and the like ). Supply increased, economy was stabilized, but money touched main street directly. Still, your main point is valid.
- Proven 6y agoWhat a shitpost... How is it anyone's business how much private employers pay its workers? Meanwhile the Busybody Insider conveniently forgets that the minimum wage rule is immoral, anticompetitive, discriminatory and unconstitutional. The minimum wage should be $0.
- pathseeker 6y agoSo? It would be even higher if it grew at the same rate as a typical Google SWE's comp did from 2010 to 2020. Some industries are doing really well.
- vmception 6y agoMarketable skills, what a concept. I’m being flippant, but there really could be constructive share ownership amongst the general population.
- luckylion 6y ago> I’m being flippant, but there really could be constructive share ownership amongst the general population. If only everyone could work in adtech and digital surveillance, we'd have endless growth and high profits throughout the world! But that's obviously not the case, so how would somebody working for trucking company arrive at the same compensation that somebody in adtech would?
- vmception 6y agoImagine thinking I was arguing for similar compensation I said what I said, there’s nothing more to read into it than what was written Oh maybe share was misinterpreted, I was referring to greater ownership of companies. Shares. Equities.
- CameronNemo 6y agoWall Street hedge fund managers are often considered to be corrupt middle men. That is just the connotation. They are an easy and popular target. Not saying it is a good reason, but that is why the article isn't targeting engineers.
- holler 6y agook but how much would a sandwich cost?
- FranzFerdiNaN 6y agoMore than it does now, but since wages are only a small part of the costs people would still be better off.
- luckylion 6y agoAccording to this [1] (first thing I was able to find, no clue how accurate): Another major cost for McDonald’s is payroll and employee benefits. These account for 36% of its company-operated restaurant expenses. I don't know in what world a third is "only a small part". The same article mentions According to PayScale, the average worker in the fast-food industry makes $8.50 per hour. Increase that to $44 and you end up with a much more expensive burger. [1] https://marketrealist.com/2019/11/how-mcdonalds-wages-major-costs-stack-up/ https://marketrealist.com/2019/11/how-mcdonalds-wages-major-...
- nlitened 6y agoWhy is this comment gray? Is it wrong?
- carbonguy 6y agoThe article you link fails to mention that McDonald's also spent about 8.5 billion on stock buybacks and dividends in 2018, which would have been enough to give every one of their 210,000 employees an extra 40,000 dollars that year on top of what they already made that year. Not quite $44 an hour, but a hell of a lot better than minimum wage - and the company wouldn't need to spend a single extra cent or raise any prices in order to do it. From the 2018 annual report: https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/content/dam/gwscorp/nfl/investor-relations-content/annual-reports/McDonalds_2018_Annual_Report.pdf https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/content/dam/gwscorp/nfl/inve...
- kevingadd 6y agoIf you compare menu prices at fast food chains in areas with high minimum wages (i.e. Seattle's $15) vs areas with low minimum wages, (i.e. the US's federal ~$8) the cost of items is higher but not as high as you might think. You can see some comparison data here, or find other sources (I don't have any bookmarked to dig up, I last did the research on this a few months ago...) https://www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/financing/why-big-mac-costs-more-seattle-austin https://www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/financing/why-big-m...
- refurb 6y agoSeems like an arbitrary comparison. Why would minimum wage (a federal law) be linked to bonuses on Wall Street? I’d be interested to know if low and entry level roles on Wall Street increased.
- BoysenberryPi 6y agoSo what? I am fully in support of increasing minimum wage but I've been seeing articles like this for weeks and it is frankly garbage ragebait that I hesitate to call journalism.
- FranzFerdiNaN 6y agoWhy should Wall Street bonuses grow this much and minimum wage not?
- nostrebored 6y agoMinimum wage increase fuel underemployment and under the table work and wall street bonuses don't?
- kristopolous 6y agoBoth readily addressable issues with legislation that have long ago been addressed in many places.
- imtringued 6y agoThere is a psychological component to minimum wages though. A small increase every year would cause companies to renegotiate salaries frequently. A sudden increase will definitively cause underemployment.
- ReptileMan 6y agoThe self checkouts counters are nice answer. If computers get cheaper than people, people will be replaced. There is serious push in eliminating low skilled labor in a lot of places.
- worker767424 6y agoThey represent different things. They article picked 1985 as the start date. The 80's and 90's saw a hedge fund boom, so it's not surprising that pay followed, and there was a shortage of people able to do that specialized work. Minimum wage is a price floor that mostly applies to unskilled labor. It does point out disparities, but minimum wage not tracking CPI and whether minimum wage is and appropriate and effective policy tool are more interesting discussions. Or on the Wall Street side, does the incentive structure serve shareholders' best interests and the best interest of the financial system. The comparison makes for good rhetoric, but they actual causes are very different, so it just makes intelligent debate harder.
- xupybd 6y agoNZ just raised our min wage to $20 an hour. I work at least 50 hours a week. A teenager at MacDonalds now earns a good fraction of my income if they work the same hours. Despite my 4 year degree, near decade of experience and the responsibility's that I hold.
- hpaavola 6y agoAre you going to switch jobs to work at McD?
- cercatrova 6y agoYou are arguing the wrong point, it is you who should be paid more rather than the teenager who should be paid less.
- nostrebored 6y agoThe value of wages are a function of average and minimum compensation.
- FranzFerdiNaN 6y agoI fail to see the problem?
- setpatchaddress 6y agoThis sort of thinking is corrosive to society at large. It’s not a zero-sum game. But, if you must, take heart in the fact that the teenager will never make more than $minimum in that job, where presumably your income will continue to rise commensurate with experience.
- Dracophoenix 6y agoThat's not corrosive at all. If anything, it's the kind of thinking that leads to recognizing one's worth. No person should stay in a job in which he is of the view the he is not commensurately compensated. Nor should he wait for some vague future in which that might the case "eventually". This was the point of raising the minimum wage in the first place. Why would you think it just stops there?
- Rebelgecko 6y agoIf minimum wage had grown at the same rate as the US federal debt it would be $408/hour
- lixtra 6y agoI think debt should be at least normalized by number of citizens. But still...
- Rebelgecko 6y agoThat makes sense, although sadly it brings the scaled minimum wage down to only around $140/hour
- rStar 6y agomoney isn’t real my dude, at least while we have that sweet sweet petrodollar scam going. see MMT.
- SerLava 6y agoRemember when they said 10 trillion in debt would cause a massive crisis?
- adreamingsoul 6y agoWho said that?
- jb775 6y agoThat irrelevant so long as the USA controls the world's money printing machine and has the biggest guns.
- insert_coin 6y agoIt is not irrelevant, or no less relevant than the headline comparison.
- 6y ago
- nilkn 6y agoWall Street compensation has become more and more bonus heavy over time (i.e., the salary to bonus ratio has shifted even keeping total comp fixed), so the methodology here really just does not make sense on top of the other flaws folks are pointing out.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- lettergram 6y agoHow are posts analyzing gun statistics or election hacking off limits (and will instantly get flagged) - but discussing minimum wage okay on hacker news? 1. Increasing minimum wage suppresses minorities and the young 2. This has been known since the 60s Here’s some recent discussions: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/minimum-wage-hikes-minority-youth-job-loss/ https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/minimum-wage-h... Wall Street bonuses are occurring because there’s a tighter labor pool. Basically, they have to compete for top talent. Money will be made on wall street regardless. Don’t conflate minimum wage and wall street bonuses. Both can be an issue but aren’t necessarily connected nor would increasing the minimum wage lower bonuses.
- biren34 6y agoThere are two big forces driving this divergence. First, the last 50 years have seen a series of "one off" increases to global labor supply. Between Asia and former communist countries, American workers have been forced to compete in an environment dominated by the largest globalization of labor ever. That competition pushes wages down for anything that can be done outside our borders. Second, as the issuer of the world's reserve currency during this period of massive globalization (while all this increased trade is creating a demand for dollars overseas), America's financial sector is involved in exporting dollars the way Norway exports oil. So Wall Street is sitting at the center of an incredible boom driven by international forces + the increased financialization that has come from having an artificially strong dollar (kind of a Dutch Disease for us, where the "sector" thats growing is the dollar-printing sector). Most dollars are printed using private debt, so Wall Street is basically the Saudi Arabia for dollars. Given these two forces, of course Wall Street compensation was going radically outpace the minimum wage. (Not that I would/could have predicted that in 1970 if I had been alive then.)
- lwansbrough 6y agoThis is the same line of thinking that pins the country's economic performance to the stock market. Stock market performance is not a strong indicator of the country's economic performance. Wall Street bonuses are up because Wall Street is making more money. Perhaps because Boomers have all their money saved up and invested with Wall Street banks that use it to make more money. Businesses aren't making that much more money, and while CEO pay has exploded, there's usually only 1 CEO per company. Walmart's CEO makes $22m total compensation per year, if they made the same as their average employee you'd be able to pay each of the 1.6m US employees $14 more per year. Big whoop. The apparent value that the best CEO for the job can bring Walmart per year far exceeds $22m, but a cashier can be replaced by a machine. What we're seeing are the effects of automation and the devaluation of replaceable workers it causes. My recommendation? Middle managers all the way up to C-suite rent-seek when they ask people to do more without raising wages to compensate for the additional effort. Counter-rent-seeking is a totally valid, reasonable response: unionize.
- helsinkiandrew 6y agoDisregarding the merits of wage equality. If the minimum wage had grown at the same rate as Wall Street bonuses, so to would have inflation and $44 dollars would be worth far less than it is now.
- stretchwithme 6y agoA society with no technology has hardly any wealth gap. People who can leverage multiple technologies can multiply their efforts. Mass communication, mass distribution and automation of all sorts. But Wall Street bonuses are subsidized by the fact the government socializes their biggest failures. Bailouts just encourage them to take greater risks, leveraging debt in dangerous ways that will blow up the system again.
- downandout 6y agoTaxpayers not only recovered everything from the 2008 bailouts, they actually earned a $15.3 billion profit. How is that “socializing their biggest failures”? From [1]: Early estimates for the total cost of the bailout to the government were as much as $700 billion, however TARP recovered funds totalling $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit or an annualized rate of return of 0.6%... [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabiliza...
- mstipetic 6y agoIt’s easy to make a profit when everyone is strapped for cash and you have an infinite supply
- anonytrary 6y agoIn the extreme case, what if the minimum wage was $500000000 dollars. That would not work, and it would create a society where everything is done under the table. Now, keep halving that value and ask at what point do people no longer feel required to do things under the table in order to make a basic living (sans criminals). It's not obvious what the right number is. On the other extreme, if the minimum wage was $0, it would be up to people to determine what they're willing to work for. At some point in the next millennium, all work will be creative work and the concept of a minimum wage probably won't even make sense anymore.
- kristopolous 6y agoWell sure, but that's the practice of politics. Just because there's no clear solution doesn't mean we disengage from it. It's why we have these multi thousand year old political projects, to try to do better with exactly these kinds of questions
- carlob 6y ago> At some point in the next millennium, all work will be creative work Or caregiving, more likely.
- bawolff 6y agoI'm not sure what your point is? There's very little in human society where we know the precise right value objectively. We still make choices in the absence of perfect information.
- anonytrary 6y ago> We still make choices in the absence of perfect information. The point is that imperfect choices are likely to be made with imperfect information. So, it's perfectly reasonable for people to be "for" and "against" the minimum wage being $44. Most people do not know the answer, so there's some consensus happening. Maybe every person should be part of direct consensus instead of a few people who are designated decision makers. Humans appoint a few individuals to make decisions on problems that are not known at the time of being appointed, so it seems like imperfect consensus. Would people have voted differently in 2016 if they knew there would be a pandemic in 2020? Maybe. Maybe not. Systems should have ways of course-correcting on a much smaller scale than 4 years. Guessing whether or not we should double minimum wage every few years doesn't work well. Numbers that don't take into account cost of living don't work. Why is the IRA income cut-off the same for someone who lives in Manhattan as it is for someone who lives in Omaha? The whole system seems off. Guessing a number for minimum wage and then mandating that until the next president updates it seems like the wrong approach.
- legitster 6y agoI don't think anyone will deny the presence of inequality, but cherry picking the highest possible number to compare against doesn't really help anything. Because the math is so easy, I calculated a couple other minimum wages (1985 vs 2020): - $21, if it kept up with software engineers. - $17.40 an hour, if it kept up with teachers. (Interestingly, only $16 if it kept up with superintendents). - Doctors are the real losers. Minimum wage would only have gone up to $9.72.
- throwawayfrauds 6y agoActually, picking the highest possible number helps show the massive disparity. I’m curious as to why you say it doesn’t help anything, or why it’s cherry picking.
- bawolff 6y agoMin wage is meant to be a safety net to prevent a race to the bottom where people are exploited unreasonably. We should be measuring it against how well it achieves that, not how it compares to some other group's compensation.
- Udik 6y agoAlso in the same series: "Average lifespan would be 800 years if it had grown like the population of China"
- throwawayfrauds 6y agoThis was a wage to wage comparison, yours is a lifespan to population comparison. So completely different.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nazgulnarsil 6y agoX<Y for any value of X and Y that will generate outrage. Shame on those who click.
- candybar 6y agoThe minimum wage hasn't kept up with other things (it feels to me that it should be $15-$25) and the overall trend of inequality is undeniable (the very top, both in terms of wealth and income, have done much better than the median person, who in turn has done much better than those near the bottom) but comparing minimum wage to bonus is highly misleading, as Wall Street comp has moved increasingly to a bonus-heavy structure, which means bonuses have grown much faster than salaries. And this is just an incredibly misleading way to frame this: > But those paydays have been skyrocketing for decades. Since 1985, Wall Street traders' bonuses have grown 1,217% - and that's just part of their overall pay, which was more than $406,000 on average in 2019, according to data from DiNapoli's office. There's insinuation here that bonuses have grown 1,217% and since that's just part of the pay, Wall Street employees did even better than what's implied by the growth rate But that's just bad math - the salary had to also grow by the same rate in order for the overall pay to have the same growth rate. I don't have this data but they probably do and it's unlikely that they would've cherry-picked the bonus data if the salaries show the same trend. Also, given the increase in automation and outsourcing of non-critical functions to less expensive areas (even moving back office functions to New Jersey would contribute to the trend), it's likely that there are fewer low-paying jobs on Wall Street as compared to the past. For instance, if you look at the source data linked to in the article: https://www.osc.state.ny.us/files/press/pdf/wall-street-bonus-chart-2011.pdf https://www.osc.state.ny.us/files/press/pdf/wall-street-bonu... The total amount grew by less than the amount per person from 1985 to 2011 (despite Wall Street being a much bigger part of the economy that employs far more people) and this means the sample in 2011 is likely biased towards a more elite subset of finance professionals.