15 ms·

If you’re interested in the topic, I recommend the MIT living wage research [1]. They’ve got probably the most useful calculator, letting you compare multiple s

by boulos 5y ago

If you’re interested in the topic, I recommend the MIT living wage research [1]. They’ve got probably the most useful calculator, letting you compare multiple scenarios. [1] https://livingwage.mit.edu/ https://livingwage.mit.edu/

maerF0x0 5y ago
This is a great resource. I'd nitpick that the childcare expense is IMO a terrible evolution of society. People used to take care of eachother's kids while they were at work (eg, work less hours or compressed days and trade day care days with a friend. ). It's far better for children to have stable adult support (ie same small set of people stably over time) than a revolving door of new employees, whomever is working that shift etc. So we're being less resourceful _and_ giving a worse setup to the next generation.
- clairity 5y ago
  children used to just go to the workplace with adults and/or spending time nearby playing with other kids. it's the separation of children from adults that creates a problem, not the accounting of it (e.g., childcare cost figures), an extension of a victorian sterility to public life, trying to cast perfect images of idyllic lives for others to admire rather than living carefree.
- wonderwonder 5y ago
  That requires friends or local family and America has another massive issue with friendless people on the rise.
  - maerF0x0 5y ago
    super agree. But for some reason our government seems focused on fixing this by paying for childcare rather than encouraging community...
- corpdrone2021 5y ago
  Most of the historical community building was done at faith communities, and by stay-at home parents in the past. As a society we fell hook line and sinker for "The two income trap," and are unwilling to contemplate the horrible idea of allowing families to collect the childcare subsidy to pay the parent providing childcare is upsetting to enough different groups to be a non-starter. Right wingers are upset because "it's socialism" and folks on the left who I've discussed the idea with have repeatedly expressed fear that it will undermine feminism.
didgeoridoo 5y ago
Hmm just ran this for my area (Essex County, MA) and it spat out that NO job pays enough on average to have 3 kids (required 130k, max job average 121k for “management”). This seems a bit pessimistic, as I know plenty of people with 3 kids and pretty typical jobs…
- amcoastal 5y ago
  Yeah they probably have two income that get pretty close to 130k, or they get government subsidies and credits to make up the difference. Raising kids is extremely expensive but also subsidized heavily, and those are probably not accounted for in the "required salary" from this tool.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >Yeah they probably have two income that get pretty close to 130k yeah if you check the hourly earning chart, the hourly wage required for a dual earner household with 2 adults and 3 kids is only $32.29/hr.
- handrous 5y ago
  > This seems a bit pessimistic, as I know plenty of people with 3 kids and pretty typical jobs… "Living wage" may include having enough margin to save such that one may retire at something resembling a typical retirement age. If so, it's very easy to under-cut it and still be apparently doing fine, until age 70 when you have to keep working, through illness and pain, as a Wal-Mart greeter. This also means responsible savers have to compete with borrowing-against-their-future types with no retirement savings, for things like housing or (relatedly) various scarce benefits for their kids. IMO it's a pretty strong argument against "freer" personal retirement account systems being the main mechanism of retirement savings, and for mandatory, strong public pension schemes.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >"Living wage" may include having enough margin to save such that one may retire . Doesn't seem to be. >[The living wage model] does not provide a financial means for planning for the future through savings and investment or for the purchase of capital assets (e.g., provisions for retirement or home purchases). https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide-Technical-Documentation-2021-05-21.pdf https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide...
6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
This doesn't seem right. I plugged in San Francisco, and it quoted a $12.00/hr minimum wage. The actual minimum wage here is $16.32/hr. They're using state level minimum wages, but that's just as inaccurate as using the federal minimum wage.

by boulos 5y ago

maerF0x0 5y ago

This is a great resource. I'd nitpick that the childcare expense is IMO a terrible evolution of society. People used to take care of eachother's kids while they were at work (eg, work less hours or compressed days and trade day care days with a friend. ). It's far better for children to have stable adult support (ie same small set of people stably over time) than a revolving door of new employees, whomever is working that shift etc. So we're being less resourceful _and_ giving a worse setup to the next generation.

clairity 5y ago
children used to just go to the workplace with adults and/or spending time nearby playing with other kids. it's the separation of children from adults that creates a problem, not the accounting of it (e.g., childcare cost figures), an extension of a victorian sterility to public life, trying to cast perfect images of idyllic lives for others to admire rather than living carefree.
wonderwonder 5y ago
That requires friends or local family and America has another massive issue with friendless people on the rise.
- maerF0x0 5y ago
  super agree. But for some reason our government seems focused on fixing this by paying for childcare rather than encouraging community...
corpdrone2021 5y ago
Most of the historical community building was done at faith communities, and by stay-at home parents in the past. As a society we fell hook line and sinker for "The two income trap," and are unwilling to contemplate the horrible idea of allowing families to collect the childcare subsidy to pay the parent providing childcare is upsetting to enough different groups to be a non-starter. Right wingers are upset because "it's socialism" and folks on the left who I've discussed the idea with have repeatedly expressed fear that it will undermine feminism.

didgeoridoo 5y ago

Hmm just ran this for my area (Essex County, MA) and it spat out that NO job pays enough on average to have 3 kids (required 130k, max job average 121k for “management”). This seems a bit pessimistic, as I know plenty of people with 3 kids and pretty typical jobs…

amcoastal 5y ago
Yeah they probably have two income that get pretty close to 130k, or they get government subsidies and credits to make up the difference. Raising kids is extremely expensive but also subsidized heavily, and those are probably not accounted for in the "required salary" from this tool.
- gruez 5y ago
  >Yeah they probably have two income that get pretty close to 130k yeah if you check the hourly earning chart, the hourly wage required for a dual earner household with 2 adults and 3 kids is only $32.29/hr.
handrous 5y ago
> This seems a bit pessimistic, as I know plenty of people with 3 kids and pretty typical jobs… "Living wage" may include having enough margin to save such that one may retire at something resembling a typical retirement age. If so, it's very easy to under-cut it and still be apparently doing fine, until age 70 when you have to keep working, through illness and pain, as a Wal-Mart greeter. This also means responsible savers have to compete with borrowing-against-their-future types with no retirement savings, for things like housing or (relatedly) various scarce benefits for their kids. IMO it's a pretty strong argument against "freer" personal retirement account systems being the main mechanism of retirement savings, and for mandatory, strong public pension schemes.
- gruez 5y ago
  >"Living wage" may include having enough margin to save such that one may retire . Doesn't seem to be. >[The living wage model] does not provide a financial means for planning for the future through savings and investment or for the purchase of capital assets (e.g., provisions for retirement or home purchases). https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide-Technical-Documentation-2021-05-21.pdf https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide...

6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago

This doesn't seem right. I plugged in San Francisco, and it quoted a $12.00/hr minimum wage. The actual minimum wage here is $16.32/hr. They're using state level minimum wages, but that's just as inaccurate as using the federal minimum wage.