4 ms·
Hm - that's about 3.5x what it is now. Does that mean everybody else should be making 3.5x what they're making now, or does this just apply to the lowest earne
by commandlinefan 5y ago
Hm - that's about 3.5x what it is now. Does that mean everybody else should be making 3.5x what they're making now, or does this just apply to the lowest earners?
- R0b0t1 5y agoThis $25/$26 figure was what was being quoted >5 years ago. It's more now. The comparison comes from (iirc) purchasing power parity based on the minimum wage when it was first established.
- unclebucknasty 5y ago>Does that mean everybody else should be making 3.5x No, it doesn't necessarily mean that. Productivity gains have not been distributed proportionally; which is what this metric is underscoring for our lowest wage workers. EDIT: If I'm misreading this, I welcome the enlightenment.
- pessimizer 5y agoIt very obviously applies to the workers that saw the least share of productivity gains. What case would you make for raising the salaries of those paid more than their equivalent jobs were paid (adjusted for productivity growth) when the minimum wage began?