3 ms·

There are two economies. The one inhabited by wealthy owner class (they own homes, stock, have paid off cars and disposable income) their economy is great. For

There are two economies. The one inhabited by wealthy owner class (they own homes, stock, have paid off cars and disposable income) their economy is great. For everyone else it sucked. The metrics tend to focus on the former and ignore the “outlier data” caused by the latter.

toomuchtodo 2y ago
The problem is the electorate is angry and impatient. The only way for wages to go up is organizing, unionizing, and to further take advantage of structural demographics compressing the working age population cohort. The only way for prices to go down is a deep recession. Instead, they believed what someone told them (“I will make prices go down”). And when they get the obvious outcome (price levels remain where they are at, or more inflation with tariffs), they are still going to be mad. Facts and data are no anecdote for bitterness and anger, which has been decades in the making (since Ronald Reagan).
- jsbisviewtiful 2y ago
  > they are still going to be mad. Historically it seems like they will be happier despite no change or worse change as long as their "team" won.
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    Yeah, fair. Tribalism and all that.
- tzs 2y ago
  We could raise the federal minimum wage from the current $7.25/hour to somewhere in the $13-16/hour range. That would help a lot of people in lower paying jobs. I picked $13-16/hour because that is what the minimum wage from 1980 would be if it were adjusted to today's dollars and wages. It was $3.10/hour then which becomes around $12.60/hour if it were adjusted to now based on the CPI. If it were adjusted using the same method the Social Security Administration uses to adjust past earnings when trying to figure your average monthly earnings over you career it would by about $16.50/hour today. I note that there are several states where the minimum wage is in that range including California, Oregon, Washington, and Arizona on the west, Florida in the south, most of the Northeast except Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. Looking at a map of minimum wage by states and a map of who won the states in the 2024 election, I think every state where the minimum wage is $7.25/hour went to Trump. In states where it is at least $13/hour it looks like most went Harris except for Florida, Arizona, and Missouri. Speaking of minimum wage and Social Security, the fact that the federal minimum wage has not kept up with inflation has an interesting consequence. Normally when you retire your SS benefit is a significant cut from your working pay. For someone whose retirement age is 67 and retiring this year their benefit is the sum of: 90% of the first $1000 of the AIME 32% of the their AIME over 1000 but less than $6000 15% of the AIME over $6000 where AIME is "average indexed monthly earning". It is simply you average monthly pay over the 35 working years where you earned the most, with each year's pay indexed to current dollars. For example if your AIME is $6000 your benefit would be 90% of $1000 + 32% of $5000 = $2500, so half of your average, which is probably around 1/3 or 1/4 or less of what you were making in your later years. Big drop. If you didn't manage to save/invest a fair amount for retirement this can mean a big drop in your standard of living. If you had been earning minimum wage all those years though your AIME now would be $1982 ($11.89/hour) which is more than you would be currently earning in your $7.25/hour job. Your SS benefit would be 90% of $1000 + 32% of 982 = $1214/month. That's $14570/year, which is $70/year more than you would be making at 2000 hours/year @ $7.25/hour. (And that $14570 is all take home. Your $14570/year working minimum wage would be $13391 after SS and Medicare taxes). So for someone who has worked minimum wage all their life at least their SS will be enough to continue their current lifestyle when they retire. They aren't screwed if they were not able to save/invest much.
tonyedgecombe 2y ago
That's been the case for a long time (at least in the Anglo-sphere). What may be different now is how in your face the disparity is.

toomuchtodo 2y ago

The problem is the electorate is angry and impatient. The only way for wages to go up is organizing, unionizing, and to further take advantage of structural demographics compressing the working age population cohort. The only way for prices to go down is a deep recession. Instead, they believed what someone told them (“I will make prices go down”). And when they get the obvious outcome (price levels remain where they are at, or more inflation with tariffs), they are still going to be mad. Facts and data are no anecdote for bitterness and anger, which has been decades in the making (since Ronald Reagan).

jsbisviewtiful 2y ago
> they are still going to be mad. Historically it seems like they will be happier despite no change or worse change as long as their "team" won.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  Yeah, fair. Tribalism and all that.
tzs 2y ago
We could raise the federal minimum wage from the current $7.25/hour to somewhere in the $13-16/hour range. That would help a lot of people in lower paying jobs. I picked $13-16/hour because that is what the minimum wage from 1980 would be if it were adjusted to today's dollars and wages. It was $3.10/hour then which becomes around $12.60/hour if it were adjusted to now based on the CPI. If it were adjusted using the same method the Social Security Administration uses to adjust past earnings when trying to figure your average monthly earnings over you career it would by about $16.50/hour today. I note that there are several states where the minimum wage is in that range including California, Oregon, Washington, and Arizona on the west, Florida in the south, most of the Northeast except Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. Looking at a map of minimum wage by states and a map of who won the states in the 2024 election, I think every state where the minimum wage is $7.25/hour went to Trump. In states where it is at least $13/hour it looks like most went Harris except for Florida, Arizona, and Missouri. Speaking of minimum wage and Social Security, the fact that the federal minimum wage has not kept up with inflation has an interesting consequence. Normally when you retire your SS benefit is a significant cut from your working pay. For someone whose retirement age is 67 and retiring this year their benefit is the sum of: 90% of the first $1000 of the AIME 32% of the their AIME over 1000 but less than $6000 15% of the AIME over $6000 where AIME is "average indexed monthly earning". It is simply you average monthly pay over the 35 working years where you earned the most, with each year's pay indexed to current dollars. For example if your AIME is $6000 your benefit would be 90% of $1000 + 32% of $5000 = $2500, so half of your average, which is probably around 1/3 or 1/4 or less of what you were making in your later years. Big drop. If you didn't manage to save/invest a fair amount for retirement this can mean a big drop in your standard of living. If you had been earning minimum wage all those years though your AIME now would be $1982 ($11.89/hour) which is more than you would be currently earning in your $7.25/hour job. Your SS benefit would be 90% of $1000 + 32% of 982 = $1214/month. That's $14570/year, which is $70/year more than you would be making at 2000 hours/year @ $7.25/hour. (And that $14570 is all take home. Your $14570/year working minimum wage would be $13391 after SS and Medicare taxes). So for someone who has worked minimum wage all their life at least their SS will be enough to continue their current lifestyle when they retire. They aren't screwed if they were not able to save/invest much.

tonyedgecombe 2y ago

That's been the case for a long time (at least in the Anglo-sphere). What may be different now is how in your face the disparity is.