4 ms·
The MIT "living wage" figures are, to put it lightly, utterly deranged; more a statement of the purveyors's ideal of a first-world standard of living than a ref
by naniwaduni 2y ago
The MIT "living wage" figures are, to put it lightly, utterly deranged; more a statement of the purveyors's ideal of a first-world standard of living than a reflection of reality. If they are to be believed, then evidently grad students—or really like, half the population??—must not be alive.
As maligned as the poverty lines are—and they do have plenty of shortcomings—they are still a far closer approximation of "the true cost of living in a modern economy" than this drivel.
†No, really, go compare the "living wage" figures (https://livingwage.mit.edu/ https://livingwage.mit.edu/) with AMI stats (https://ami-lookup-tool.fanniemae.com/ https://ami-lookup-tool.fanniemae.com/).
- nemomarx 2y agogenerally "living wage" in these contexts also covers like, a house and being able to take care of dependents + maybe a partner? Which is generally above poverty levels right
- naniwaduni 2y agoIt's broken down by number of working adults and children.
- lazyasciiart 2y agoYou may not have understood the concept of a living wage. For a start, a living wage is expected to support saving for retirement and future expenses like a new car, or eventually buying a house. "People can live on $100/week for six weeks!!!" is not a relevant counter point to "$100/week is not a living wage."