Minimum wage earners can't afford to live anywhere in America

...because we live in a capitalist economy and its history shows they will drive the bottom wage down to absurdly low levels. Then people will take the "more livable" but still unacceptable alternative of various kinds of welfare. So then without a minimum wage, what's the next step? ..... eliminate all forms of welfare and public assistance. And what a great society we'll have then!!!

 

Wow! Perhaps you could benefit from coursework in critical thinking! Your link to BLS is about the number of minimum wage workers. My graphic was about the characteristics of minimum wage workers. And where the two of them come closest to intersecting, it is impossible to draw any relationship between them because they remain so different in what they report. And you don't see it. Wow.

 

Perhaps if you actually read what was right there on the link... Here, I'll make it simple for you.

And that's just the start of it. I'm not going to C&P the entire link, please read it for yourself.

Your graphic is pretty... and useless. Source and link to source is kind of what supporting your posts are all about.

 

And you reject the EPI for partisan reasons.

My EPI graphic said the AVERAGE AGE of those on minimum wage is 35. And you haven't thought about how many retired people have taken minimum wage jobs to stay busy, stay involved, and to make a little income to supplement S.S. and how their ages skews the average. Bottom line: as I said, "where the two of them come closest to intersecting, it is impossible to draw any relationship between them because they remain so different in what they report" and this is precisely where I meant. You cannot determine the AVERAGE AGE of minimum wage workers from what you posted. Comprehension. Ya know?

 

time to raise the min wage

 

Yes, we know that's your motto.

 

no kidding, thanks to Trump we are all paying much more at the pump this year

 

"Back in 1960 the minimum wage was $1/hour."

the problem is min wage has not risen to keep up with inflation, it was doing great at keeping up, then it stopped, that was the problem

"Minimum wage has never been a solution to anything other than protecting workers from the most egregious employers..."

and that is why we have a min wage

 

"Affordable housing for everyone is a critical issue yet few or no politicians have the cahones to solve the problem..."

this I agree with, there needed to be much much more government housing, housing that people can choose and pay a reasonable rent for

 

So first you said my link didn't give characteristics, and when I proved you wrong on that, you jump off to the validity of the data provided that you said didn't exist.

I have no clue who EPI is, or what is partisan. Assumptions aren't good.

The data at Bureau of Labor Statistics is drawn from data supplied by employers collected on a monthly basis and compiled. One of those annoy government agencies that demand that kind of information from businesses so that people like you and me can be current on the existing employment environment.

If you disagree with the information, that's fine. But to disregard it because it disagrees with a graphic that you posted with no link that I could find, well, I'm not very concerned. But you might consider that your comment of 'comprehension' should be more of an inner reflection. Just saying....

 

Why not just make all housing government housing? After all, everybody should be able to have other people pay for things to make it all reasonable and affordable. Why have any incentive to strive to do more or better? Government transportation, government medical, government education, government food....

For those who need to be told, sarcasm included.

 

No I didn't. Again, comprehension PLUS correct reading. Try to read the words that are actually there, and avoid "reading" words that are NOT there.
I said your link presented NUMBERS while mine presented CHARACTERISTICS. But let's go on.....

Yet you replied to my post #21 with "Perhaps if you got your information from a non-partisan source, you would know actual facts to post."
False denials aren't good.

You really don't get it, do you. The two links DO NOT DISAGREE! In fact they don't comment on the same datapoint. Are you really this unable to understand the argument you're in here?

 

So apparently, the fact that there is an entire section in the link I posted that gives data regarding characteristics like gender, age, marital status, income levels in the household, have no comparison to a graphic that displays gender, age and other characteristics. Alrighty then.

I still don't know what EPI is. The government, with high hopes, is not (supposed to be) partisan. I was referring to the source I posted. Keep up.

So pick one or the other. 'They do not disagree', or 'they don't comment on the same datatpoint.' Because the age range BLS states, is not the same age range your graphic highlights, as one point. I'm not going to put each of your points to the ones in the link I supplied.

So, try one more time on your reading and comprehension.

 

Maybe you should check the definition of the word "average".

LOL!! You're dancing and spinning! You LITERALLY SAID "Perhaps if you got your information from a non-partisan source, you would know actual facts to post."

At this point you are not a reliable poster in this conversation, so this is my last post to you since there really isn't any point if you refuse to deal with what we actually said instead of your fantasies.
Bye.

 

did you miss that I said they pay rent, it's just managed by the government

you can still rent from people that have homes more to your liking if you can afford it

 

I still don't know who EPI is, or anything about them, since you didn't bother posting a link to it. Apparently you really don't understand English, but that's fine. Dismissing non-partisan data because it doesn't fit your slant doesn't help you any.

Fantasies? Nope, facts.

Enjoy your day!

 

But it's not affordable to all people. Since a certain group is having their rent made affordable, how about making it affordable for everyone? Managed by the government... subsidized. Don't we all deserve subsidized rent or mortgages?

 

everyone can make the choice, the rich ones will choose private and the ones that can't afford it will choose gov housing, but you can choose either

 

Labor costs are determined mostly by supply and demand and these costs can vary greatly from community to community. From a business perspective the company needs to pay whatever labor cost in order to be able to hire and sustain employees to satisfy demand. Of course, the actual cost of labor must be in line with the company model. Another part of labor cost is determined by the local cost of living...it's stupid to have a MW of $7.25/hour in San Francisco where $250K income is needed to buy a home...

 

Who is 'they'? The employee decides what job and what wages to take with no gun held to their heads. The company MUST pay whatever labor prices necessary to hire and sustain their labor force. And employers compete for labor by paying more or having benefits, etc.

 

Those earning $.50 above minimum wage in 1960 have also not increased parallel to inflation. Half the nation earns less than $16.35/hour or less...none of these wages have increased parallel to inflation! Why?

Today there are few egregious employers that can take advantage of workers. And any MW put in place for this will not be a so-called livable wage but a bare-ass low wage which serves no purpose...

 

To achieve this the profit motive needs to be removed, meaning non-profit models backed by the government but managed by the public sector...

 

agree, raising the min wage is not the only answer

 

If the State Minimum Wage is higher than the Federal Minimum Wage, then the State's MW would be applied. California is $13-$14 according to the link below, so if someone has an issue with that, they need to address it to the State.
California Minimum Wage 2021 - Minimum-Wage.org

A number of States have a higher MW then the Federal MW. As I previously stated, MW is a starting point. Less than 2% of the workforce actually makes just FMW, and rarely do they stay at that wage. Those that do not move past FMW carry the weight of that, and the argument that they should be paid more for no additional production does nothing to the benefit of the worker or the employer.

 

How much would the MW need to be increased to make a difference? And any answer to this cannot be the same in San Francisco and Mayberry RFD so a federal MW has little meaning.