The minimum wage would be $44 an hour if it had grown at the same rate as Wall Street bonuses
By - speckz
Now how much would it be if tied to cost of college?
That’s a better question. Or just inflation even. But to answer you’re question it would be around 22-25 an hour
Funny... that actually sounds like a livable wage here in the USA.
I make $21/hr before taxes, benefit costs etc. I can live on it in my county, but not in the metro county of my state.
Yearly, before taxes and benefits, my income comes out to 44.5k. In the city I live in I qualify for low income housing.
Edit: Since enough people have responded with "move" or "let me get my violin" I obviously didn't communicate the point of my comment well enough.
This isn't a "oh you should feel sorry for me" comment. It's a comment on how warped our income inequality is. The fact that someone making as much money as I am can still qualify as low income should be shocking because if I can still qualify for it, how in the hell is someone making the current minimum wage suppose to survive?
I make about the same as you, but I live in a very rural part of south western Pa. our cost of living is really low compared to the rest of the country. If my home was an hour north near Pittsburgh, it would be worth at least an additional 50k.
Hmm gonna take a stab in the dark, do you live in Washington county? Haha
King County to be exact. The sad part, I don't have a car, so to save money and live somewhere cheaper, I'd have to buy a car and then commute in, which then means spending money on car payments, insurance, gas, and maintenance, the cost of which would probably negate the savings of moving away from the city. But then, how is anyone making less than me supposed to survive in the same enviroment?
And that’s the problem, they can’t really. I just got a new job/promotion within the agency I work for. I was only making 39k/yr and just barely scraped by. Thankfully I got a place for $525/mo. Which is pretty cheap compared to what’s around to rent. But with all my monthly payments and school loans, it was still a struggle.
I live in Kentucky, one of the top 5 poorest states and for $525/mo. you can rent a tool shed.
a 1 bedroom apartment in the literal ghetto part of town, shared rundown building with many others is minimum 1,000 a month just for rent
Honestly bro any 90s civics or Corolla are basically bulletproof just grab the cheapest one that isnt leaking it making abnormal noise and just change the oil and you're golden
I make the same salary and live in the same county. They are keeping us pinned down here.
Close, I’ve lived on the westmoreland/fayette county line most my life. My home is in westmoreland.
Same! Lol live in Good ol’ Greensburg.
We moved from Johnstown to Latrobe and it’s quite the change. Not in a bad way, either. I like this area - not too far from Pittsburgh plus it’s relatively quiet and peaceful. We’re close to the airport so it’s fun to watch planes take off and land.
My property would be worth 5x it's value 10 miles away lol
My property would be worth.. wait you guys have property?
Emotional baggage counts as property, right?
I wish we could rent out emotional baggage. Our generation would be thriving.
What state actually just goes off the fed minimum though?
About 20 of them.
Wild! , why even work? Lol
I live in Bismarck, ND and we have the federal minimum wage. I don't see jobs paying anything less than $10/hour because any less and they don't get applicants. McDonald's is hiring at $11.
And there’s the root of our crime rates
You were stating facts not looking for pity. Have my upvote.
Roughly the same here friend, plus child support now so I’m making even less than before. If not for my parents I’d be homeless
Bless the parents who aren't throwing their kids into this shit show.
I have a host of opinions on how shitty the child support system is but I'm heated enough talking about our crippling poverty.
What state are you in? I know some states are more fair than others. Sadly too many states are still very backwards in that area.
I made the same off unemployment
Mine came from a full time job lol
Fuck us right?
So you're paid under minimum wage?
Lol same out here with $11,500 last year working 6 days a week 6-7hr shifts. The last 2 months of 2020 I finally was able to get a second job so I was working around 58-60hrs a week lost 40lbs cause I was only able to afford to eat 1 meal every other day or every other 2 days. Otherwise I’d of been kicked out of my apartment and been homeless.
Had a discussion months ago with an American chap he maintained that the Americans that were poor is because some people like it, and maybe a week or two ago one told me that people working two or three jobs to get by was only because they were simple jobs and short hours only
Never mind their opinion about free healthcare, honestly I don't understand what they get from seeing it the way they see it
Fucking respect friend.
Living like this ain't fun, and people look down on us for being minimum wage workers when it's our bosses who refuse to pay us.
I wasn't even flipping burgers I was working in a Warehouse in the deep south with no A/C or heating 5-7 days a week 8-11 hour shifts
America is a third world country.
I made 70k before taxes and I was able to get special financing for a home purchase because the government says I’m poor. I make a little over 4.5x the minimum wage here.
I always hate the whole “lol then move do you want me to feel bad for you?” shit whenever someone replies to these kinds of posts. Like god damn, I never thought of that before those intelligent Redditors came in.
I make $51k on salary. That's $24-ish/hour before taxes. $1500 take home every 2 weeks (taxes, healthcare, etc. deducted already). If I moved to the city I work in I'd be homeless
Just to further prove your point, I was able to buy a 3 bd home on roughly .75 acres making a little more than $48k a year. Something tells me your city doesn’t have a single home this size anywhere near affordable for you.
The county I live in now has a law or that in any new development a certain percentage must be low income. They just built a bunch of luxury townhomes down the street from me. The cost for one of the “low income” units is $1.1M
But where are you even from? Your wage is lower than most “low” to medium wages are here in Scandinavia. Buuuuut we pay a hefty part of it for free healthcare etc. etc. Roads, etc. public shools, etc. You know…. We are ACTUALLY “free”…. Oh, and actually democratic as well 😂 I could cut off my finger right now and get it fixed for free. Ambulance and all. F it. I could be in intensive care for the rest of my life without my family having to worry about it. Now THAT’S freedom. Idiots
I’m making roughly 21/hr, with a family of 4 (EDIT: family of 4 = me, spouse and 2 children) it’s barely enough to get by and we can’t afford healthcare (if I break the cost out to hourly it’s $9/hr for healthcare). Can’t even afford marketplace insurance so we go uninsured to keep the bills paid. The problem is multi-level and not just income related.
Hard cliff of benefits.
So many benefit programs have hard cut offs that it hurts the mobility factor.
Yea, they need a better slide on benefits scaling with a higher fade out. Would help out so many people who are in that "almost there" area.
Is CoL even scaled into benefits availability? I know wages are but never seen any indication if local CoL is part of it.
This might get downvoted but I’ve seriously considered getting divorced to change the numbers in our favor for getting assistance. I can’t really take it to that extreme though, it’s dishonest and I’m not that kind of person. Just a fleeting thought every once in a while.
I know a lot of people get married in the military to share the benefits.
With that level of income (166% FPL) youd qualify for CSR subsidy silver plans with actuarial values of 94% for next to nothing. Feel like something is missing from the info unless your work offers you coverage for less than 8.5% of your pay. Please DM if you want help because I'd hate to see your family not be covered and get no care.
You don’t get it for free ? What state are you in?
It's not a system that was comprehensively designed to screw the poor in every possible way, but capitalism incentivizes the kind of behavior that screws the poor at every turn despite being built entirely by and on the labor and spending power of those poor.
We needed a revolution twenty years ago. We needed progress forty years ago. We needed human decency in our political system sixty years ago.
We needed a revolution 20 years ago, but we got distracted by you guess it : TERRORISM ! Now who's leaving in fear of not being able to make it till the next paycheck....
Hey there are some confederate statues you should be arguing about...
"Reclaim Wallstreet" turned in to "Reclaim confederate statues"
The rich win again
Figures like Keynes and others speculated that by now we'd have way more leisure time and still make enough working less hours to sustain ourselves. Unfortunately, capitalism won out. Along with the elite class of capital owners.
The poor are disposable cogs for a money printing machine. It doesn't matter how many cogs get worn out and replaced. It doesn't matter how many raw materials are used up, nor whether they can be replaced. The only thing that matters is the money must keep flowing into the hoards of these dragons in human form.
/r/ABoringDystopia meets fantasy.
That's kinda the point, if wages don't follow inflation then what was just enough to be a living wage 30 years ago wouldn't be a living wage today
I believe there was a data chart somewhere that stated the livable wage per state. I believe the average was $21 - $23, so you're not wrong.
It depends where you live. The living wage in my county is $13.
Minimum wage in Hawaii is $10. Average price for a gallon of milk is $7. I don’t even like milk but I had to move my poor ass out of there even though I’m native.
Isn't the price that high because it's imported? Does Hawaii have many dairy farms?
What I saw in Hawaii was the land could bring in more money catering to housing and tourism vs farming.
Which is why all the sugar cane farms are gone.
Read up on the Jones Act and it explains everything about why prices are so expensive in Hawaii
I know what I'm doing than. Moving to Hawaii and starting a dairy farm to sell milk for cheaper
Gl finding a plot of land big enough to pasture your cows in that isn’t crazy expensive
Need them Himalayan mountain cows with the big ol bendy legs. Something that can graze on a volcano lol
Lmao, Are you talking about Yaks?
A dairy farm is an incredible pain in the butt to run. Even at $6/gallon it's going to seem like a waste of time and sanity.
We are sort of lucky that anyone chooses to farm at all anymore.
It isn’t that there are local dairy farms, is that the farms rely on mainland for their feed.
If you could find a reliable way to grow it you should move to Hawaii and start a feed farm for all the dairy farmers
If that's the case, I'm building vertical farms over there. Want to be my business partner?
If you live in Hawaii and try to live like a mainlander, you're gonna be in trouble. If you adjust your expectations to live like an islander (small apartment, mostly seafood diet) you'll be better off. Milk isn't a normal food in Hawaii. That's like trying to eat crab everyday while living in Kansas.
A studio apartment in downtown is $1300. I get what you’re saying but I could not afford that even with 2 jobs. I had to think about living to work or working to live. Also, milk is a common drink in Hawaii. Just because I don’t like milk doesn’t mean other people don’t.
That's comparable to a studio in Denver, where I live. I'll concede all day long that living in HI is more expensive than other states. But the price of milk is a horrible metric to compare cost of living in HI to other states.
You’re right it’s a bad comparison. It’s honestly the first thing I thought of that most people would relate to. My bad.
That would be sooo nice. If I made $25/hr with goods and services and roughly the same price, myself and many others may actually be hopeful in this lifetime
Inflation makes more sense than comparing different jobs wages.
That's productivity, isn't it?
I thought it would go up to 30+, but that was just one college some out of touch Republican was talking about.
Pegged to inflation, using the highest purchasing power min wage in our history ($1.60 in 1968), the equivalent is around 12 today
Disclaimer: this is not an advocating of having only a 12 minimum wage, just pointing out accurate numbers.
1938 had it at .25cents an hour. 1938 at Pen state (happened to be one I could find info for) 400 tuition for bachelor's. 250 for masters
2019/20 was 51k, 36k for masters. So 127 times the cost for the bachelor's tuition. While at 7.25 per hour means that we have 29 times the pay of when minimum wage was established.
Which would leave about 32$ an hour.
1938 - 1600 working hours for tuition. If we take 2019 for it to be 1700 hours for tuition it would be 30$ an hour.
If I use 1976. 2.30$ per hour. 3,755 tuition for bachelor's we have. 9.38 times the cost and 9.2 times the pay so that's good.
raising the minimum wage eliminates the abusive kind of immigration as inheritors and their corporations will see too much liability in hiring foreigners over citizens of that country.
>minimum wage tends to protect native workers from competition induced by low-skill immigration.
Problem with that is it’s so easy to avoid with under the table payments
The cost of college is a function solely of the free availability of student loans and the fact they cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. Change that and college costs will plummet.
We're going in the opposite direction with forgiveness. Making college both infinitely expensive and free on the back of the tax payer has university board members stroking themselves.
Another problem is the difference in % of tuition paid by the state between 1980 and now. It was 80% then and 20% now (in the US).
If the state covered the same amount as in 1980, then it would of cost me about 2k per semester (4k/yr) + books somewhere around 6k ... I can earn that with 40 hrs/week in summer and cover most of my expenses with a part-time job during the year. No loans required.
Loans are part of the problem, but States really need to step up and support education with revenue as they did in the past...
>Another problem is the difference in % of tuition paid by the state between 1980 and now. It was 80% then and 20% now (in the US).
>If the state covered the same amount as in 1980, then it would of cost me about 2k per semester (4k/yr) + books somewhere around 6k ... I can earn that with 40 hrs/week in summer and cover most of my expenses with a part-time job during the year. No loans required.
It's nice to see someone actually acknowledging the truth about this situation, and not just parroting the "mUh LoANs" meme.
Yeah why are we tethering minimum wage to Wall Street bonuses lol it seems almost perfectly irrelevant
Cost of college is inflated because government continually increased loan amounts for decades. I agree with the sentiment here but the reason colleges price are what they are is because of government stupidity.
Imagine what it would be if it grew at the same rate as college tuition (or to an extent, college administration leadership salaries).
I think some other dude in the comments did the math, would be like $22.50
Ummmm.....That doesn't seem quite right. Inflation adjusted to the growth of tuition (which is what was asked), [Stacker.com shows it increased ~157% from 1969 to 2018](https://stacker.com/stories/3861/how-college-costs-have-changed-last-50-years).
Now US federal minimum wage was 1.30 per hr in 1969, and 7.25 per hour as of 2020. [Inflation for the same period ](https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/) means that Fed min wage should be 9.17 an hr today (605% total inflation)
So if we do some quick maths (hopefully the finance and accounting boys can help on this):
If we achieved an inflation adjusted growth in tuition of 157%, therefore we'd have:
((1+x)/(1+6.05)) - 1 = 1.57
We end up with a ~1712.5% nominal growth rate from 1969.
Or 22.27 per hour.
So thats actually really close and I don't why I posted this.
Props to you for still posting this.
That’s it? Surprising. I know Wall Street was top pay in the 60s and 70s also and university was not even close and tuitions were small. University costs and health care have been the two major cost growths aside from rent. Most other things flat or even down....
Edit: sounds like the individual contributor salaries aren’t up that much. Top growth is total tuition. Then administration leadership and that kind of thing. A lot of the growth is the scale of employment which drives tuition costs up.
That doesn’t seem right. A quick google has yahoo finance showing a 3009% tuition increase since 1969. Minimum wage in 1969 was 1.30. 3009% of 1.30 is 39.11. So that comes out to $40.41.
I’m shit at math though so maybe that’s wrong?
That sounds right so about the same as finance.
Student loans are the reason
Yep. The value is high but demand (students and their families) had limiting purchasing power. That created a low price equilibrium. Now it’s high value and far less limited ability to pay to the value from the loans, so the return on investment is lowering and cost is increasing a lot. Not a good situation.
My take from this article is not that the minimum wage should match the growth of Wall Street bonuses but that the wealth gap between the wealthy and those not so wealthy has grown. With that gap growing significantly further last year, 2020. The emphasis on a stagnant minimum wage for 12 years that has not kept up with inflation is a major flaw in our domestic labor and wage policy.
Starting with the current minimum wage of $7.25, $44 is about 6 times higher.
I find it very hard to believe that Wall Street bonuses have ONLY increased by a factor of 6.
It's time to increase taxes on the wealthy. Here's a compelling argument (chart showing all taxes on wealthy vs everyone else since 1950):
Well that hurts to look at.
Reagan! That MF’kr!!
Everyone after him is just as complicit if not more so for not rolling it back or accelerating it forward.
yes, but he normalized that! It’s always hard to roll back changes. Trump couldn’t roll back Obama years or Biden can’t roll back a lot of Trump changes.
Once the blocks fall misaligned you can’t build a straight building!
The building needs to just be knocked down and rebuilt at this point
except the same people who built the old one crooked will still be in charge and the next one will be crooked too
Not if we knock them down and rebuild them better too.
remember that after the French Revolution came Napoleon
Just because people in the past failed it doesn’t mean it’s impossible for all time.
Might as well just give up all hope then and go live with the natives in the Amazon since we’re doomed anyways.
I got my pee bottle ready
That seems like the best option moving forward, but that would mean civil war and America would fall completely. There are way too many foreign actors waiting for the plot to twist on that story unfortunately. Everyone wants to tear it down, but America after that would be gamed exactly how the US has done to so many nations before. We would have Russian and Chinese forces here in a matter of days.
That’s when I’m claiming refugee status and seeking asylum in a country that isn’t trying to actively undermine itself.
We can't all go to new Zealand
[Reagan lowered taxed on top marginal tax bracket/wealth twice, *while increasing taxes on lower/middle class* and somehow they call him a tax cutter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Historical_Marginal_Tax_Rate_for_Highest_and_Lowest_Income_Earners.jpg). For some reason they loved him even though his economy was debt and credit cards blew up at the same time.
Fun fact: [only president to every lower bottom marginal tax bracket to almost zero? Jimmy Carter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Historical_Marginal_Tax_Rate_for_Highest_and_Lowest_Income_Earners.jpg) and they hated him.
Money trickles up and down and all around, but money only trickles where other money is found.
I think they hated Carter because, during an oil shortage, he told people to do such awful things as turn down their thermostats and stop driving personal cars that get 8mpg on premium gas.
As a politician if you fuck with that bullshit image of American exceptionalism you die. Same reason the whole gun violence thing is going nowhere, the changes that need to happen (societal shit so people have less reasons to shoot one another, not going after guns that look scary) will never happen, it'd be an admission of weakness.
Imagine what they would have done if Carter had done something truly radical like ask them to wear masks during a deadly pandemic.
I hate Reagan so much.
This is also an absurd comparison. There are merit filled arguments to be made for raising the minimum wage, but comparing minimum wage to singular private industry bonuses is dumb. This is equally valid to say “if minimum wage was tied to professional athletes increases in contract value”
Just because someone from private business X Makes money, doesn’t mean that the entire nation’s minimum wage is in any way correlated to that private industry.
Relating bonuses to minimum wage is stupid. Choose the plethora of better things to tie minimum wage to like standards of living or at worst, inflation.
Making dumb illustrations hurts your argument in the long run.
Wait, did you type "clap" each time then autocorrect it to the emoji?
Lol I was like what are you talking about then I saw he wrote the word clap one time
Edit: BOOO GIVE US THE CLAPS BACK
This comment gave me the clap.
Here's what we think happened: Michael's sidekick, who all through the movie, is this complete idiot who's causing the downfall of the United States, was originally named Dwight, but then Michael changed it to Samuel L. Chang using a search and replace. But that doesn't work on misspelled words, leaving behind one "Dwigt." And Dwight figured it out. Oops!
I think a good auto correct program would see after the third clap what your pattern is and would recommend it automatically.
I 👏 am 👏 going 👏to 👏 test ... Ok yeah, my swype sucks, zero recommendation from it.
Exactly what I thought. It's hilarious how brain just overlooks the whole argument to focus on a weird glitch.
Now I can't take their argument seriously. That's so funny!
Clap at this:
" In 2019, the ratio of CEO-to-typical-worker compensation was 320-to-1 under the realized measure of CEO pay; that is up from 293-to-1 in 2018 and a big increase from 21-to-1 in 1965 and 61-to-1 in 1989. CEOs are even making a lot more—about six times as much—as other very high earners (wage earners in the top 0.1%). From 1978 to 2019, CEO pay based on realized compensation grew by 1,167%, far outstripping S&P stock market growth (741%) and top 0.1% earnings growth (which was 337% between 1978 and 2018, the latest data year available). In contrast, compensation of the typical worker grew by just 13.7% from 1978 to 2019"
I mean it's not like it's the only comparison ever made to support the idea oft taxing the rich. This is just one of the myriad of examples supporting the idea of taxing the rich and the more people can come up with, the stronger the case.
Except this isn’t an absurd comparison - it should be illustrated how the wealthy top has grown in excess while wages at the bottom have completely stagnated comparatively. While no one is making the argument that these bonuses represent the stolen wages - it does represent the growth of businesses as a whole, since these assholes make money off of investments in other companies. This growth has failed to make an equivalent growth in wealth for the workers in those companies.
It’s all skimmed off of the top and there’s the crumbs left for us to pick over at the bottom and told to be thankful we even have jobs in the first place.
Don’t apologize for these rich fucks - they don’t give a care about your insignificant life any more than they care about the number of pennies in their bank account. They will continue to find whatever loophole they can to squeeze the workers the world over out of each nickel so they can have more than everyone else. They’ve convinced an army of sycophants to work to squeeze that money for slightly more scraps than the rest of us.
He edited his comment secretly so as to not look so dumb.
What corporate hack gave this awful argument rewards?
Absurd? No absurd is the fact wallstreet overleveraged the fuck out of themselves and sent our economy to the shitter in 2008 while the government bailed them out.
If their “private industry” has no relation to the entire country’s situation, explain to me why in 2008 the government sided with rich private industry morons over that of the entire population and watched as markets crashed and jobs were destroyed.
Well to slightly clarify, they were given loans by the government which are paying massive dividends right now, the US government has made a lot more than it spent during the bailouts...
As for helping Wall Street and not Main Street, there’s a lot more arguments to be made both for and against... bailing out Wall Street was the reason why lending is still a thing, without the bailouts any and all loans you have would have massive interest rates, imagine no normal person being able to afford a car or a house (the reason for this is systemic: the country runs on debt not capital - that’s a different story). Could they have cleaned the system so this didn’t happen? Yes, they should have, 100%. The one who created this problem was definitely Wall Street and bodies should’ve been hung to show the errors, and that’s the part that stings...
I still think bailouts were a good idea, but the fact that Wall Street had larger bonuses that year and no one was jailed is the thing I still take issue with. Then again, I’m not in finance and I don’t deal with economics but I suspect the entire situation was very unique and they handled it very well...
> Relating bonuses to minimum wage is stupid. Choose the plethora of better things to tie minimum wage to like standards of living or at worst, inflation.
We’ve already seen these comparisons dozens of times and they’re as equally damning. What exactly is your point here? Just to sound smart?
Filling your argument with dumb hand emojis really cheapens your point.
Shouldn't we look at effective tax rate? What % actually went to the IRS?
Then the numbers would skew even more favorably to the wealthy.
Why are people comparing minimum wage versus a performance bonus on Wall Street? The comparison makes no sense but as long as you say bad things about the rich you'll get upvoted!
Strange, because bonuses are so heavily tied to keeping the bottom line low. The most control anyone can have on bottom line is employee wages. Buildings go up in price, materials go up, all the same, but employee wages stay the same, because, that’s what they can directly control.
Problem is, those same employees are bound by the same external forces going up in price, but they best they can do is “appreciate the job you’ve been given” or they have to “go someplace else”.
Bonuses are not tied to bottom lines. Bonuses are tied to whatever they agreed, even if the company ad a while lost money.
The issue is these exclusive sets of people are encouraged to do anything it takes to make another exclusive sets of people money. The rest of the system doesn't matter. They play aggressive at money making, and sometimes bankrupt everything on the way, but they made money for thenselves and their clients.
Very well put. If I could just ramble about economic history this is a long trend.
When the depression first hit the solution proposed by conservative economists was to 'liquidate the small farmers and the workers'. To consolidate capital and drive down wages. Instead the new deal occured. Taxes on the wealthy like never before were put in place and spending programs stimulated the economy. Keynesian economics saved the day. When unemployment was high raise inflation, when inflation is high raise unemployment.
Then in the 70s a crisis occured that traditional economics was not prepared for. Stagflation, inflation had become dangerously high and at the same time unemployment was reaching crisis levels. Carter and Reagan present diametrically opposed vision but instituted tragically similar policies. Liquidate the working class. Crush down wages, elemenate unions, raise unemployment if you must, allow capital to consolidate massively. This is the trend that is continuing to this day.
Our economic model requires constant growth. Without constant grown we cant get a return on an investment to justify investing. Which will lower investing which will lower growth which will create a spiral destroying our system. However, endless growth is impossible. We've run out of new markets and new technologies are more and more rare. The rate of profit is falling almost inevitability. So the only place to turn to cut costs, to lower prices, is wages. Its the last thing that can be pushed to be more efficient. Consolidate, monopolize, and liquidate the workers share of the profits. We saw in the 80s with the massive corporate consolidation and the almost universial abolishment of pensions. We're seeing now with falling wages even at the hight of productivity. The rate of profit cant countinue to rise and corporations are turning to the last thing they can squeeze cutting costs from.
Raising minimum wages to a liveable wage is indeed a noble cause and something the vast majority of folks would agree with. This article is pure pandering garbage comparing apples to oranges.
"The ratio of CEO's to presidents has exploded since the inception of the US."
What do Wall Street bonuses have to do with minimums wage?
If you compare it with bitcoin, minimum wage should be 100k per hour. Not sure why this comparison makes sense.
Nothing. This thread is cringe.
This sub is basically turning into r/antiwork.
That sub is so sad and also doesn’t make any sense at all
I asked what people would do with their cash if nobody worked and thus no goods were produced, I was told that people could still work the same but they would just have extra money to buy frivolous things. But that increases consumption so where is the extra work for those extra goods coming from?
I was told robot workers....those people are idiots whose ideas are literally unworkable in their own fantasy land without technology from 100 years from now
And horribly unrelated to futurology, like they've turned it into a general "inequality rabblerousing dump". Which is not to say "don't care about inequality", just, generic comparisons like this are not, in any sense, "futurology". There are plenty of other subs where this belongs.
just shows inequality in society but doesn't belong in the sub
They’re sensational reading for the morning US Reddit audience lol.
Haven’t you ever wondered what minimum wage would be today if it kept up with Schrute bucks?
I wonder what it would be if it had grown at the same rate as Bitcoin?!!
Exactly. OP just knows full well anything about Wall Street will get Reddit frothing at the mouth
Agree. Came here to comment just that. Lets tie minimum wage to a fast and extremely profitable sector of the economy. Ok....
How can you relate bonuses to the minimum wage?
If I make a company a ridiculous amount of money due to my skill and get bonuses due to that, that has nothing to do with minimum wage workers and their wage. One is purely based on financial performance, one is not.
The argument for raising minimum wage is completely valid, but this comparison with the bonuses is rlly asinine and completely void of logic.
We literally just have to compare it to inflation and cost of living increases to emphasize how abhorrently low it is. No need to try and fluff the numbers even more.
It seems very odd and is a logical absurdity. I wonder the reasoning behind the media doing such odd comparisons.
Tin foil hat: I think a case could be made that the reason why articles get written that are just WAY fringe and illogical in mainstream media is because it further divides people from logical progress.
Imagine that you're someone who is on the fence about, say, invading Canada for it's natural resources. You find that there are compelling points made on both sides. All of the sudden, though, you start seeing articles sayings "the left wants to remove all borders and submit to the Canadian government" and other similar things that are 100% against what you feel. I mean, invading Canada isn't something you want, but you can't stand the thought of standing ideally by why the "left" allows Canada's influence to poison American Ideals! Thus, you're pushed right by the "mainstream" reporting of the left's fringe.
The Occupy Wall Street was a great example of that. Instead of the MSM interviewing the people running and planning the whole thing, they focused on people who didn't have clear ideas or weren't great at speaking their ideas, making a reasonable movement seem like an absurd hippy carnival.
I think the MSM reporting of racial tension is the same way. Instead of focusing on BLM and changing the unqualified immunity cops get, and the protections bad cops receive, they report that BLM protestors want to remove all police departments! That every black person expects 100k in slave reparations! Which just hardens people's opinions about enacting meaningful change.
yup, purposeful misdirection to divide and obfuscate the truth, preventing scrutiny of the real issues. You see it all the time on this site, and once you notice it you keep noticing it.
Probably to hinder the efforts of those using valid arguments. If people's first impression of a topic is bad enough, they will give less consideration to more valid criticisms they encounter in the future.
It also aids in cultural polarization by making those who disagree see the entire argument as absurd, giving them ammunition to use against "the other side."
The meme wars have begun.
The reasoning is very, very simple.
Let me be clear that the minimum wage should absolutely be increased, no one should work a full time job and not be able to make ends meet, and income inequality on the scale that we have now is unsustainable.
But people write articles like this because they know there are a lot of idiots out there who aren't grounded in logic. There are legitimately people out there who think that everyone is just intrinsically equal and should be compensated equally regardless of talent, work ethic, etc.
Yea. This post is stupid. The comparison makes no sense, and arguments like this hurt the argument for raising minimum wage in the long term. People will read this, then repeat the argument as a reason to raise minimum wage. There are plenty of logical arguments to justify an increase.
When was the last time you heard of a minimum wage worker getting a bonus due to their skill, or the company's financial performance?
Because companies made ridiculous amount of profit before, but still paid lower bonuses overall. The amount of bonuses has grown vastly disproportionally to the amount of profit they make. Meanwhile the common workers, the cornerstone of making any profit at all, got squat.
Unless the bonus is for some very specific merit/ award, bonuses are usually just a dividend of the companies profit. The grunts of a company are also contributing to its success.
If a company can pay increasingly large bonuses and keeps all wages stagnant, but only gives bonuses for upper level employees, then it is literally preferentially sharing financial success with the already wealthier employees: the wealth gap will grow.
Example: McDonalds CEO getting a $20,000,000 bonus for McDonalds doing well under that persons guidance.
Say instead, the CEO only gets $1,000,000 and all the “grunts” get a bonus from $19,000,000 that’s left. Apparently there’s 1.9 million employees of McDonalds. So, using my fancy number calculation device that gives... $10. Once a year bonus of $10. Most people wouldn’t even notice an extra $10 in their paycheck if they weren’t told it was there as a bonus.
If you sort by controversial you’ll see such cool people commenting. /s
Then there’s awesome people like my wife, who despite making 6 figures, values my underpaid profession and career greatly. And instead of her telling me to pick myself up by the bootstraps she at least recognizes what I do as an educator is important rather than telling me to just magically demand a better job and pay despite loving what I do.
This is just reddit circle jerk click bait. If one completely unrelated number goes up it means absolutely nothing for the other number. The actual total dollar impacts of those two things are vastly different. I'll enjoy my downvotes from the wall street workers should die / minimum wage should be infinity people.
To add to that, inequality itself is not what’s morally objectionable, but rather poverty. If a person lives a long, healthy, pleasurable, and stimulating life, then how much money the Joneses earn, how big their house is, and how many cars they drive are morally irrelevant.
These same Wall Street overlords are doing their best to keep the working class as divided as ever
If we had forty four an hour we could actually afford to buy all the amazing technology our civilization produced
The minimum wage would be $1,000,000 per hour if it went up as much as Jeff Bezos net worth went up in the last 20 years. We are getting cheated I tell you! We should all be billionaires.
It’s almost like more intense jobs give you higher rewards
If only those minimum wage jobs created the same revenue as some Wall Street jobs.
May i suggest moving to europe? I was in the US several times (working) PA / CA. But if you really want to live a life without many sorrows pack your things and move to: germany, denmark, norway, sweden, finland, netherlands, austria, switzerland. You won't be working overhours much, your bosses treat you respectful, no hire and fire, healthcare and other care stuff. You will work one job, dont have an credit card and can buy a house / send your kids to university for free. You wont even lock your house door. Dont fear crime, guns, crazy homeless people or something.
Life in US is only good if you got lots of $$$.
History has shown us that income disparity, more specifically life style disparity is one of the primary drivers of violent revolutions and collapse of societies.
If we don’t un-fuck this situation, the west will collapse and America will lead that charge.
The rich have convinced many that any reform or change is “socialism” and that “that’s bad “... that it’s “unchristian” and “it’s Russian”.
We’re at the point were westerners (Americans mostly) are shoveling their money __*to*__ the rich or risk being called a “socialist”. We can debate on the pros and cons of socialism but one thing for sure is that any wealth distribution __to__ the poor the rich won’t support. However when it redistributed to the rich as it’s arguably done now, they will support that structure...naturally
“Take my money for you are thy lord and we are not worthy!”
I don’t think anyone is saying we need to all have the same income. (Real socialism)
But we are going in the wrong direction.
We are in fact dissolving into feudalism.
No one says you shouldn’t be able to buy a Ferrari.
But you shouldn’t be able to buy 20 of them and a private jet, a 500’ yacht, and 4 different residences __meanwhile__ someone else can’t even aford the medication to live or pay basic rent. That’s an unhealthy and absurd disparity and it’s getting larger and larger.
There was a time when the average job could get you a house, one or even two cars, save for retirement and afford one small “luxury” item/hobby. For example if you’re a motorcycle enthusiast you could get __a__ Harley Davidson, if you’re into boating you could get __a__ small-ish boat of 20 feet or so. If you’re a guitar enthusiast you could afford a high end Les Paul ($5000). A family of four could afford a Disney Vacation, etc.
The mass majority don’t see these as extremely extravagant luxuries.
__This__ was the American “middle class”.
Point is the average job would allow to to __live__, save and still afford to be happy without being “wealthy”.
That group is shrinking and dying. In the future more will basically fall into one of two categories, the “the jet, the yacht and the four residences” or “you can’t afford medicine to live and basic rent.”
This thread is severely unaware of basic economic concepts
That’s reddit as a whole. r/Economics has also gone down the shitter.
You guys should see how little hedge funds pay in taxes.
Hedge funds are usually structured as a partnership in which the partners pay taxes with their personal income. The partnership does not pay taxes itself. This is called a pass through entity.
hedge funds dont work like that... they pay no taxes because any money a hedge fund makes is passed through to investors who are liable to pay taxes
One (Wall Street bonuses) has absolutely nothing to with the other (minimum wage). Dumb correlation and meaningless.
You guys arent getting $44/hr for flipping burgers at your minimum wage jobs lol. How out of touch can you get?
In no way should somebody flipping burgers or an entry level position be making $44 an hour. If you want to make wallstreet money go learn how to trade stocks. Quit whining about how little you make at your low skilled low stress job.
It's the equivalent of people calculating a CEO's hourly wage by their net worth trying to prove an incomprehensible point. It's literally not how anything works.
Now do the price of a banana instead of Wall Street Bonuses.
SpoiIer: I did the math. If minimum wage increased at the same rate as bananas since 1985, minimum wage would be $7.00 now, which is less than the current $7.25.