What people with minimum wage can really afford in the US?

[dazzleman]

The minimum wage is very low, and people living on it cannot afford much.

Perhaps a husband and wife who both earned minimum wage could eke out a modest living if they pooled their money and spent carefully, but a single person would have a very tough time.

Which brings me to my next point -- minimum wage jobs are really for teenagers or those who work part time, are on the fringes of the labor force, etc.  Few people remain in minimum wage jobs as their careers progress, unless they have a serious lack of skills, reliability or work ethic.  It is not intended to be a wage on which it is possible to support a wife, three kids and a dog in a lovely four-bedroom colonial in one of the better suburbs.  It's meant to be a place to start.

I get very irritated when I hear stories about single women with kids who talk about how they're struggling to live on the minimum wage.  Why did they have kids outside of marriage if they had no job skills to support them?  I get sick of people trying to make others feel guilty because they're suffering the consequences of stupid decisions.

[dazzleman]

A very low percentage of adults are living on the minimum wage.  I will try to get some statistics, but the reality is that most adults, even those without a college education, have incomes considerably above the minimum wage.

When listening to what opebo says, you must take into account that he has never worked a day in his life, and has no understanding of the working world.

He also is a major hypocrite in that he constantly blasts working people who happen to earn a good living while himself living off inherited money.  He talks incessantly of redistribution, but wouldn't dream of redistributing any of his own money.  If he means what he says, he should get a full-time job and give the money away to charity, since he obviously doesn't need it.

I don't deny that there are many people with a low ceiling on their earnings, for several reasons, generally having to do with the fact that they don't offer much in the way of skills, work ethic, etc. that would make somebody want to pay very much to employ them.

I have seen the power that people who have developed their skills and working reputation can have in the job market.  This is something that opebo, for all his talk, knows nothing about.

Much of life is the cards we deal to ourselves.  There are some people who have such terrible situations in life that they can never recover.  I sympathize very much with these people.  But there are many more who could have done more to deal themselves a better hand in life, but didn't, for a number of reasons, none of them good.  I cannot feel the same degree of sympathy for them.  I especially don't feel sorry for people who loudly proclaim their right to make stupid decisions, such as having multiple children without a husband and with no means of supporting them, and then demanding that others are responsible for making their life easy.

The picture that opebo paints of life in the US is highly skewed, and as a foreigner, you should know that, Huck.

[dazzleman]

Please remember, Huggleberry Finn, that what you see the Republicans posting here will be prepared propaganda - their party has put a lot of effort into the pretense that the American working class is fine, just fine. 

Why not just go visit the US and have a look at the horrible slums everywhere?

A low percentage of the population lives in slums.  Again, your picture is horribly skewed.  Slums are a problem, but they're not 'everywhere.'

[dazzleman]

I'm in favor of raising the minimum wage somewhat, but it can never be a 'living wage.'  Still, it has not kept up with inflation in the past 20 years, and I do think it should be raised, at least for full-time workers.

Scoonie, I think that your theory about Republicans and unions implicitly assumes that unions are good for workers.  I don't think they really are at this point.

Flyers once made a post that said it all.  He talked about how his dad went on strike against the place where he worked for a long time, and that a short time after the strike was settled, the company went under.

Unions are to some extent a necessary evil, but they're not necessarily good for workers, or at least all workers.  They flatten pay scales, disincentivize merit, and reward older, often less productive workers, over younger workers who are more productive.  They also reward and protect mediocrity and incompetence in practice, while effectively penalizing extra initiative.

I am very much for the betterment of lives for people in all lines of work.  I don't really think unions are the way to go about it today.

[dazzleman]

There's no denying that the income gap has grown substantially since 1980.  

There are many reasons for this, most of which are not in direct control of government policy.  Things like, on the low end, the decline of manufacturing, decay in family structure leading to more children growing up without fathers to support them, and on the high end, the explosion of highly paid jobs in newer high-tech industries, productivity increases caused by more automation, and even the feminist movement, which brought talented women into the workforce on a fuller basis.

There are many moving parts to the whole thing.  When most people become better off, the poor become worse off in comparison, even if they have not fallen in absolute terms when their income is measured in dollars.  When the economy is strong, prices of certain things like housing increase considerably, and this is very tough on people with low incomes.

There is no right answer; it's about finding the right balance.  Life is a lot like the game of monopoly; if you don't become some type of owner at the earliest opportunity, things will always be stacked against you.  I'm not sure this can ever really be changed.

[dazzleman]

I should also note that comparing income figures across regions is useless, since the cost of living varies widely across the country.  A certain income could be poverty level in New York or Connecticut, and upper middle class in Mississippi.

[dazzleman]

Good points, angus, as usual.

The key goal is to empower people, and encourage them to take charge of their own destiny in a positive way.  This is the most effective anti-poverty program there is, as your examples attest to from your own family.

It's a pity that the vast majority of our anti-poverty programs have done the exact opposite, and therefore exacerbated poverty rather than reducing it.  Subsidies and redistribution, as well as absolving people of any responsibility for their own decisions and actions, do nothing to help people to take control of their own destiny.  In fact, they do just the opposite, which is why they have failed so miserably when utilized.  Apparently, opebo is ignorant of the actual results of these policies.

[dazzleman]

angus, you're still trying to talk sense to that guy?

[dazzleman]

Hey, shouldn't you be spewing misogyny?  or something. 

Well, let's see.  I'm a fascist, racist, mysoginist, arrogant prude.  I'm sure I've forgotten a few.

It's when guys like opebo like you that you have to worry.