Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
there is no defination of a living wages, because a living wages doesnt exist, you can have millionaires living pay check to paycheck so they dont have a living wage
the term living wages was invented so the left have something to complain about,
I would define a living wage as having enough to meet your necessities with money left over to accumulate capital. Less than that, and you're generally stuck in perpetual poverty (i.e., "wage slavery") with just enough consumption to tread water.
Again...you're ignoring that despite doing as described the US is more productive then ever in the past. And our levels of inequality are at a record....
You have 9 people, they average 50K a year. You add one guy who makes 20K. Average is now 47K. Does not matter what race the person is. The fact is most of our impoverished immigrants right now are hispanic. This does not even factor in downward pressure on the wages of the nine original members.
You get paid based on the demand for your skills versus the supply of competing labor. Economics 101.
You have 9 people, they average 50K a year. You add one guy who makes 20K. Average is now 47K. Does not matter what race the person is. The fact is most of our impoverished immigrants right now are hispanic.
You get paid based on the demand for your skills versus the supply of competing labor. Economics 101.
You have 9 people, they average 50K a year. You add one guy who makes 20K. Average is now 47K.....meanwhile the company they work for has gone from producing 1 million in product with 200K in after expense profit, to making 1.2 million a year and clearing 250K in profit. All future employees are hired on at 20K......Economically this is good.....right? Except...
The Economics of it is kind of irrelevant. Its what will occur if we continue down this route. I don't think it will be good for that company. I don't think it will be good for anyone that company employs either.
You have 9 people, they average 50K a year. You add one guy who makes 20K. Average is now 47K.....meanwhile the company they work for has gone from producing 1 million in product with 200K in after expense profit, to making 1.2 million a year and clearing 250K in profit. All future employees are hired on at 20K......Economically this is good.....right? Except...
The Economics of it is kind of irrelevant. Its what will occur if we continue down this route. I don't think it will be good for that company. I don't think it will be good for anyone that company employs either.
Not many people making 50K have a real lot to worry about from the 20K guy. He is not likely competing for their job. The 25K guy is another story.
Companies may have a short term benefit from technological gains that increase productivity and lower wages but history shows it is ultimately the consumer that gets most of the benefit. I suggest you google Wal Mart Consumer Surplus to see how much just one company has benefitted consumers versus how much they have benefitted the shareholders. You might be surprised.
You have 9 people, they average 50K a year. You add one guy who makes 20K. Average is now 47K.....meanwhile the company they work for has gone from producing 1 million in product with 200K in after expense profit, to making 1.2 million a year and clearing 250K in profit. All future employees are hired on at 20K......Economically this is good.....right? Except...
The Economics of it is kind of irrelevant. Its what will occur if we continue down this route. I don't think it will be good for that company. I don't think it will be good for anyone that company employs either.
Except it evidently is, and has been, good for that company. Basic free market stuff. Why do you feel a compulsion to exert control over what someone can earn if it's not your business? Where's the motivation for that coming from?
Excluding recent or illegal immigrants who are still getting or unable to get established in this country, the kind of poverty of consumption (before taking into account welfare payments) talked about in the OP is very much driven in the current day by single-parent households. The "living wage" to support multiple kids on a single income is really high, even more so without a stay at home parent to take care of childcare, housework, and finances. Bluntly and sadly, it's not really realistic or feasible to have a minimum wage that is at a "living wage" for everyone as expressed in the OP unless and until you tackle the single-parenthood crisis first -- which we show no signs of doing, or even knowing how to do.
Someone at MIT took a swing at this (Living Wage Calculator) and you look at the numbers for even medium cost areas and it's very clear that they don't add up for an implementable minimum when you have one parent and more than one kid.
Last edited by ALackOfCreativity; 06-03-2015 at 08:43 PM..
Except it evidently is, and has been, good for that company. Basic free market stuff. Why do you feel a compulsion to exert control over what someone can earn if it's not your business? Where's the motivation for that coming from?
LOL. The basic free market stuff works perfectly when theres sufficient jobs to employ everyone. For example-when this country was formed 90%+ of our population was working on farms. There was demand and competition for employees, realistically no fit human being would be unemployed except by choice.
Welcome to 2015. a significant % of our population is unemployed, and not by choice. People who growing up had nothing but opportunity, can't comprehend the changing world, and apply their old beliefs to the current world.
Suddenly Basic free market capitalism no longer is good for the the community. Because there is no competition at the bottom end of the skillset, and the "bottom end" is rising as automation comes into play more and more. While battered by offshoring, now the automation is going to smash it.
Basically.....I worry about what occurs next. I worry that the increasingly unemployed will look at this, and recognize that their choices are limited. And that rising from this they will vote in extremist choices. Or even worse become violent.
Odd fact. Studios average more then a 1 bedroom. No, have no idea why. Maybe they are more common in high rent areas? Lets use the lower 1 bedroom cost.
Oh that's easy, we'll just keep doing the same thing Obama is doing. Keep the borders open.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
