>>The going to $15 in Seattle? That's the way we did it. Gradually. <<
A problem with this approach: the $15 minimum was calculated years ago, around 2012, as the then-current wage required to keep someone above the poverty line. That line creeps upward every year. This means that a gradual introduction needs to include a gradual raise of the target. Otherwise you necessarily fall short.
Let us consider, as a reasonable standard of living, that most persons wish to obtain a companion with whom to live; and that a majority of said partnerships wish to procreate; and that as more people work from home, space for a home office becomes a common and compelling need even for single people. This requires a minimum of 2 bedrooms. Here is what it costs per state to afford such housing at the recommended responsible rate of 30% of income spent on housing. On average, an American household needs to earn at least $21.21 per hour to afford a modest, two-bedroom apartment without spending more than 30 percent of their income on rent. Only at the lowest end ($14.49 per hour in West Virginia) would $15/hour suffice to meet even basic housing needs. On the high end ($35.20 in Hawaii) you would need more than twice the proposed living wage just to get by. The comparison to actual minimum wages is even more brutal.
>>That's why they want to kill us. Tough noogies, scheisskopfen. We're comin' for you.<<
An interesting point of history: over the long run, the fatcats ALWAYS lose. They can only win a battle, not the war. This is simple math: in order for some people to have more than others, the rich must be few and the poor must be many. It doesn't matter if your castle can repel 10:1 odds. The moment 11:1 people hate you, then you die. They will build a ladder of bodies to reach you so they can kill you.
Judging from things I've seen in the news, we're not all that far from that point now. Most people don't see it. But any historian can spot the pattern easily.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dancing_serpent
Re: Thoughts
Date: 2019-08-22 02:48 am (UTC)A problem with this approach: the $15 minimum was calculated years ago, around 2012, as the then-current wage required to keep someone above the poverty line. That line creeps upward every year. This means that a gradual introduction needs to include a gradual raise of the target. Otherwise you necessarily fall short.
Let us consider, as a reasonable standard of living, that most persons wish to obtain a companion with whom to live; and that a majority of said partnerships wish to procreate; and that as more people work from home, space for a home office becomes a common and compelling need even for single people. This requires a minimum of 2 bedrooms. Here is what it costs per state to afford such housing at the recommended responsible rate of 30% of income spent on housing. On average, an American household needs to earn at least $21.21 per hour to afford a modest, two-bedroom apartment without spending more than 30 percent of their income on rent. Only at the lowest end ($14.49 per hour in West Virginia) would $15/hour suffice to meet even basic housing needs. On the high end ($35.20 in Hawaii) you would need more than twice the proposed living wage just to get by. The comparison to actual minimum wages is even more brutal.
>>That's why they want to kill us. Tough noogies, scheisskopfen. We're comin' for you.<<
An interesting point of history: over the long run, the fatcats ALWAYS lose. They can only win a battle, not the war. This is simple math: in order for some people to have more than others, the rich must be few and the poor must be many. It doesn't matter if your castle can repel 10:1 odds. The moment 11:1 people hate you, then you die. They will build a ladder of bodies to reach you so they can kill you.
Judging from things I've seen in the news, we're not all that far from that point now. Most people don't see it. But any historian can spot the pattern easily.