If you think a job should exist, the people working that job should be paid enough to live comfortably.
You don’t get to look down on people flipping burgers and sneer that they should get a real job if you want McDonald’s to exist - you’re essentially saying people should be punished for delivering a service that you want - it’s sickening.
At least 15$/h. And even that’s not enough to live on these days.
Low wages would honestly be fine if everyone was guaranteed housing and food and medical care. I just want a society where a person who is lazy or unambitious or disadvanted who just wanted to take a year off could survive with some reasonable level of comfort without working at all if they didn’t want to.
The focus on wages is misleading (intentionally). America has more than enough resources for everyone here to live comfortable lives regardless of what jobs anyone does, they’re just poorly distributed
They’re optimally distributed if you’re near the top.
Are they though? The mentally ill who think all there is to life is a digital high score in their bank accounts definitely don’t act like they’re living fulfilling lives.
If we peel about 50 billionaires and their families we could make every single American a multi-millionaire. I bet it would put a dent in wage theft, too. Scare the piss out of middle managers so hard they prolapse their ureters.
That’s not correct.
The average wealth in this country is ~250k a person
Yeah their number sounded really high, but fuck it hurt to see 250k as well. Do I count as 0 or a negative number if I have more debt than my possessions are worth?
I think 0? I’m not sure. I think the number came from total wealth as an object, not total net worth.
Could still be correct, average is heavily skewed by the millionaires/billionaires.
No. No way. A million a person would mean $325 ish TRILLION for just the US. I think that’s around half the global wealth?
The median income is supposedly around 64k, which already paints a different picture.
So you’re saying we just need more economic imperialism?
No
The average wealth could be $1,990,000 and they’d still be incorrect, lol (assuming the minimum value for “multimilion”, $2 million).
The 50 richest people in the US have a collective net worth of about $3 trillion. If you could wave a magic wand and turn that net worth (which is not an amount of cash money) directly into cash, something that obviously can’t actually be done, but I digress, and you distributed that $3 trillion evenly among the ~340 million people in the US, everyone would get about $8800, lmao. Not quite multimillionaire level.
It amuses me how confidently people will state complete bullshit, even when it’s so easily debunked.
It’s wild how conservatives have been led to believe that people shouldn’t make a livable wage doing whatever job needs to be done.
Then, when people don’t want to work for shit pay, they cry that “nobody wants to work anymore”.
For me to win, others must lose
That’s the crux of it. Republicans almost invariably see life as a zero-sum game. It honestly does not occur to them that everyone could be happy and prosperous.
Well, of course. They agree that someone has to do those jobs, they just don’t think they should be able to afford a one bedroom apartment while doing so.
They really just want slaves, but they know that’s a line they can’t say anymore. In public.
It’s wild how conservatives have been led to believe that people shouldn’t make a livable wage doing whatever job needs to be done.
Not just conservatives. My stepdad is far from being one, but he lives in a fantasy reality where “no one in the 80s made a living or supported a family working fast food or running a register.” (I paraphrased a tiny bit, but this is a near-direct quote from him.)
“makinh a living” and “surviving” are two different things
This. My parents and my husband and I went to the Smithsonian archival museum in Washington DC. They had an exhibit about the coal and steel strike from the 1800s-literally present day. My parents were raised in the era of “work hard put your head down”. They really needed this to show class inequality of capitalism. I mean you can find that anywhere on the internet but it was cool to be there and talk about it. Fuck Capitalism and the cancer that it has always been. My parents are still voting for Trash but I feel its a step forward.
I came into this thinking $15 was too low so it makes the poster seem like the bad guy
A republican should make $15/h
So… one approach you could take would be to say anyone working a full time job should be able to afford a one bedroom apartment. You know, New Deal kind of ethos for the modern era.
https://www.zillow.com/rental-manager/market-trends/united-states/?bedrooms=1
Ok, avg one bed rent ~= $1600 a month.
$1600 * 3 = $4800 (1/3 rent to income ratio)
$4800 / (40 hrs x 4 weeks) = $30 dollars an hour.
So yeah its actually worse than ‘We’ve been arguing about $15 for so long its more like $25’.
Nope. Its $30 an hour. $62,400 a year.
Sure would be cool if we did literally anything to _actually_make housing more affordable.
(BTW 60% of working individual Americans make less than this)
Not just afford a one bedroom apartment. They should be able to do so and also afford to go to work. You can get housing for next to nothing in bumfuck nowhere, but if you can’t get to work while living there, then there’s no point.
1/3 of your income for rent is higher than financial experts advise. You should try to keep it under 25%
True, but afaik, basically every place in the US has a functionally, if not outright legally mandated 3 to 1 income to rent ratio.
Occasionally some smaller or more charitable landlords may waive this, or there may be different rules for some specific affordable/elderly/disabled communities, but for the overwhelming number of places, 1 to 3 is either legally required or enforced via industry standard.
hey now why’d you have to crop it so we don’t get to see how fucking old this tweet screencap is?
I found it this way
It’s been three or four days since we’ve seen this posted, so it was overdue.
$15 is a start. How about $20 and adjusted to inflation yearly?
deleted by creator
“But you clearly deserve more than $15 an hour. What do you do, what do you deserve to earn, and why?”
But if you ask them if someone deserves a million dollars per hour for shitposting on Twitter they look at you like you just burned an effigy in their front lawn. Not the brightest bunch
The common argument for why 16 year olds flipping burgers shouldn’t make $15 / hr is that they don’t have the same expenses as an adult, so they don’t need that much, and it’s so fucking wild to me that they’d use that. Clearly what you need doesn’t factor into what people are paid in any other circumstance, otherwise the top 0.1% would be middle class, too. So why does it suddenly matter for that one specific demographic?
Dare I say it’s totally fucking Marxist and anti-American to suggest that people be paid for their labor based on financial need? This also makes boomers have a meltdown
I shitpost on Lemmy; what do I get?
A hard time?
Correct!
Gross income, roughly for a 35-40h workweek$7.25? Woof. I made that back at a grocery store 20 years ago.
I’ll take €1,969 and look out on the Mediterranean.
Some of those 7.25s will technically be even lower, that’s the federal minimum that will apply to pretty much all jobs, but they still have it on the books that if they could, they’d fuck you over even harder. Georgia’s for instance is 5.15 which can come up in some niche circumstances, and some don’t even have a listed minimum
List of European countries by minimum wage
Don’t forget cost of living. Monaco might not be the easiest city to find affordable housing.
It’s notable that the countries with no legal minimum wage are also those with the highest wages. That’s because these countries have replaced laws with collective agreements. This goes to show that united workers can create better results than politicians.
It’s a really unfortunate effect of minimum wage. It turns into maximum wage, because employers can point at a minimum wage and say “hey I already pay you 0.01€ more than minimum, go back to work and be thankful”, whereas union wages are based on constant negotiation and actual statistics of what is paid in the market.
I really don’t want my wage to be determined on country-wide politics. In my opinion, it’s much more logical to let each sector determine it for themselves. Especially in times like this where right wing parties are gaining influence due to immigration issues. Why would I have to take a pay cut, because a lot of old people are afraid of immigrants? It makes no sense. Issues like that make people vote against their own interest.
The best way to put a value on work is by letting the people in the sectors decide. Both sides of the table of course. But just not political.
(I do realize that union agreements are also political in that both employers and enployee unions are democratic, but at least it’s confined to that topic and to that sector.)
I agree that legislative parliaments shouldn’t determine minimum wages.
Minimum wages are a safeguard against certain forms of wage theft, IMO, because the biggest stick around acts as your compulsory union.
Voluntary unions should then collectively determine minimum wages in a separate body.
I do not agree that there should be sector-specific minimum wage alone as every human being has worth and thus their time as well. This does not exclude sector-specific negotiations.
Yes, one builds on top of the other. That’s how it works ideally.
It is however easier to get workers to unite when there’s no legal minimum to fall back on. Also, when the majority of workers are unionized, the legal minimum is irrelevant and only serves as a talking point against the actual negotiations.
Minimum wage makes sense in countries where unions can’t get a foothold, but it’s a double edged sword: It’s keeping unions from establishing, because a lot of people will gladly leave their negotiations up to the politicians and not risking sticking their nose out.
Quite a lot of the things that people take for granted now started as union contracts. Paid holidays, working hours being less han 80h/week, maternity/paternity/family leave, sick leave/pay, paid breaks, paid pension etc.etc.
NONE of that happened due to political parties feeling a need to require employers to pay out more or secure the working class… Never happened.
It might be elevated to law in some countries by now, but it always always started with unions demanding it and going to conflict over it.
Even when the conflicts failed, it made the premises for putting it into law. That is how working hours have decreased. Unions wanted it, didn’t get it at first, but still got it second time around, when the notion hit the government workers, making it necessary to lift the idea into law to keep functioning.
Without unions, we’d still be shoveling coal into a furnace 80 hours a week, because that’s what made financial sense for the business owners.
Conservative: yes
did you just have this list of people you don’t respect ready to go, imaginary person I made up for this fake conversation meme?
Also, ‘the job you do creates less value than the wage you’re demanding for it’ and ‘I don’t respect you’ are not the same sentence. They’re not even the same category of statement. The former is an assertion of fact (which can be true/false, depending on the job/wage), the latter a subjective value judgment.
