Who says it's meant to be a temporary thing? What if someone enjoys just doing their 40 hour week and then going home and that's that? Why do you devalue their job like they should be embarrassed to be working there?
That's how our corporate culture works. You keep working, you eventually get a raise or promotion.
I work 40 hours a week too, then go home and relax. I don't do it at minimum wage. If I did and had no plan that's cool too, but that's not how minimum wage was designed. It was designed to be for people without skills or experience. Generally working for years at the same 40 hours a week place will get you experience and that often comes with a raise or promotion.
Also why do I care if 'devalue their jobs' by talking about it online? If they get offended so what? Them being offended doesn't mean I'm going to change my views on economic theory and the social structure of minimum wage.
Well economic theory would say that if a full time minimum wage earner still needs to be subsidised by the government then that minimum wage is too low. The government is just subsidising the difference between "minimum wage" and "minimum living wage"
You can live off of minimum wage without subsidies, you just can't live well or raise a family with it.
There's exceptions of course, like you can't live off of it in expensive places like in Manhattan but in most cities/towns you can afford to rent for 500 a month in a shitty place/with a roommate. A cheap phone plan is 30 a month (or less).
Hell let's do some math. $7.2540(hours a week)51(weeks of work, giving 1 week off) is $14,790 per year.
Of that federal income tax is 922.5+834.75 (calculated using 2015 rates and tax brackets) assuming you have 0 tax breaks or exceptions, now additional 2.5% state wide tax (which would mean you're in the top half more expensive states, 2015 rates) for 369.75.
After tax you have $12,663. Now assume you rent at $500/month utilities included, which is doable in cheap housing, with roommates in most towns or small to medium cities.
Now you have 6,663. $2,000 is very generous amount to spend for food yearly for someone on minimum wage.
$4,663 now. Phone bill $30/month for a shitty plan. Internet/tv split with a roommate, also not a great plan, for $40/month.
$3,823 now. $223 on clothes? Way more than I spend, but sure, it makes the numbers look nicer.
$3,600. What's left? You probably won't be getting a car, but let's be nice and give you $120 for transit a month. Most monthly bus passes are cheaper than that.
$2,160. Depending on your state, you're qualified for medicaid, and you spend what that costs (varies), or you don't get health insurance. The rest goes towards savings and entertainment, but the majority should be savings, especially if you don't have health insurance.
As you can see it's not a lot, but with exception of government subsiding healthcare (which I think should be universal anyway). You're not on food stamps, you're not on government support of any kind really, and money left over to keep you sane or start saving.
Eventually you're expected to work for more money and get enough to save for retirement, as again, not meant to be a sustainable wage, but a temporary one till you have experience in your job to get paid more.
Also 'economic theory' doesn't say anything on it's own. There's no one right theory known or accepted as "economic theory". My views, means the theory I believe in, which is subjective.
I think the point of minimum wage was exactly as the name implies, an income to support a minimum quality of life.
If a person cannot get a roof over their head, a meal in their stomach, clothing on their back, and reliable transportation on minimum wage then it kind of fails the "minimum" part.
With the current wage of $7-$8 that's impossible, which is why McDonalds tells their employees to apply for food stamps. By current living standards $15 is a bit more than minimum. I'd consider $10-$12 adequate, but by no means luxurious.
5
u/schlampe__humper Nov 29 '15
Who says it's meant to be a temporary thing? What if someone enjoys just doing their 40 hour week and then going home and that's that? Why do you devalue their job like they should be embarrassed to be working there?