• Sparlock@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            But it is relevant?

            Just like when massive unions get better pay rates (or weekends) it raises the bar for what all other workers expect, except the min wage has MORE effect since it applies across all employment.

      • dangblingus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah sure, less than 1% of working Americans make minimum wage. Gonna need a citation for that one.

          • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            And $7.50 is a pointless figure to use as representative of minimum wage. When established, the minimum wage was equivalent to $26 today, and most states had higher minimums even before they went up to $15.

            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              I think we should tie the minimum wage to local (probably generally county/parish) COL, updated biannually.

              But the minimum wage currently shapes a miniscule amount of people’s bargaining power.

      • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Dude, that is the federal minimum, which hasn’t been raised in over 30 years. The states had minimums closer to $10 to $12 in the last 20 years, and many went up to $15 in the last 3 years. That is still much less buying power than minimum wage was at its establishment.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          That’s not relevant to any discussion tho. 1.3% of people are at the federal min

          • Sparlock@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Dude I corrected you on this EXACT BS you posted earlier.

            You might just be a chat bot.

          • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            If someone is claiming that the rise In minimum wages in many states does not impact the “wages are growing faster than inflation” assertion, it is entirely relevant as many of those people saw a 33% raise over the last few years, and that is way more than 1.3% of wage earners.

          • 20hzservers@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I’m here to help and provide information or assistance on a wide range of topics. If something seems weird or if you have a specific question or topic you’d like to discuss, feel free to let me know, and I’ll do my best to assist you!

            –ChatSCB

      • teuast@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Your number leaves out all of the people whose pay rates are above minimum wage, but are still poverty wages. There is quite a large gap between minimum and poverty, and not in the direction that benefits the working class.

        Furthermore, raising the minimum wage leads to people in that gap also getting raises. People can and do benefit tremendously from the minimum wage being raised, even if they have never personally worked at minimum wage. As such, the minimum wage is relevant to far, far more workers than are actually getting it.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Your number leaves out all of the people whose pay rates are above minimum wage, but are still poverty wages.

          This is because minimum wage has nothing to do with this discussion

          This is my original point.

          Furthermore, raising the minimum wage leads to people in that gap also getting raises.

          They’re already getting raises because wages are up across the board. There are two jobs for every person right now and that isn’t likely to change for a long time.

          • teuast@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            I’m sorry, how in the fuck is the minimum wage not related to the fact that rising prices and inflation are causing people to struggle financially? That’s like saying the tides have nothing to do with surfing.

            And sure, wages are up, the problem is that if you bother to account for inflation and COL, the purchasing power they provide is down. That’s what people mean when they say “real wages.” I’m sure you know that on some level, even if for purposes of this discussion, you’re pretending not to.

            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              I’m sorry, how in the fuck is the minimum wage not related to the fact that rising prices and inflation are causing people to struggle financially?

              Because a small enough people make.minimum wage that it has no bearing on overall price pressures for labor.

              Idk why you think I’m “pretending” anything.

              • teuast@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                I think you’re pretending not to understand the relevance of the minimum wage because two comments ago I said this:

                Furthermore, raising the minimum wage leads to people in that gap also getting raises. People can and do benefit tremendously from the minimum wage being raised, even if they have never personally worked at minimum wage. As such, the minimum wage is relevant to far, far more workers than are actually getting it.

                And you proceeded to act like I didn’t.

                • Sparlock@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  He’s a troll and not a good faith interlocutor so don’t expect honesty from him.

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  I understand you said it, but that doesn’t make it true.

                  It would be true if any significant number of people made minimum wage, but they don’t.

                  • teuast@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    I mean, at least you acknowledged that I said it this time. Even if I’m now slightly less convinced that you deliberately aren’t getting it, because you still didn’t seem to understand what I was actually arguing.

                    They say it takes exponentially more effort to debunk bullshit than it does to spread it, and when I’m making a real effort to make a point and your rebuttal is basically “nuh uh,” that seems to hold true. Fortunately, I don’t have to type out the argument myself when I can just post Charlynn Teter’s excellent essay, sources included, about it instead. https://bpr.berkeley.edu/2021/01/30/no-more-lies-the-truth-about-raising-the-minimum-wage/ I look forward to how you “nuh uh” this.

                  • Sparlock@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    While it’s true that less than 1.3% of people make minimum wage, it’s important to recognize that the minimum wage sets a baseline for the broader labor market. Even though a small percentage of workers are directly affected, the minimum wage often serves as a reference point for wage negotiations and can have a cascading effect on wages above the minimum. While the direct impact may be limited to a specific percentage of workers, the broader implications of minimum wage policies are relevant to a much larger economic context.

    • EatATaco
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      7 months ago

      Oh, I thought we were talking about actual wages, not the minimum wage. I’m not even sure how that makes sense in the context.

      • force@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Most of the places around me pay way less than the actual cost of living, like the average is maybe $12 an hour max but I’d say it’s more like $10. Cost of living estimates vary but for a single adult it’s often around $2500/month, which is far more than you’ll make working at almost anywhere here full time. Even worse, most establishments are actually choosing to short-staff themselves to save money, so most aren’t even looking to increase employment.

        So you can work full time and still not have enough to just survive, then if you want to do university/trade school and aren’t elligible for e.g. HOPE then you could have to pick up 2 full time jobs and still somehow have the time/energy left to do college (which most people wouldn’t after that and would just drop out). Some people are able to live with family to reduce or eliminate the housing cost, and a few people are privileged enough to have their family pay for their whole college, but if that’s not the case you’re completely fucked.

        And this is in suburban/rural Georgia. I can only imagine how shit it is for someone who can’t afford college, a car, whatever else in a shitty place like Texas or Florida.

        • EatATaco
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          One of the things that frustrates me the most about this site (and reddit but it seems even worse here) is the inability of people to follow the context.

          The article is about how people, wide spread, are rating the economy as poor despite good economic data. The top level comment is talking about not wanting deflation, but rising wages so they don’t lose out to inflation. I point out that wages are rising and outpacing inflation, so by the metric they used the economy is doing well. Then someone inexplicably brings in the minimum wage (FTR, “Workers in the bottom pay quartile also saw median “real” income gains of 6% since 2019, more than the rest of the income distribution.”[https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-job-market-softens-gains-minority-groups-hang-balance-2023-11-27/#:~:text=Workers in the bottom pay,rest of the income distribution] But who cares about the facts? They don’t really mean anything anymore.). I point out that this isn’t about the minimum wage (BTW, I agree that it should be raised) and people still go off on how in their anecdotal experience minimum wage is not enough to get by.

          It’s like anything to ignore reality. It’s the same ridiculousness I see from conservatives when I’m debating climate change: just ignore the facts, cherry-pick some data, throw in some anecdotes, and try to reframe the debate.

          • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s the subjective experience of not seeing the wage growth themselves, combined with things not being acceptable for a longer time than Biden or Trump’s presidency. Things are improving right now, but haven’t caught up to people having economic security. When you’ve sunk deep enough, it takes a longer period of rising to finally catch a breath. Basically, the current growth must sustain for longer to get more people into a good position. If things continue on their current path, people will calm down.

            It’s also true that necessities like housing have inflated in price far faster than other goods, again, for longer than a decade. Unnecessary goods might be cheaper than ever, but you NEED things like shelter and there are NO alternatives. Despite good competition, the demand is inelastic, so limited excess supply translates to soaring prices, plus, other factors are at play.

            It also isn’t a good idea ignore subjective experiences in general. Not only are people almost always right to be unhappy on some level, invalidating their lived experiences isn’t a good idea. Democrats will not be successful if they don’t listen to people’s displeasure. Basic economic measures are essential, but not sufficient to make voters happier.

            • EatATaco
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              There’s not much I disagree with in your post. However, this all stems from a poster saying that (effectively) they don’t want deflation, but for wages to out-pace inflation, and I pointed out that this is already happening. By their own metric they should be happy with the economy, even if they haven’t personally benefitted from it, but instead they are unhappy with it but that’s based on a false belief.

              It also isn’t a good idea ignore subjective experiences in general. Not only are people almost always right to be unhappy on some level, invalidating their lived experiences isn’t a good idea. Democrats will not be successful if they don’t listen to people’s displeasure. Basic economic measures are essential, but not sufficient to make voters happier.

              And this is basically what the article is all about, that the economy is actually going in the right direction, but everyone thinks it isn’t. Spreading the false belief that we are still in situation where inflation is out-pacing wages is just further spreading the false belief that is making people upset. I get that people still have a ways to go before they make up for what was lost to inflation, but being constantly grim about the state of the economy for bad reasons isn’t helping anyone. It’s probably just making it worse.

              • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                It’s the fine line of not saying people are correct in their specific criticisms, while still validating their lived experience. I don’t expect most conservative liberals to do this, but Democratic politicians must to win elections.

                • EatATaco
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Sure, but people should also try to be accurate when they are making claims as to why they are upset with the economy, especially if they are making a very general claim as to why people are upset.

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                7 months ago

                And this is basically what the article is all about, that the economy is actually going in the right direction, but everyone thinks it isn’t. Spreading the false belief that we are still in situation where inflation is out-pacing wages is just further spreading the false belief that is making people upset. I get that people still have a ways to go before they make up for what was lost to inflation, but being constantly grim about the state of the economy for bad reasons isn’t helping anyone. It’s probably just making it worse.

                Okay, so this actually misses how this “false belief” has spread.

                The thing about inflation is it doesn’t go away when it goes down. There hasn’t been deflation, so when prices rose they just stayed high even as inflation cooled. It doesn’t matter that prices aren’t rising as fast as they were before because the prices are still high. Wages, on the other hand, lagged behind inflation for so long that they’re still behind even if the rates are more even now. This has to keep up for several years to give wages have time to catch up; until then people are still going to be mad about inflation even if it is getting better.

                • EatATaco
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Wages, on the other hand, lagged behind inflation for so long that they’re still behind even if the rates are more even now.

                  This is what I meant when I said:

                  I get that people still have a ways to go before they make up for what was lost to inflation

                  But, again, the claim is that they just want wages that won’t be beaten by inflation (again, effectively) and that is the case now. So what they want is what is happening now, yet still unhappy. Your post is a movement of the goal-posts. I get it that it still sucks, but we’re going in the right direction, especially on the point they made. This should result in a more cheery-outlook for people basing their opinion on wages out-pacing inflation.

                  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    They want the pain to stop now. That’s my point. Only people with a financial cushion can sit around and wait for things to get better, everyone else is suffering. People are not going to be patient for relief.

          • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I’m coming late to this rodeo. I see minimum wage as relevant if the recent statutory raises of the minimum wage are behind the “wages are rising faster than inflation” point. I need to see a distribution chart showing which raises are rising faster, because a lot of pay went from $10 to $15 in the last few years, and that’s a 33% pay increase for those people. What if the people earning between $30 and $60 saw no raises, or worse, lost their jobs and got new ones for less?

            • EatATaco
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              I need to see a distribution chart showing which raises are rising faster

              I’d be curious to see what your research finds on this too.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Most of the places around me pay way less than the actual cost of living

          This is mathematically impossible, unless you live in a place that’s a combination of heavy commuting and like, tourism.

          And this is in suburban/rural Georgia

          Yeah it’s definitely mathematically impossible. Your standards of living are out of whack with local standards of living.

          Even worse, most establishments are actually choosing to short-staff themselves to save money

          You live in a dying town.

          • force@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            “Mathematically impossible” my ass, everyone commutes 2 hours to the nearest city because work outside of urban areas is unsustainable. And no, the county has had a steady high growth rate for around 3 decades by now because of the prestige from Atlanta rubbing off + low cost to buy a house make Georgia seem appealing to middle class people, and aggressive advertising by the county makes people move here, it’s not “dying”.

            “Local standards of living” are what I gave you, that’s what statistics say. If you don’t like science you can just say so. Hell, it’s not that hard to just Google “median income in Georgia” (spoiler alert: median personal income is $30,000, which is very clearly unsustainable).

            In this day and age, it’s near impossible to survive out of school if you don’t have family willing to pay for you. Hell, if I didn’t have family to fall back on I would probably have been in the streets starving rather than be getting my degree.

        • EatATaco
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          What does this have to do with what we’re talking about?