General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhere The Minimum Wage Would Be If It Kept Pace With The Earnings Of The 1%
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/12/01/3007011/minimum-wage-percent-leave-workers/If the minimum wage had grown at the same rate as the earnings of the top one percent of Americans the federal wage floor would be more than triple the current hourly minimum of $7.25. Instead, the minimum wage has been lower than a poverty wage ever since 1982.
The New York Times compiled those and other basic facts about the minimum wage into an infographic. Together with demographic data about who actually holds minimum-wage jobs less than a quarter of the minimum-wage workforce are teenagers, and nearly four in ten are over the age of 30 the graphic makes the fundamental case for fighting inequality and economic hardship by raising the minimum wage. The horizontal red line in the Times graphic indicates the hourly wage necessary for a single parent working full-time with one child to avoid poverty:
One puzzle piece missing in the graphic is race. Since racial minorities are over-represented among the minimum wage workforce, raising the minimum wage to just $10.10 would lift 3.5 million people of color out of poverty.
The stagnation and collapse of minimum wage purchasing power has helped drive the divergence between the wealthiest and poorest segments of the U.S. workforce. As minimum-wage jobs have provided less and less stable economic footing for working people, the wealthiest sliver of the country has seen astronomical gains in their compensation. If instead the federal minimum wage had grown at the same rate as one-percenter earnings, it would sit at $22.62 per hour today 212 percent higher than the current wage floor.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
madokie
(51,076 posts)because they've cut everyones wages who are paid by the hour to the bone. Otherwise that 37% would be closer to 20%
n2doc
(47,953 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I've said this on my show many times. One of the differences between now and pre 1968 that has caused the wealth differential between the 1% and everyone else is that the owner class is pocketing the difference between the increase in productivity from the pre 1970's US and today since wages have not increased.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)of this nation is doomed to fail.
It is that simple.
Turning citizens into net tax payers from net tax users should be the goal of government and every business in this nation, as it also gives those that need it the most disposable income to stimulate economic growth by spending on higher-value purchases, and pay higher net taxes which will enable this nation to finally re-invest in itself without borrowing to subsidize businesses.
It's a long-term win/win strategy for workers and employers.
But the 1% only sees four quarters out and demands instant gratification and massive returns on their gambles .
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Now they earn a lot less.
greymattermom
(5,754 posts)What would it be if the increases were tied to pay for Congress? Social security? Federal workers? Just curious.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Bill USA
(6,436 posts)much as the idiotic ideology of Trickle Down Econocomics. Maybe enough people will start to realize their suspicions, that they have been somehow screwed, are supported by the facts.
People should also criticize and mock the GOP toadieville of M$M for repeating Trickle-Down horseshit as if it was generally accepted superstition while being ever so careful to not mention the empirical evidence proves Trickle-Down Supply-Side Econocomics is nonsense, demonstrated by the facts to be total bullshit.
Recommended!!
Bookmarked.
ReRe
(10,597 posts).... it should be MORE than $22.62/hr.
Since this is such an "exceptional" country and all.