the Republicans don't want a minimum wage, don't want government programs to help the poor and think college is only for the elitists. Just what IS their plan for people to be able to afford to live?

It is the ONLY way to live under current circumstances for more and more people, and the policies that Republicans put forth would exacerbate that reality.

So, it is a direct attack on the American way of life that used to allow families to afford to live on their own.

It wasn't a factor of cost, even though I was getting by on a zero income budget, but my parents were octogenarians and not in the best of health. Neither were fit to drive and doing yard work and repairs could have been a death sentence. I feel like I'm on the lucky end of the deal.
Now that my Dad is gone, it's become a necessity. My Mom couldn't stay here on her own.

they keep telling their children they're EXPECTED to move out when they turn 18, and if they are allowed to live at home, the kids don't want to do so because the culture wrapped their parents firmly around the idea of minute-by-minute zero tolerance.

I think that is a good thing.

Since when is that part of the plan for the commoners?

I made $8/hour in 1968 as a SECRETARY in NYC. My rent at the time was $150 a month in Manhattan. My health insurance was totally free. I took the subway to work back and forth a day for 50 cents.

See how bad the minimum wage is in 2012????? Imagine trying to support yourself, let alone a FAMILY, ANYWHERE in the USA today?

moved many miles from his hometown..had ZERO college debt (and he had no scholarships/grants either).

His entry-level job provided him with a very nice 2 bedroom apartment (furnished) for $70 a month, and he also had a TWO-YEAR car loan for a brand new GTO.

He was a totally self-sufficient young guy with enough money to take ski trips to Aspen, and live a pretty nice life.

Most entry level jobs for college grads would . . . at least they have, in the past.

I know that when we were married in 1970, he got a raise & we celebrated..big time.. his new salary? $900 a month

we thought we were a step away from "Easy Street"

A forty hour week back then would have paid $100.

and made $6/hour as a typist for a steamship company near what would be the Twin Towers. Well, it was NYC and I still lived at home then with my parents, but in a year I was able to save enough money to go on vacation to Europe for 2 weeks. Imagine that NOW?

I remember vividly "dreaming" of a $1k/month salary when I was in Viet Nam in 1969. That seemed "high on the hog" to me in those days.

I worked in a paint, carpet, and tile store when I was 15 and that was 1975. I made $1.70/hr. which was minimum wage. I don't remember anything about healthcare. I remember paying some kinda taxes though.

As a college grad in Viet Nam, I 'dreamed' of $1K/month ($12K/year) ... being drafted out of a $9k/year job at GM.

But you're right, today's minimum wage won't support a family. I'm just not sure it ever could, at least in most places.

You'll only need to work 55 hours/week there for an apartment!

NM is 68.

This whole thing is ridiculous and inhumane.

because it's too blurry on mine to be sure.

Off to PR, everybody!

meaning the living space might be a camper shell on cinderblocks, true story about how a lot of marginal workers in this state live. If you're lucky, it's in a campground where you can shower and use an indoor toilet year round. If you're not lucky, it's a derelict trailer out in the desert and you have no electricity, no running water, and no sanitation. People still find those conditions superior to being warehoused at night in dormitory conditions with a couple of hundred strangers at the shelters.

Some of the unofficial "towns" of working poor in this state are as bad as you find across the border in Mexico.

And that's what you get for your 55 hours a week at minimum wage. If you can get 55 hours a week these days.

Outhouse. No insulation or storm windows. Shacks with corrugated tin roofs. 30 below.

but what percentage of americans earn minimum wage?

According to the U.S. Dept of Labor:

"In 2010, 72.9 million American workers age 16 and over were paid at hourly rates, representing 58.8 percent of all wage and salary workers.1 Among those paid by the hour, 1.8 million earned exactly the prevailing Federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 2.5 million had wages below the minimum.2 Together, these 4.4 million workers with wages at or below the Federal minimum made up 6.0 percent of all hourly-paid workers. "
------------------
So 6% of the 58.8% who are paid by the hour.

4.4 million workers earn minimum wage OR LESS THAN MINIMUM WAGE.

Source: http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2010.htm

Last edited Fri Mar 16, 2012, 11:19 PM - Edit history (2)

I don't know how anyone with even a minimum of awareness could possibly be surprised at that graphic.

It appears that a minimum wage may be sufficient only for a single person living in a studio or one bedroom, or sharing a larger space with other people.

But that depends on what the headline means when it says "afford rent." If it means "afford rent" as some reasonable fraction of a larger income, that's one thing -- if it means "pay rent with nothing left over for anything else" -- that's something else completely.

I wish there was a link to the whole report.

At least two bedrooms on one minimum wage salary. Hard to find good roommates when you're parenting. That's why they look at two bedrooms. They're thinking about families, not individuals.

Just my best guess.

and gas

and health care

and clothes

and

First they freeze the wages. Then they slowly raise the rents. Soon, no poor people! What, you don't think that will work?

in poor neighborhood.

it is not the maximum wage and with skill attainment and experience the potential earned wage grows. The map is neither unexpected or alarming. It is, perhaps, a cautionary graphic.

As someone basically posted, it's not that minimum wage won't cover rent, but rather that 30% of minimum wage won't cover rent. But it is actually possibly to pay more than 30% of one's income on housing and still have enough left for food and clothing.

Why does it need to be enough for a 2 bedroom place? It reminds me of another stat which showed how far below the poverty line minimum wage was for a family of four. Who ever said that minimum wage was supposed to be enough to support oneself, a spouse, and two kids? (Of course, someone who finds themselves in that position will almost certainly be eligible for additional government aid anyway.) Maybe someone who makes minimum wage should be looking for a 1 bedroom, or maybe even a studio (the horror!). Minimum wage is not designed to be a guarantee of an ideal scenario.

And what is "fair market value" of a 2 BR apartment in Manhattan? It's all over the place. Many people, even making far above minimum wage, can't afford to live in the neighborhood they work in.

I'm not trying to be callous here... it's just that, we all start somewhere. When someone gets his or her first job out of High School, is it so terrible that they can't afford an average two-bedroom apartment in the neighborhood with just 30% of their pay? Come on. It just sounds like so much of an over reach that I think it actually does damage against all the actual reasons why minimum wage should be increased and indexed to inflation.

where people are housemates, if they're lucky, each with their own room. I've read in the town I live in, some workers take shifts sleeping in the living room, as well.

Yet, we apparently have neighbors who complain about this breaking local "single family" zoning. Are these neighbors who do complain being unreasonable and heartless and completely out of touch with most people's lives? Surely people have to sleep and shower and eat somewhere. Minimum wage ain't buying them fancy meals, they'll be lucky to have rice and beans, never mind pepper rice and creamy rancho beans with salsa fresca. Working so many hours won't give them any time to cook.

they want cheap labor - and that is what they're getting thanks to the unions being decimated

each week as required by their state to afford that rent.

Ie: Hawaii Senators and House Reps have to work 175 Hrs.

Pa Senators and House Reps need to work 89 hours.


THAT is the only way they will begin to understand.