I'm not entirely sure how they are measuring "living" though, I thought this when it came out too.
Forgot where but it is on another recent thread on MMM somewhere about if people believe some of the budgets people live on, $10,000-20,000 for example.
I know I'm not mustachian all the time, but I spend in the range of $15,000-18,000 by myself, or in the $25,000-30,000 range for a small family from how I extrapolate my own family growing up. At minimum wage of $7, that's still $14,000/year or $28,000 with two people working
I'd like to see how they define "living" first before I buy into their wage. Not that I wouldn't like to see it go up, but that's a different reason than to have a "living" wage
edit: and their "living" wage doesn't account for retirement saving either, so I'm not sure how much "extras" they are counting as needed to be "living"
edit: it might sound callous because I have a nice emergency cushion, but if that was all that was needed to get people to "live" the government could give that in tax credits, which they do... Giving people higher wages won't help because they will still live on credit to buy more junk. Instead of buying one $100 toy, they will buy three $100 toys, or one $300... nevermind that they could save the extra $200 from increased wages...
edit again: I just noticed, 1 adult + 1 child = needing money for childcare, 2 adults + children = free... they are assuming one parent will give up working each time and count that into a "living" wage for the other parent? The same for the housing cost, 1 adult + 1 child is the same as 1 adult + 2 kids, 2 adults + 1 kid, and 2 adults + 2 kids... or how 1 adult + 2 kids eats the same amount as 2 adults + 1 kid.