This is my very last (you may thank me now) effort to get this point through a number of seemingly very thick skulls, and those who refuse to address this point.
You are all assuming that a min wage earner works a 40 hour work week, for 50 or 52 weeks a year. That is absolutely fucking laughable, both the idea and the fact that it seems to be believed.
When you live on minimum wage you do not get a 40 hour work week. You get 24.
When you live on minimum wage if you miss a day due to illness or (gasp) vacation, you DO NOT GET PAID. Unless of course you are lucky enough to be injured at work and then Workers Comp pays you a portion of your salary while you are away.
This is a very different experience than the one enjoyed by the crew of MMM who enjoy such luxuries as paid vacations, salary instead of wages and sick days.
And to those advocating that the min wage earners can just go share a bachelor apartment with a string of roomates for the rest of their lives ... get real.
Thus trying to live off of minimum wage is much much different than what you or I are doing to trying to do, and there should indeed be a higher minimum wage or a basic living wage.
In short, if you think a min wage earner can enjoy a good normal life and a reasonable retirement you are delusional, and your bulging retirement account is making you sound like dear old Marie Antoinette, telling the peasants to just eat cake.
I had to think this over a few times, as there are some questions raised.
1. I am having trouble picturing
the person working on minimum wage for more than 2 years, without another disability or societal constraining factor other than pay rate. Could you paint a (stereotype) picture of what that person is doing? Maybe my thick skull is in the way.
Previously, I was responsible for over hiring for 150 entry level manufacturing positions (cutting vegetables all day on assembly line), the criteria were: no english is ok, no work experience ok, must be literate in your native language, must be able to stand all day, must show up for work. In return, starting pay was $1/hr over minimum to start, full time, fixed schedule (no erratic shifts) and medical benefits. This was a very low overhead margin employer, the typical employee was non-english, 50 yr old woman in her first paid or non-agriculture picking job. Employers wanting english for the same skills had to pay $4 to $6 over minimum wage to start, if they wanted to keep people for more than 18 months. Heck, most warehouse workers here start at $17 / hr, but don't get full time right away.
2. I utterly agree with your 24 hr / wk comment. But, you then seem to be saying that minimum wage should be high enough that someone working only 24 hr /wk on minimum wage should be able to live without a room mate and still have a "typical", not "Zikoris MMM" lifestyle.!? say what?
3. If minimum wage is actually a temporary condition for able bodied, available persons, of 2 years or less in duration, (my proposition) then sharing accommodation in order to live a "normal" lifestyle, or living alone with a "frugal" lifestyle should be valid for those first couple of years.
4. Minimum wage is really intended for people getting started in the workforce, part time, limited abilities, wanting to add to a household income, students, etc. None of these persons are trying to retire or live independently on minimum wage.
5. Your bare bones $21k per year is not too far off (a bit lower) than the Market Basket Method that calculates in this range, depending on local rent costs. $21k/yr is minimum wage, at full time hours, last time I looked. You seem to therefore be agreeing that the Full time minimum wage rate is acceptable, and the only problem is getting 24 hr/wk (while wanting to carry full rent). You should argue for more hours for minimum wage workers, rather than more $'s.
I did not see anyone saying that minimum wage earners can retire easily after a lifetime of only 24 hr/wk pay and minimum wage only. (okay, barring government programs). I did read Zikoris stating that it is possible to live very well on less than minimum wage, which is kind of inspiring.
That said,
The original topic is about Living Wage arguments, which I find to be based on weak, recursive logic. Not minimum wage per se... although I am enjoying this thread!
I would much prefer if we agreed that someone working full time, at employment and pay they would reasonably pursue for several years, should earn at least 75% (or another number) of the average salary in the region. ie, specifically, that our municipal governments should pay their childcare, facilities and admin staff decently, raising taxes if needed to do so...