Paycheck-To-Paycheck Nation

[Kris]

The fastest way to remove the most people from the paycheck-to-paycheck list would be to insist on a minimum wage that covered a decent living.   Most of the working poor live paycheck to paycheck because they are paid poverty wages, not a decent living.

This minimum wage argument makes absolutely no sense!

Being a cashier at McDonalds, or a dishwasher at Applebee's, are NOT careers that should provide a living wage.
Why are we expecting these types of menial, no-skill jobs to provide a "decent living"?

It would be great if every grocery-bagger in the country could make $50K/year, but it ain't happening.
Either the grocery store goes out of business, a gallon of milk would cost $15, or the bagger job is eliminated (replaced with self-checkout).

That argument makes no sense to me.

"We acknowledge that this job needs to be done, but we think the people who do it should have to suffer and not earn enough to make a living."

Eye. Roll.

[Tigerpine]

The fastest way to remove the most people from the paycheck-to-paycheck list would be to insist on a minimum wage that covered a decent living.   Most of the working poor live paycheck to paycheck because they are paid poverty wages, not a decent living.

This minimum wage argument makes absolutely no sense!

Being a cashier at McDonalds, or a dishwasher at Applebee's, are NOT careers that should provide a living wage.
Why are we expecting these types of menial, no-skill jobs to provide a "decent living"?

It would be great if every grocery-bagger in the country could make $50K/year, but it ain't happening.
Either the grocery store goes out of business, a gallon of milk would cost $15, or the bagger job is eliminated (replaced with self-checkout).

That argument makes no sense to me.

"We acknowledge that this job needs to be done, but we think the people who do it should have to suffer and not earn enough to make a living."

Eye. Roll.

Acknowledging that a job needs to be done is not the same as saying that a person should make a career of it, though.

[John Galt incarnate!]

To me, this just reveals how bifurcated our economy is.

Yesterday, my thinking at length about this bifurcation evoked "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times," the opening phrases  in Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities.

[RetiredAt63]

The fastest way to remove the most people from the paycheck-to-paycheck list would be to insist on a minimum wage that covered a decent living.   Most of the working poor live paycheck to paycheck because they are paid poverty wages, not a decent living.

This minimum wage argument makes absolutely no sense!

Being a cashier at McDonalds, or a dishwasher at Applebee's, are NOT careers that should provide a living wage.
Why are we expecting these types of menial, no-skill jobs to provide a "decent living"?

It would be great if every grocery-bagger in the country could make $50K/year, but it ain't happening.
Either the grocery store goes out of business, a gallon of milk would cost $15, or the bagger job is eliminated (replaced with self-checkout).

That argument makes no sense to me.

"We acknowledge that this job needs to be done, but we think the people who do it should have to suffer and not earn enough to make a living."

Eye. Roll.

Acknowledging that a job needs to be done is not the same as saying that a person should make a career of it, though.

Not everyone is going to have a "career".  Lots will be happy to have a "job".

Ontario has a lower minimum wage for teenagers working part-time or summer jobs.  Minimum wage laws can be adjusted, it doesn't have to be one size fits all.

[researcher1]

That argument makes no sense to me.
"We acknowledge that this job needs to be done, but we think the people who do it should have to suffer and not earn enough to make a living."
Eye. Roll.

Bagging groceries and washing dishes are NOT careers to support oneself or family.

These no-skill jobs are for high school/college kids, retired/disabled people, ect.
You can't expect to "make a living" working jobs like this that require absolutely no skills/training/intelligence.

So a 16-year-old kid with a part-time job bagging groceries to earn spending money...is being forced to "suffer and not earn enough to make a living"?

[Kris]

That argument makes no sense to me.
"We acknowledge that this job needs to be done, but we think the people who do it should have to suffer and not earn enough to make a living."
Eye. Roll.

Bagging groceries and washing dishes are NOT careers to support oneself or family.

These no-skill jobs are for high school/college kids, retired/disabled people, ect.
You can't expect to "make a living" working jobs like this that require absolutely no skills/training/intelligence.

So a 16-year-old kid with a part-time job bagging groceries to earn spending money...is being forced to "suffer and not earn enough to make a living"?

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-than-a-quarter-of-fast-food-workers-are-raising-a-child/278424/#:~:text=(The%20Bureau%20of%20Labor%20Statistics,have%20at%20least%20some%20college.

[ixtap]

That argument makes no sense to me.
"We acknowledge that this job needs to be done, but we think the people who do it should have to suffer and not earn enough to make a living."
Eye. Roll.

Bagging groceries and washing dishes are NOT careers to support oneself or family.

These no-skill jobs are for high school/college kids, retired/disabled people, ect.
You can't expect to "make a living" working jobs like this that require absolutely no skills/training/intelligence.

So a 16-year-old kid with a part-time job bagging groceries to earn spending money...is being forced to "suffer and not earn enough to make a living"?

I think you misestimate the number of functioning adults with below average intelligence. I know people who could barely keep a job in fast food or basket weaving or whatever they tried because they just couldn't work fast enough for those environments. They still needed to have a roof over their head and food on the table when the got home.

And then we have the farm workers. Low skill, but high body stress and at times that don't lend themselves to part timers.

Finally, no one is saying that the part timer should be taking home enough to support themselves, but rather the full timer.

[Eowyn_MI]

I think a large contributor is the slow lifestyle creep that society as a whole has experienced.  All the the following things, good, bad, or indifferent, come at a cost that past generations didn't have to pay.  This list goes back a ways, but it shows how these things build over time.

Video games
Cable TV
Internet
Practically every family owning a midsize/large pet (when I was a kid, people with cats/dogs were in the minority)
Specialty coffee
Cell phones
Snack food
Highly processed food
Eating out on a regular basis
Intercontinental travel/vacations
Mobile phones
Gender reveal parties
"Disposable" clothing
ATM fees
So much disposable decor for various holidays.  Disposable is the key word
Computer
TV
VCR/DVD/Blu-Ray/etc.
Branded merchandise (for example "Star Wars" shoes.  Yeah, I know someone who has them)

I think that this is incredibly important and frequently overlooked.  Lifestyle creep can be seen in housing too.  When they say that young people can't afford to buy a house nowadays, I wonder, what do they define as a house?  Take a look at older suburbs with houses that were commonly built in the 50's or 60's.  Then go look at what size houses they are building in suburbs today.  It's no wonder that (new) housing has become unaffordable.

[researcher1]

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-than-a-quarter-of-fast-food-workers-are-raising-a-child/278424/#:~:text=(The%20Bureau%20of%20Labor%20Statistics,have%20at%20least%20some%20college.

The fact that people are attempting to support families by taking out trash at McDonald's does not change anything.

I would love to quit my stressful job and support my wife/kids by answering the phone at Wal-Mart, for example.
But that is not reality, as such a job doesn't provide the value necessary to justify a $50K or $100K salary.

These no-skill jobs are low-paying for a reason.

[Cranky]

It doesn’t matter how much financial literacy you teach - our whole economy is built on consumption.We’ve just seen that everything falls apart if restaurants are closed for a couple of months.

If people actually live within their means it will certainly be better for them but problematic for the rest of the system.

To me, this just reveals how bifurcated our economy is. The US stock market is up 17% year to date. Think of how crazy that sounds. But it makes sense. If you're a A credit megacorp who has just been granted access to super low interest borrowing thanks to the Fed, then you're good. 18 months of wonky earnings doesn't change your long term valuation. You can shift your office staff to WFH. You can get waivers for the rest. Most importantly, you've got finance guys whose job is specifically to figure stuff like this out. You've got IT coordinating WFH. You've got HR working with local governments to bring people back to work who cannot WFH while still abiding by guidelines.

If you're a local restaurant owner, you have to navigate what the PPP is by yourself. Your employees cannot work remote, so you have to lay them off. And even a few months is enough to burn through your capital. And if you want to buoy yourself with debt, you may very likely be attaching that debt to your own name. Or something closer to your own name than when CEOs borrow.

On the individual level, if you're a white collar worker with a good health plan, you may never think about healthcare costs. But if you're among the ten percent who does not have insurance, healthcare costs will ruin you. You cannot pay for cancer treatment from a rainy day fund.

Poverty is not a moral judgement on how individuals live their lives as much as it is a judgement on how we've decided to organize our economy. Everyone has a lazy nephew they can point to and say, "He's poor because he's lazy and spends money on dumb things." That's true, but this is not the reason why a pandemic crippled the (non-publicly traded) economy and it's not the reason why tens of millions of people are subject to the risk of total financial ruin from hospital bills.

edited to add, Cranky I'm not saying you were saying that poverty is a moral judgement. That's not what I took away from your post. I just used your thoughts to springboard into some thoughts of my own.

I agree - our economy is a very complex system that works well for some people and not for others. I do think that it’s worth questioning the premise of the system on an individual level, and that’s part of the MMM approach that I like - step back, out of the cycle of consumption, and see if you can make the system work better for you.

But if people want to eat at McDonald’s I can’t think why the people who work there should be paid poverty wages, though I don’t know that that was the point of the original article.

[Sugaree]

I think that there is a difference between "not making enough to provide the very basic needs for life" and "not making enough to pay for life plus debt/extras" and conflating the two issues isn't helping anyone.  There is a point where paying for everything just can't happen.  Even in my super low COLA, $1000/month is probably about the minimum you could get away with spending if every single thing goes right every month and you budget nothing for entertainment or fun.  That's 38-ish hours a week at minimum wage.  This issue needs to be addressed by addressing the rising housing costs and the stagnant wages.  You can argue over whether a minimum wage job is supposed to be a living wage or not, but I would imagine that if we decide that minimum wage jobs are just for teenagers then people will be sorely disappointed to find McDonalds closed from 8-3 M-F because the staff is all in school. 

That's different than living outside of one's means.  This issue needs to be addressed by financial literacy, making credit harder to qualify for, and de-normalizing having large amounts of consumer debt.  So many people my age or younger have this mindset that they will always be in debt and that debt is just part of life.  And that's a problem too.

[Cranky]

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-than-a-quarter-of-fast-food-workers-are-raising-a-child/278424/#:~:text=(The%20Bureau%20of%20Labor%20Statistics,have%20at%20least%20some%20college.

The fact that people are attempting to support families by taking out trash at McDonald's does not change anything.

I would love to quit my stressful job and support my wife/kids by answering the phone at Wal-Mart, for example.
But that is not reality, as such a job doesn't provide the value necessary to justify a $50K or $100K salary.

These no-skill jobs are low-paying for a reason.

I believe that you have not spent much time working at WalMart if you actually believe that’s “low stress.” LOL

[bbqbonelesswing]

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-than-a-quarter-of-fast-food-workers-are-raising-a-child/278424/#:~:text=(The%20Bureau%20of%20Labor%20Statistics,have%20at%20least%20some%20college.

The fact that people are attempting to support families by taking out trash at McDonald's does not change anything.

I would love to quit my stressful job and support my wife/kids by answering the phone at Wal-Mart, for example.
But that is not reality, as such a job doesn't provide the value necessary to justify a $50K or $100K salary.

These no-skill jobs are low-paying for a reason.

Uh, no.

"According to two reports published in 2018, McDonald's is the world's second-largest private employer with 1.7 million employees (behind Walmart with 2.3 million employees)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald%27s

Are you trying to say these are all college kids? Your argument that this portion of the workforce doesn't deserve to make enough to live on seems to show that you don't really know what actually makes up the world economy.

[Sugaree]

The headline overstates things for high income people though.  Only 16% (granted still too high) making 100-200K struggle with basic expenses (although I bet most could cover them at least temporarily with 401K, IRA, etc) compared to 63% making less than 25K and 47% making 25K-49K.   Clearly it matters a lot how much you make.  And lest people think this is some new phenomenon, I assure you it is not since these #'s don't seem far off from what I remember from 20+ years ago.

Totally, one of my coworkers “lives” pay check to pay check.  He is a 401k millionaire and always maxes it out.  He just chooses to spend “everything” else.  He’s fine.

This could have been me last week.  I was totally throwing myself a pity party because I always feel broke.  Nevermind the fact that I max out my TSP, IRA, and HSA.  Or send money to a 529 and brokerage account somewhat regularly. 

[Kris]

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-than-a-quarter-of-fast-food-workers-are-raising-a-child/278424/#:~:text=(The%20Bureau%20of%20Labor%20Statistics,have%20at%20least%20some%20college.

The fact that people are attempting to support families by taking out trash at McDonald's does not change anything.

I would love to quit my stressful job and support my wife/kids by answering the phone at Wal-Mart, for example.
But that is not reality, as such a job doesn't provide the value necessary to justify a $50K or $100K salary.

These no-skill jobs are low-paying for a reason.

I've done low-paying jobs like that and white collar jobs.

The low paying jobs are way, way harder. And you're straw-manning the hell out of this, by the way.

[American GenX]

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-than-a-quarter-of-fast-food-workers-are-raising-a-child/278424/#:~:text=(The%20Bureau%20of%20Labor%20Statistics,have%20at%20least%20some%20college.

The fact that people are attempting to support families by taking out trash at McDonald's does not change anything.

I would love to quit my stressful job and support my wife/kids by answering the phone at Wal-Mart, for example.
But that is not reality, as such a job doesn't provide the value necessary to justify a $50K or $100K salary.

These no-skill jobs are low-paying for a reason.

I generally agree that a job should pay what the market shows it's worth, not what government mandates.   Whether a person has a bunch of kids while working at McDonald's should not be relevant to pay.  Those people are already getting huge tax benefits, EIC, tax credits, and other government aid.   Normally, those people find that if they work too much and receive a cut in benefits, they cut back how much they work so that the gravy keeps coming in.  They rather receive freebies than work harder for it.

[ixtap]

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-than-a-quarter-of-fast-food-workers-are-raising-a-child/278424/#:~:text=(The%20Bureau%20of%20Labor%20Statistics,have%20at%20least%20some%20college.

The fact that people are attempting to support families by taking out trash at McDonald's does not change anything.

I would love to quit my stressful job and support my wife/kids by answering the phone at Wal-Mart, for example.
But that is not reality, as such a job doesn't provide the value necessary to justify a $50K or $100K salary.

These no-skill jobs are low-paying for a reason.

I generally agree that a job should pay what the market shows it's worth, not what government mandates.   Whether a person has a bunch of kids while working at McDonald's should not be relevant to pay.  Those people are already getting huge tax benefits, EIC, tax credits, and other government aid.   Normally, those people find that if they work too much and receive a cut in benefits, they cut back how much they work so that the gravy keeps coming in.  They rather receive freebies than work harder for it.

Except that is how we end up with company stores and other fucked up shit. The market is not responsible to its workers and couldn't care less if they starve to death right up until the point that means there aren't any more workers.

[bwall]

I generally agree that a job should pay what the market shows it's worth, not what government mandates.   Whether a person has a bunch of kids while working at McDonald's should not be relevant to pay.  Those people are already getting huge tax benefits, EIC, tax credits, and other government aid.   Normally, those people find that if they work too much and receive a cut in benefits, they cut back how much they work so that the gravy keeps coming in.  They rather receive freebies than work harder for it.

I also agree that the US government should stop subsiding Wal-Mart and McDonalds.

[mathlete]

The fastest way to remove the most people from the paycheck-to-paycheck list would be to insist on a minimum wage that covered a decent living.   Most of the working poor live paycheck to paycheck because they are paid poverty wages, not a decent living.

This minimum wage argument makes absolutely no sense!

Being a cashier at McDonalds, or a dishwasher at Applebee's, are NOT careers that should provide a living wage.
Why are we expecting these types of menial, no-skill jobs to provide a "decent living"?

It would be great if every grocery-bagger in the country could make $50K/year, but it ain't happening.
Either the grocery store goes out of business, a gallon of milk would cost $15, or the bagger job is eliminated (replaced with self-checkout).

What is the basis for this?

[Kris]

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-than-a-quarter-of-fast-food-workers-are-raising-a-child/278424/#:~:text=(The%20Bureau%20of%20Labor%20Statistics,have%20at%20least%20some%20college.

The fact that people are attempting to support families by taking out trash at McDonald's does not change anything.

I would love to quit my stressful job and support my wife/kids by answering the phone at Wal-Mart, for example.
But that is not reality, as such a job doesn't provide the value necessary to justify a $50K or $100K salary.

These no-skill jobs are low-paying for a reason.

I generally agree that a job should pay what the market shows it's worth, not what government mandates.   Whether a person has a bunch of kids while working at McDonald's should not be relevant to pay.  Those people are already getting huge tax benefits, EIC, tax credits, and other government aid.   Normally, those people find that if they work too much and receive a cut in benefits, they cut back how much they work so that the gravy keeps coming in.  They rather receive freebies than work harder for it.

Uh, yeah. Why am I paying for those benefits and aid with my tax dollars, instead of the private companies paying them an actual living wage? Why are we subsidizing those corporations to allow them to pay poverty wages? I am not in favor of corporate welfare.

[mathlete]

To me, this just reveals how bifurcated our economy is.

Yesterday, my thinking at length about this bifurcation evoked "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times," the opening phrases  in Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities.

Somehow in all the thinking I've done during this crisis, that quote never popped into my head. Dude knew what he was talking about.

[WhiteTrashCash]

I’ve lived in the real world, so let me explain the “McDonald’s as a career” situation. There are many people who have very poor education and don’t have the aptitude to improve their educational situation. These people often work menial jobs and they can never improve that situation. Good people believe that these folks deserve to be able to have meals and a roof over their head. Bad people think they should die. End of story.

[mathlete]

For what its worth, I'm in favor of companies paying market wages. The government should take care of providing for welfare. It doesn't make sense to pay a teen and a single mom both the wage it takes to raise a kid. If there's a single mom working a low paying job, the government should step in to fill the gap.

But the notion that some jobs are "career jobs" and others "aren't meant" to pay a living wage is silly. Life would be a whole lot better if we did away with this post-hoc rationalization and just mandated minimum standards of living for all Americans in our first world country.

[slappy]

I’ve lived in the real world, so let me explain the “McDonald’s as a career” situation. There are many people who have very poor education and don’t have the aptitude to improve their educational situation. These people often work menial jobs and they can never improve that situation. Good people believe that these folks deserve to be able to have meals and a roof over their head. Bad people think they should die. End of story.

I'm not sure that's really end of story. There is a lot of space between a roof over their head and dying.

[WhiteTrashCash]

I’ve lived in the real world, so let me explain the “McDonald’s as a career” situation. There are many people who have very poor education and don’t have the aptitude to improve their educational situation. These people often work menial jobs and they can never improve that situation. Good people believe that these folks deserve to be able to have meals and a roof over their head. Bad people think they should die. End of story.

I'm not sure that's really end of story. There is a lot of space between a roof over their head and dying.

I suppose there’s living out of a homeless shelter And then dying. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Kris]

For what its worth, I'm in favor of companies paying market wages. The government should take care of providing for welfare. It doesn't make sense to pay a teen and a single mom both the wage it takes to raise a kid. If there's a single mom working a low paying job, the government should step in to fill the gap.

But the notion that some jobs are "career jobs" and others "aren't meant" to pay a living wage is silly. Life would be a whole lot better if we did away with this post-hoc rationalization and just mandated minimum standards of living for all Americans in our first world country.

Amen.

[mm1970]

The fastest way to remove the most people from the paycheck-to-paycheck list would be to insist on a minimum wage that covered a decent living.   Most of the working poor live paycheck to paycheck because they are paid poverty wages, not a decent living.

This minimum wage argument makes absolutely no sense!

Being a cashier at McDonalds, or a dishwasher at Applebee's, are NOT careers that should provide a living wage.
Why are we expecting these types of menial, no-skill jobs to provide a "decent living"?

It would be great if every grocery-bagger in the country could make $50K/year, but it ain't happening.
Either the grocery store goes out of business, a gallon of milk would cost $15, or the bagger job is eliminated (replaced with self-checkout).

"If you want a living wage, get a better job" is a fascinating way to spin "I acknowledge that your current job needs to be done, but I think whomever does that job deserves to be in poverty."

I remember when working at a grocery store was a good, solid job - benefits, small retirement, and enough money to pay rent, buy food, and go camping a couple of times a year for vacation.  It was never considered "menial", it was a decent job and you worked hard at it.  When did that change?

I’ve lived in the real world, so let me explain the “McDonald’s as a career” situation. There are many people who have very poor education and don’t have the aptitude to improve their educational situation. These people often work menial jobs and they can never improve that situation. Good people believe that these folks deserve to be able to have meals and a roof over their head. Bad people think they should die. End of story.

Yep.  And people who do have the ability to move up - do.  I know a few people from back home who worked McDonald's. One, no college degree but became the store manager.  Another, went to college and got a degree and now works at headquarters.

A lot of people seem to forget that not everyone CAN do those other things.

Note: the baggers at many of our grocery stores are disabled.  They work.  They get paid.  They often live in government subsidized supportive housing.   I think this is...awesome.

I think that there is a difference between "not making enough to provide the very basic needs for life" and "not making enough to pay for life plus debt/extras" and conflating the two issues isn't helping anyone. There is a point where paying for everything just can't happen.  Even in my super low COLA, $1000/month is probably about the minimum you could get away with spending if every single thing goes right every month and you budget nothing for entertainment or fun.  That's 38-ish hours a week at minimum wage.  This issue needs to be addressed by addressing the rising housing costs and the stagnant wages.  You can argue over whether a minimum wage job is supposed to be a living wage or not, but I would imagine that if we decide that minimum wage jobs are just for teenagers then people will be sorely disappointed to find McDonalds closed from 8-3 M-F because the staff is all in school. 

That's different than living outside of one's means.  This issue needs to be addressed by financial literacy, making credit harder to qualify for, and de-normalizing having large amounts of consumer debt.  So many people my age or younger have this mindset that they will always be in debt and that debt is just part of life.  And that's a problem too.

Yep

[slappy]

I’ve lived in the real world, so let me explain the “McDonald’s as a career” situation. There are many people who have very poor education and don’t have the aptitude to improve their educational situation. These people often work menial jobs and they can never improve that situation. Good people believe that these folks deserve to be able to have meals and a roof over their head. Bad people think they should die. End of story.

I'm not sure that's really end of story. There is a lot of space between a roof over their head and dying.

I suppose there’s living out of a homeless shelter And then dying. Thanks for clearing that up.

Seriously? People can have roommates, live in smaller apartments, etc. Obviously this doesn't apply to everyone working at Mcdonald's or Walmart or whatever. But going back to conversations above, what are the expectations for a "decent living"? What are we wanting a minimum wage to cover? Obviously we want it to cover something more than a homeless shelter, but something less than a house in the burbs. Is a studio apartment near work enough?

[Poundwise]

Everybody in that article has made poor choices that have put them in their current position. They might not be financially secure with better, more responsible decision making, but they would certainly be better off than they currently are.

I agree. But many people should not have discretion over income needed for survival, and never will. They weren't raised with the skills or goals to be thrifty, and they will never pick them up. However their poor financial skills doesn't mean they belong out on the street, hungry, or without healthcare.

It's easy to be judgmental from a place of comfort. I think my friend was an idiot to spend his Covid relief check on replica WWF championship belts, and now he has no margin going into the winter.  On the other hand, I have spent lots of money on items quite as frivolous but it hardly registers because we are comfortable (granted we also sacrificed and worked considerably to achieve our current prosperity). 

[WhiteTrashCash]

I’ve lived in the real world, so let me explain the “McDonald’s as a career” situation. There are many people who have very poor education and don’t have the aptitude to improve their educational situation. These people often work menial jobs and they can never improve that situation. Good people believe that these folks deserve to be able to have meals and a roof over their head. Bad people think they should die. End of story.

I'm not sure that's really end of story. There is a lot of space between a roof over their head and dying.

I suppose there’s living out of a homeless shelter And then dying. Thanks for clearing that up.

Seriously? People can have roommates, live in smaller apartments, etc. Obviously this doesn't apply to everyone working at Mcdonald's or Walmart or whatever. But going back to conversations above, what are the expectations for a "decent living"? What are we wanting a minimum wage to cover? Obviously we want it to cover something more than a homeless shelter, but something less than a house in the burbs. Is a studio apartment near work enough?

Like I said, I have lived in the real world. Who should an intellectually disadvantaged single mom with an autistic two year old have as a roommate in her rural backwoods town with a population of 1000? Good people want her to be able to afford to live. Bad people cover up their hatred for her by saying she should have “more self-responsibility.”

[desertadapted]

I thought it would be interesting to show annualized salaries at various hourly wages:

$7.25/hour = 15,080
$10.00/hour = 20,800
$15.00/hour = $31,200
https://www.calcxml.com/calculators/convert-hourly-to-salary?skn=606&r=1

Doesn’t look like a lot of money to me. Especially given that minimum wage jobs aren’t known for their salary increases.  A teacher who starts off at $30K might make 2.5 to 3.0 x that (along with pension) by career’s end.  The proverbial McDonald’s employee won’t. 

Similarly, Walmart is the largest private employer in the world, and the largest private employer in many States.  For those under the impression that these jobs are principally held by high school students or those with developmental delays, I think you should get out more.

[stoaX]

I think a large contributor is the slow lifestyle creep that society as a whole has experienced.  All the the following things, good, bad, or indifferent, come at a cost that past generations didn't have to pay.  This list goes back a ways, but it shows how these things build over time.

Video games
Cable TV
Internet
Practically every family owning a midsize/large pet (when I was a kid, people with cats/dogs were in the minority)
Specialty coffee
Cell phones
Snack food
Highly processed food
Eating out on a regular basis
Intercontinental travel/vacations
Mobile phones
Gender reveal parties
"Disposable" clothing
ATM fees
So much disposable decor for various holidays.  Disposable is the key word
Computer
TV
VCR/DVD/Blu-Ray/etc.
Branded merchandise (for example "Star Wars" shoes.  Yeah, I know someone who has them)

This is a great observation.  And I'm sure there are thousands of other examples of lifestyle creep that could be added to the list.  Healthcare and higher education costs are 2 more items that have far outpaced wage growth. 

[Jack0Life]

I’ve lived in the real world, so let me explain the “McDonald’s as a career” situation. There are many people who have very poor education and don’t have the aptitude to improve their educational situation. These people often work menial jobs and they can never improve that situation. Good people believe that these folks deserve to be able to have meals and a roof over their head. Bad people think they should die. End of story.

This is 100% false. Just because you used McDonalds as an example.
I am that guy that actually was a GM for McDonalds for 5 yrs and I was in the McDonalds business at 16 and left for good in 2005.
McDonalds is one of the easiest if not easiest place to improve yourself in the "dead-end" job world.
The reason is there is such a high turnover in the business that they are always looking to good people to improve their training to become managers, GM and even owners/operators.
You don't know how many times I've come across a good workers and tell them to apply themselves and continue their training to become something more. Most don't listen and continue with their menial jobs merry go around.
I've seen so many people who ended up being GM(running their own store) in 2-3 years time. A friend of mine worked at McDonalds since HS and never bother going to college. He made it a career and is now really high up making $100K+. A close friend of mine is an owner/operator of 28+ McDonalds so I pretty much knew that business inside and out.
I agree that working menial jobs at a small business will probably won't get you anywhere but for a large business, you can easily improve your situation with some dedication.
The biggest obstacles I see are people with kids working in these menial jobs. It's a rut that's really hard to get out off.

[researcher1]

I've done low-paying jobs like that and white collar jobs.
The low paying jobs are way, way harder.

Your argument that this portion of the workforce doesn't deserve to make enough to live on seems to show that you don't really know what actually makes up the world economy.

Being a cashier at McDonalds, or a dishwasher at Applebee's, are NOT careers that should provide a living wage. -- What is the basis for this?

"If you want a living wage, get a better job" is a fascinating way to spin "I acknowledge that your current job needs to be done, but I think whomever does that job deserves to be in poverty."

The issue here involves NON-SKILLED jobs vs. SKILLED jobs.
It is not about "low-paying" jobs vs. "white collar" jobs.

There are millions of non-white collar occupations that pay living wages...
Carpenter, plumber, electrician, welder, HVAC, real estate agent, insurance salesperson, equipment operator, farmer, small business owner, hairdresser, truck driver, ect.

Do you really think the pay rate for mindless, no-skill jobs should be comparable to the occupations noted above?
A person bagging groceries is bringing no skills to the table and providing very little value.
How could you possibly justify paying this person ~$50K year?

That type of job is not for someone to support themselves on.  It's for a part-time high school or retired/disabled person.
If you people insist on grocery baggers being paid that much, then that position will no longer exist.

[bbqbonelesswing]

I've done low-paying jobs like that and white collar jobs.
The low paying jobs are way, way harder.

Your argument that this portion of the workforce doesn't deserve to make enough to live on seems to show that you don't really know what actually makes up the world economy.

Being a cashier at McDonalds, or a dishwasher at Applebee's, are NOT careers that should provide a living wage. -- What is the basis for this?

"If you want a living wage, get a better job" is a fascinating way to spin "I acknowledge that your current job needs to be done, but I think whomever does that job deserves to be in poverty."

The issue here involves NON-SKILLED jobs vs. SKILLED jobs.
It is not about "low-paying" jobs vs. "white collar" jobs.

There are millions of non-white collar occupations that pay living wages...
Carpenter, plumber, electrician, welder, HVAC, real estate agent, insurance salesperson, equipment operator, farmer, small business owner, hairdresser, truck driver, ect.

Do you really think the pay rate for mindless, no-skill jobs should be comparable to the occupations noted above?
A person bagging groceries is bringing no skills to the table and providing very little value.
How could you possibly justify paying this person ~$50K year?

That type of job is not for someone to support themselves on.  It's for a part-time high school or retired/disabled person.
If you people insist on grocery baggers being paid that much, then that position will no longer exist.

Who said they should be making $50k?

And to call these "mindless, no-skill jobs" is pretty far from reality. Have you ever had one of these jobs?

[Kris]

I've done low-paying jobs like that and white collar jobs.
The low paying jobs are way, way harder.

Your argument that this portion of the workforce doesn't deserve to make enough to live on seems to show that you don't really know what actually makes up the world economy.

Being a cashier at McDonalds, or a dishwasher at Applebee's, are NOT careers that should provide a living wage. -- What is the basis for this?

"If you want a living wage, get a better job" is a fascinating way to spin "I acknowledge that your current job needs to be done, but I think whomever does that job deserves to be in poverty."

The issue here involves NON-SKILLED jobs vs. SKILLED jobs.
It is not about "low-paying" jobs vs. "white collar" jobs.

There are millions of non-white collar occupations that pay living wages...
Carpenter, plumber, electrician, welder, HVAC, real estate agent, insurance salesperson, equipment operator, farmer, small business owner, hairdresser, truck driver, ect.

Do you really think the pay rate for mindless, no-skill jobs should be comparable to the occupations noted above?
A person bagging groceries is bringing no skills to the table and providing very little value.
How could you possibly justify paying this person ~$50K year?

That type of job is not for someone to support themselves on.  It's for a part-time high school or retired/disabled person.
If you people insist on grocery baggers being paid that much, then that position will no longer exist.

Who said they should be making $50k?

And to call these "mindless, no-skill jobs" is pretty far from reality. Have you ever had one of these jobs?

Exactly. And I will state once again that researcher1 is strawmanning the shit out of their argument

[researcher1]

Who said they should be making $50k?

And to call these "mindless, no-skill jobs" is pretty far from reality. Have you ever had one of these jobs?

I just made up the $50K as a reference point, since so many think these people currently being woefully underpaid.

YES, I've had several of these jobs...dishwasher, busboy, fry cook, grocery bagger.
I can confirm that these are largely mindless jobs that require absolutely no skills of any kind.

I can't fathom how anyone would think such jobs should pay enough to fully support a household.

[bbqbonelesswing]

Who said they should be making $50k?

And to call these "mindless, no-skill jobs" is pretty far from reality. Have you ever had one of these jobs?

I just made up the $50K as a reference point, since so many think these people currently being woefully underpaid.

YES, I've had several of these jobs...dishwasher, busboy, fry cook, grocery bagger.
I can confirm that these are largely mindless jobs that require absolutely no skills of any kind.

I can't fathom how anyone would think such jobs should pay enough to fully support a household.

Ok. Well, it's a good thing that what you are able to fathom doesn't manifest itself into reality. Because here in the real world, millions of adults rely on those jobs to get by every day. It really doesn't matter what your impression of these jobs is. People are doing them. And they're supporting themselves and their families off them.

"I just made up..." kind of summarizes your entire argument, doesn't it?

[bacchi]

Who said they should be making $50k?

And to call these "mindless, no-skill jobs" is pretty far from reality. Have you ever had one of these jobs?

I just made up the $50K as a reference point, since so many think these people currently being woefully underpaid.

YES, I've had several of these jobs...dishwasher, busboy, fry cook, grocery bagger.
I can confirm that these are largely mindless jobs that require absolutely no skills of any kind.

I can't fathom how anyone would think such jobs should pay enough to fully support a household.

Ok. Well, it's a good thing that what you are able to fathom doesn't manifest itself into reality. Because here in the real world, millions of adults rely on those jobs to get by every day. It really doesn't matter what your impression of these jobs is. People are doing them. And they're supporting themselves and their families off them.

"I just made up..." kind of summarizes your entire argument, doesn't it?

Word.

The credentialed (degree, vocational) don't consider these jobs as "career" jobs but they are. Wishing it to not be true doesn't make it not true.

[researcher1]

Ok. Well, it's a good thing that what you are able to fathom doesn't manifest itself into reality. Because here in the real world, millions of adults rely on those jobs to get by every day. It really doesn't matter what your impression of these jobs is. People are doing them. And they're supporting themselves and their families off them.

I understand that some adults use these jobs as a career, and I'm completely fine with that.

I'm just saying that companies shouldn't be forced to pay these no-skill jobs $30K-$40K+ per year.

I'm fine with the argument that there should be governmental or social safety nets.
But making companies pay SKILLED wages for NON-SKILLED work makes no sense.

These jobs won't even exist in the future if you instituted this.

[mathlete]

Ok. Well, it's a good thing that what you are able to fathom doesn't manifest itself into reality. Because here in the real world, millions of adults rely on those jobs to get by every day. It really doesn't matter what your impression of these jobs is. People are doing them. And they're supporting themselves and their families off them.

I understand that some adults use these jobs as a career, and I'm completely fine with that.

I'm just saying that companies shouldn't be forced to pay these no-skill jobs $30K-$40K+ per year.

I'm fine with the argument that there should be governmental or social safety nets.
But making companies pay SKILLED wages for NON-SKILLED work makes no sense.

These jobs won't even exist in the future if you instituted this.

These jobs won't exist in the future regardless. Racing wages to the bottom such that we can stave off replacing human labor with machine labor for a few years is bad.

[mm1970]

Who said they should be making $50k?

And to call these "mindless, no-skill jobs" is pretty far from reality. Have you ever had one of these jobs?

I just made up the $50K as a reference point, since so many think these people currently being woefully underpaid.

YES, I've had several of these jobs...dishwasher, busboy, fry cook, grocery bagger.
I can confirm that these are largely mindless jobs that require absolutely no skills of any kind.

I can't fathom how anyone would think such jobs should pay enough to fully support a household.

Ok. Well, it's a good thing that what you are able to fathom doesn't manifest itself into reality. Because here in the real world, millions of adults rely on those jobs to get by every day. It really doesn't matter what your impression of these jobs is. People are doing them. And they're supporting themselves and their families off them.

"I just made up..." kind of summarizes your entire argument, doesn't it?

Word.

The credentialed (degree, vocational) don't consider these jobs as "career" jobs but they are. Wishing it to not be true doesn't make it not true.

Uh huh.

That type of job is not for someone to support themselves on.  It's for a part-time high school or retired/disabled person.
If you people insist on grocery baggers being paid that much, then that position will no longer exist.

Are you sure about that?

I mean, they used to be just that.

And who is saying that unskilled jobs should pay more than skilled jobs?  There has been such wage suppression over the last many decades so that folks like Bezos and the like can be worth billions.  I mean, seriously.  You think it's okay for these companies to pay these wages?  You are paying these wages!  Your taxes are paying for SNAP and welfare and other social services.

I have to say...that people work at grocery stores in other first world countries.  They clean bathrooms.  These jobs have not disappeared.   Talk about reinventing the wheel.

The internet tells me that the average janitor in Denmark gets paid $44,500 a year (US equivalent).
Average grocery store clerk makes $39,000.

If there aren't enough "skilled" jobs for the number of people who need a job, then by definition, there will be people working "unskilled" jobs.  They do not deserve to live in poverty.  Now, we can make the large corporations pay more and give better benefits, or we can use our tax dollars to provide free health care, better education, money for rent and food, whatever, so people aren't living in poverty.

[Tigerpine]

Ok. Well, it's a good thing that what you are able to fathom doesn't manifest itself into reality. Because here in the real world, millions of adults rely on those jobs to get by every day. It really doesn't matter what your impression of these jobs is. People are doing them. And they're supporting themselves and their families off them.

I understand that some adults use these jobs as a career, and I'm completely fine with that.

I'm just saying that companies shouldn't be forced to pay these no-skill jobs $30K-$40K+ per year.

I'm fine with the argument that there should be governmental or social safety nets.
But making companies pay SKILLED wages for NON-SKILLED work makes no sense.

These jobs won't even exist in the future if you instituted this.

These jobs won't exist in the future regardless. Racing wages to the bottom such that we can stave off replacing human labor with machine labor for a few years is bad.

Here's a visual for you.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cover-story/cover-story-2017-10-23

[Poundwise]

The fastest way to remove the most people from the paycheck-to-paycheck list would be to insist on a minimum wage that covered a decent living.   Most of the working poor live paycheck to paycheck because they are paid poverty wages, not a decent living.

As for the middle class income folks who are just morons with their money, well, I don't lose much sleep over them.   Glad to help them make better choices but they chose to be foolish with their money.

I totally disagree on this one. Setting an arbitrary minimal wage isn't going to magically improve the lower Americans from living paycheck to paycheck.
American is the easiest country to get ahead if you set your mind to it.
Perfect example was when I ran a fast food franchise and I see people come and go working that menial job barely making above minimum wage. I always tell my employees this doesn't have to be the dead-end job people making it out to be. Put a bit of effort and you can easily move up and get yourself off the minimal wage train. Most don't listen and they jump from one "dead end" job to another. Or they are too busy having kids where they can't afford one and therefore stuck in that rut for the rest of their life.
In contrast, in the same fast food company, I've seen a foreign girl who spoke zero English but she put in the effort to learn about the business and improved her English. She was able to run her own store in less than 2 years. This girl is probably making $60K+ now.

On my way up the ladder, I've known a lot of very poor people, and tried to help them. Unfortunately, in most cases there were intractable problems that kept them poor... ranging from lack of self discipline with spending, to problems keeping a job (adult ADD, learning disabilities), conflict prone personalities, depression, or simple lack of problem solving ability.  Would a living wage or UBI help these folks? In many cases yes, and in many cases no.

There's a large percentage of people who will spend their money on fun stuff, then come crying when it's time to pay the rent or for groceries.  There's also a large percentage of people who will catapult to independence if they are given a small leg up (my church's refugee "adoption" program has been graduating families at a very good clip... many are completely self sufficient by year 3 and well on their way to living the American dream.) There are also a number of people who would be able to chug along, living within their means, and supporting themselves day to day on a modest but sufficient paycheck, as long as they weren't asked to plan for the future. But how can one distinguish among these?

 That's why my opinion has been moving towards supporting tax-based, government provided social services, plus a minimum wage to cover discretionary spending. 

Edited to summarize: A lot of people just WON'T save enough for emergencies or the retirement, even if we offered them sufficient money (carrot) or removed the support network (stick).  Face reality, since we can't shouldn't let them die in the street, they need guaranteed services like food shelter healthcare education and retirement.  Then they can go be as wise or foolish as they like with the money they earn. 

[researcher1]

If there aren't enough "skilled" jobs for the number of people who need a job, then by definition, there will be people working "unskilled" jobs.  They do not deserve to live in poverty.  Now, we can make the large corporations pay more and give better benefits, or we can use our tax dollars to provide free health care, better education, money for rent and food, whatever, so people aren't living in poverty.

Where do you get the idea that there aren't enough skilled jobs?

There is actually a huge need for skilled labor in this country...
https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/04/25/605092520/high-paying-trade-jobs-sit-empty-while-high-school-grads-line-up-for-university
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahchamberlain/2019/08/21/addressing-the-skilled-labor-shortage-in-america/?sh=1952b7f8181d
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/339978

[joe189man]

There's a difference between paycheck to paycheck existence because a job doesn't pay enough to support basic shelter, food and clothing and the job doesn't pay enough to support a PS5 habit, a fishing boat and trips to department stores in addition to the basics.

The second case is easy, this person is not mustachian, will they realize this and solve their problem? who knows

The first case is an issue, and i dont have a solution

 

[MudPuppy]

I am flabbergasted that there are posters here arguing that honest, full time labor shouldn’t pay a living wage because it’s arbitrarily declared “low skill/menial/whatever.” Absolutely flabbergasted.

[the_gastropod]

Who said they should be making $50k?

And to call these "mindless, no-skill jobs" is pretty far from reality. Have you ever had one of these jobs?

I just made up the $50K as a reference point, since so many think these people currently being woefully underpaid.

YES, I've had several of these jobs...dishwasher, busboy, fry cook, grocery bagger.
I can confirm that these are largely mindless jobs that require absolutely no skills of any kind.

I can't fathom how anyone would think such jobs should pay enough to fully support a household.

I suggest you read FDR’s statement on the National Industrial Recover Act  of 1933. Here’s a relevant snippet re: the introduction of the minimum wage:

In my Inaugural I laid down the simple proposition that nobody is going to starve in this country. It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By "business" I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living.

The rest of the statement is also very good, and worth your time: http://docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/odnirast.html

The purpose of the minimum wage, contrary to what you’re arguing here, was precisely for any person with a full-time job to afford a decent living.

[Kris]

I am flabbergasted that there are posters here arguing that honest, full time labor shouldn’t pay a living wage because it’s arbitrarily declared “low skill/menial/whatever.” Absolutely flabbergasted.

Yep. And they call the lefties elitist.

[Villanelle]

Two jobs mostly lost during the pandemic, so they go out and get a designer purebred dog and trips to gamestop, as well as a financed new bike?

And the last couple?  He thinks it was the early start on children that put them in the cycle and she thinks it was that they never made enough.  I think it was the amp mentioned in the opening, and surely many other similar purchases.