Paycheck-To-Paycheck Nation

[johndoe]

@WhiteTrashCash I'm intruiged by your story, would you mind sharing more about your experience with "slavery" and how your legal action only got you $14?

@bacchi I think I see why you'd say that, but we're not talking about an ethical issue are we? This is black and white: If a business or individual breaks a contract or law they're held responsible.

[EvenSteven]

@WhiteTrashCash I'm intruiged by your story, would you mind sharing more about your experience with "slavery" and how your legal action only got you $14?

@bacchi I think I see why you'd say that, but we're not talking about an ethical issue are we? This is black and white: If a business or individual breaks a contract or law they're held responsible.

Not even a little bit true. People and businesses break the law all the time and get away with it. I've probably broken a law hundreds or thousands of times and gotten away with it.

[Plina]

It would be nice if American workers could live the lifestyle that European workers get to enjoy. It was really eye-opening when the internet came along and we all learned that European workers had four weeks of paid vacation per year which they spent on vacation in Spain.

I don't understand this argument. I suspect it's usually made by people who have not spent significant time living with Europeans. It is extremely easy to live a lifestyle in America where you work 32 hours a week and take 6 weeks off a year like an Italian. The tradeoff that they pay is a much lower standard of living, very small apartments, staying at home into your 30s, having a very small or no car, having fewer children.

You didn't specify where the "much lower standard of living" is.

My point is, if you want to live in a small apartment, not own a car, and have fewer luxuries than the average American, then it's pretty simple to work less just like the Europeans do

I would say that varies among european countries. Here the standard vacation time is 6 weeks and most of the people move away from home after high school. You would be seen as a pretty big failure to live with your parents when you are 30 years.

You assume it is a trade off to have a smaller apartment or to not own a car. I guess it might be from an american perspective. Many people actually choose to not have a car because it is seen as a big tradeoff to have one. It is not because they can’t afford one but because of downside of owning one. It is easier and faster to take public transport or rent one when you need one. They also chose to live smaller so they don’t have to move to suburbs. Why would you spend a lot of money to pay for several bedrooms if there are only one or two living in the apartment. That allows you to spend your money on travel or something else that interests instead on rooms and cars that are rarely used.

[WhiteTrashCash]

@WhiteTrashCash I'm intruiged by your story, would you mind sharing more about your experience with "slavery" and how your legal action only got you $14?

Well, basically, there was this new company that came into town called Walmart who promised they would create a lot of new high-paying jobs. Instead, they used predatory prices to run all the small businesses in town (some of which had operated for over 100 years) out-of-business and they became the only place to work in town other than a fast food restaurant. I ended up working there for a while. They were under orders from corporate not to pay any overtime, but they also wanted to save on payroll by not hiring enough staff, so their solution was to make all the employees clock out and then do some of their duties for free off-the-clock. If an employee complained about it, they were fired and other desperate unemployed people would take their place. So we shut up and did what we were told, which was a modern-day version of slavery. There was no labor union to protect employees.

Eventually, enough fired employees went to a lawyer who agreed to take the case as a class-action lawsuit. Walmart settled the suit for a paltry sum, because the lawyer wanted his money and wasn't willing to take the problem to court against Walmart lawyers. The settlement money was divided up by all the former and current employees in the class and I got $14 for all those hours of unpaid labor.

So, I hope you understand now why enraged low-wage workers don't turn to the justice system to right wrongs. It makes complete sense to me why they decide to start burning places to the ground instead. I don't advocate for that, but I understand it.

[Bloop Bloop Reloaded]

I'm also a bit surprised that people think a federally mandated minimum wage makes much sense at all vs regional/state minimum wages. Even within many states, cost of living varies dramatically.

Looking around my state alone from the livingwage.mit.edu link presented earlier, some of the rural counties have target wages already below the state minimum. Some counties (particularly cities) are meaningfully higher.

What I've never understood is the end goal for folks opposed to minimum wage increases and who also want to cut welfare types of benefits. Like... what's the end game there?

Anyways for me, one of the fundamental problems with wages is much more that executive compensation has astronomically outpaced the average worker compensation. Making the federal minimum wage higher helps but only so much. At a certain point, fixing the entire problem surrounding living wage is going to require the ratio of executive compensation to average worker compensation to drop. Either voluntarily (lol...) or via taxation.

Agreed.  Wage disparity is a huge negative for society.  Capitalism by it's nature requires a control on the accumulation of wealth for a functioning economic system and for a middle class to exist at all.  Otherwise capital concentrates and things eventually fall apart.  This has been well studied and documented for over 100 years now.

You're making two separate points here. One is that capital concentration and wealth transfer between generations is bad (absolutely agree - that's "cheating" in life because you're carrying on bonus points from your parents' past life. I believe in a punitive estate/gift tax to stop this from happening). The other is that wage disparity is bad. In this sense I believe studies have shown that excessive wage disparity does have social negatives...but I would still say that I support wage disparity (or more to the point I don't support alleviating wage disparity) as long as there's a social safety net.

But there are two different things at play. One is income transfer between generations. One is wage disparity among workers. They don't have to come as a joint thing. We could have one without the other.

[GuitarStv]

Wage disparity isn't a negative under normal circumstances.  Nobody should expect a guy flipping burgers to be making the same amount as a nuclear plant engineer.  It's when wage disparity becomes extreme and almost completely decoupled from value that things become a problem - the investment banker who makes millions in bonuses while being bailed out by taxpayers for risky loans vs the teller at the bank who doesn't get out of living for yet another year.

The nature of capitalism will always cause these disparities given enough time.

[fuzzy math]

Notably McDonald's has not gone out of business yet even though many jurisdictions throughout the world have in fact increased the minimum wage.

It should be noted that McDonald's already pays workers ABOVE the minimum wage in many cases.
I don't think the argument is about raising the minimum wage by a buck or two.
But rather, the push we've seen by fast food workers to make the minimum wage $15 or more.

https://www.inc.com/magazine/201603/norm-brodsky/15-minimum-wage-consequences-for-businesses.html
"But if $15 per hour becomes our entry-level wage, there will be consequences. Jobs will be lost.
The reason is simple math. Our restaurants will no longer be viable if labor costs rise above 35 percent of revenue. And no, we can't just jack up prices and pass the additional cost along to customers. There are real limits to what people will pay.

We're paying the minimum wage ($9/hr) for entry-level jobs, such as busboy and dishwasher. Other hourly people get more than that, but none as much as $15 per hour. If the minimum rises, not only will we have to pay more to entry-level people, but everyone above them will have to get a raise as well. You can't pay someone who does food preparation what you pay someone who buses the tables and sweeps the floors.

The first options are to automate and outsource, and we're preparing to do both. We have employees taking and inputting orders right now because human contact is important to building customer relationships. But we'll have to cut back on the number of people doing that job."

This is a really complicated problem as others in this thread have already commented on.

People have absolutely no clue how many jobs out there do not pay $15 /hr now. This article puts it at 43% of the country. https://tcf.org/content/commentary/making-economic-case-15-minimum-wage/?session=1
This isn't about getting people off the federal minimum wage (because almost no one is making $7.50), its about essentially providing a 30-50% wage increase to those making between 9.50 (advertised local starting pay at Five guys) and $12.00 (advertised local starting pay at Chik Fil A). Its for people across a broad number of employment sectors: the baker and the driver who supply the buns at your mega burger franchise, the warehouse people who are loading inventory that supplies almost all of the disposable goods you buy at the grocery or big box store, the migrant workers harvesting the lettuce or onions you buy, the unlicensed vet tech at your vet clinic, the lunch lady at your kid's school, the city/county clerk opening the mail at your local govt office, the medical assistant taking your blood pressure at your primary care clinic, the unlicensed pharmacy tech ringing up your meds at Walgreens.

Those wage increases will not go unnoticed by the consumer when they go to the Dr, the gas station, the craft store, the grocery store. As we witnessed with the pandemic, simply disrupting 1 segment of the work force has rippling effects across the economy. Costs for health care, food, rent, utilities, taxes and other things will increase with an increased minimum wage. Its the same reason that groceries at a Kroger brand store in California cost more than groceries at a Kroger brand store in South Carolina.

When economists talk about sales tax being a regressive tax, its because it predominately affects the poor. The poor spends nearly all of their disposable income (after rent / bills) on goods that get taxed, whereas Walmart billionaires spend a single digit percentage of their wealth on goods. So raising the minimum wage 30-50% will deplete the purchasing power of the poor quicker when they notice costs of goods and services rising. It also diminishes the purchasing power of the middle class, who did not see their $19-30/hr wages increase but now have a ___% (15 - 30??) more expensive time going about their daily lives. Without a corresponding social safety net (healthcare, housing etc), these changes will handicap a larger segment of the population, or just cause inflation that erodes the purchasing power of your new $15 / hr wage. Govt tax policies are needed to disincentivize high income disparity to CEOs and other highly compensated employees by introducing very tiered taxation and closing loopholes that shield their profits from taxation, otherwise companies are just going to continue to pass those cost increases on to customers. Legislation like this is hard sell in the US.

Most countries that provide a stronger social safety net have flatter wages. Only in America do tech bros and doctors make over $200k (hourly wage $90+), while the minimum wage is realistically $9. That's a wage disparity ratio of at least 10:1.  In the UK, doctors make £90k (£43/hr) while minimum wage pays £9/ hr. That's a wage disparity ratio of 4.8 :1. There is absolutely no way to raise wages here 30-50% for many without depleting purchasing power for others. Our relative lack of social safety net would plunge many more into food and shelter insecurity.The US economy would have to be restructured to provide a social safety net (never mind that we currently finance our limited social safety net with unfunded huge deficit spending).

Countries with higher wages and lower income disparity have much higher prices on discretionary items. In the UK, a big mac meal comes with what Americans would call a small fry / soda and costs about £7. The equivalent cost in the US (for a larger meal) is about $7. In Australia, where wages are even higher, a big mac meal is $12. A nurse in Australia making $35/ hr (standard wage) has a much harder time buying that meal and saving money than an equivalent nurse in the US making $35/hr. In the UK, where a nurse makes £15 / hr, that big mac meal is half their hourly wage. These higher costs in the UK/Aus are also borne out across multiple types of purchases.

Every single American on this board has had a quicker path to FIRE due to the structure of our economy / wage disparity subsidizing our cheap purchases. None of us have been able to remove ourselves from the economy and purely support businesses that pay above poverty wages because we do not have choice in many of the matters (we cannot affect what our landlords pay their handyman, what our contracted internet or trash utility pays their call center person). So lets all look at this from a practical stand point and ask HOW we can participate in a more fair economy, while acknowledging that it will affect all of our bottom lines. Those of you who have FIREd at currently inflated wage ratios need to recognize that privilege and realize how many more years it would have taken you at flatter wages in comparison, instead of just saying "I don't mind paying $0.41 more for a fast food burger". Its just not that simple. I don't have any real answers regarding restructuring the economy, I just want to point out that it it were that simple, we would have already solved poverty each time the minimum wage was raised.

[stoaX]

There have been a lot of fact-free pronouncements about the catastrophic effects of a living wage on employment upthread.  While a living wage is no panacea, and there are employment impacts of increasing the minimum wage, the catastrophizing just isn't borne out.  Below is just a smattering.  I've tried to avoid more ideological citations on both the left and right.
https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/federal-minimum-wage-research/
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/increasing-minimum-wage-would-help-not-hurt-economy-n1244586
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/02/seattle-passed-a-15-minimum-wage-law-in-2014-heres-how-its-turned-out-so-far.html

The utter lack of respect for human dignity in this thread has been, to quote another poster, flabbergasting.  The premise of the living wage movement (with $15/hour as a shorthand), is that all full time workers deserve the chance to earn enough to afford a basic, but decent, living.  We are not all born with equivalent gifts or good fortune, be it by nature or nurture.  We cannot all be above average.  But the person who was born with the 80 IQ, or experienced significant adverse childhood experiences, or whose opportunities were limited by endemic poverty, is just as entitled to be able to afford food, housing, and family through the dignity of work.

Proponents of the living wage movement are not so naive to think that an increased wage will solve all of society's ills.  We believe it will help. 

Many of the arguments against a living wage apply just as well against any minimum wage.  The idea that someone would advocate for the Dickensian days before the New Deal is appalling.

The inability to feel empathy is a far greater flaw than to lack the skills to move into management.  The need to judge those less capable, or less fortunate, and consign them to struggle with multiple jobs just to have a chance at that basic dignity is . . . mean.

** For those interested in a deeper dive into what constitutes a living wage in different areas: https://livingwage.mit.edu/

Thanks for the MIT living wage calculator link.... I could spend hours looking at it!

[habanero]

Contrary to popular belief, even among a very large part of the "natives", socialist Norway does not have a legal minimum wage at all, to my knowledge we have never really had one and hardly anyone really wants it. The labour force is however heavily unionized and for the larger sectors there are broad agreements between business untions and labor unions which apply across the sector regardless of if a particular worker is member and pays membership fees to the union or not. One of the central points in any such acreement is pay, how much and how it adjusts with more experience, for work at odd hours, on weekends/public holidays and so on.

The wage structure is, however, much flatter than in the US.

[Metalcat]

Contrary to popular belief, even among a very large part of the "natives", socialist Norway does not have a legal minimum wage at all, to my knowledge we have never really had one and hardly anyone really wants it. The labour force is however heavily unionized and for the larger sectors there are broad agreements between business untions and labor unions which apply across the sector regardless of if a particular worker is member and pays membership fees to the union or not. One of the central points in any such acreement is pay, how much and how it adjusts with more experience, for work at odd hours, on weekends/public holidays and so on.

The wage structure is, however, much flatter than in the US.

That's the thing with a lot of the Nordic countries, a lot of policies aren't needed to regulate certain things because the shared values of the society already self regulate them.

I just read a summary of corporate social responsibility and responsible business conduct in Finland as compared to other countries and Finland had among the fewest national policies compared to almost anywhere else, even countries who are known for being horrible on these fronts. The government just concluded: companies are managing this fine on their own, we don't need to mandate anything, so we'll just stay out of their way.

In the absence of the will of the people, a policy can end up totally useless and the people will simply elect a new government to dismantle the policy. On the flip side though, policies can be highly effective at changing the will of the people.

It's a dynamic and often unpredictable relationship.

[researcher1]

There have been a lot of fact-free pronouncements about the catastrophic effects of a living wage on employment upthread.  While a living wage is no panacea, and there are employment impacts of increasing the minimum wage, the catastrophizing just isn't borne out.

I haven't seen anyone use the word "catastrophic", though your links show some experts think a $15 minimum wage will have detrimental impacts...
- The first paragraph in your first link states..."some estimate relatively large job losses" and that "not all economists are convinced that raising the minimum wage is the best way to help the working poor."
- The second link was weak and light on data, but says "The CBO estimated a median loss of 1.3 million jobs."
- The third link cites only Seattle, which has a higher COL than almost every city in the country, and most entry level workers earn well over $10.  They are gradually raising minimum wage from $9-$15, and the studies from 2017/2018 are well before wages reach the $15 level, so the full impact is unknown.  Even so, it states "there is no consensus among economists" and "that while wages went up, hours worked declined, resulting in less pay for low-wage workers."  Business owners state that “I think as we start to look at future planning, we are definitely looking at restaurant models that take less labor,”.

The utter lack of respect for human dignity in this thread has been, to quote another poster, flabbergasting.  We cannot all be above average.  But the person who was born with the 80 IQ, or experienced significant adverse childhood experiences, or whose opportunities were limited by endemic poverty, is just as entitled to be able to afford food, housing, and family through the dignity of work.

I don't know anyone who has expressed an "utter lack of respect for human dignity".
But a free market economy cannot provide a guaranteed nationwide $31,200 salary to every person who walks in the door asking for a job.
I sympathize with people who suffer from physical/psychological/developmental/social/environmental/educational disabilities/deficiencies/hardships.
Though it is not a business owner's responsibility to provide for everyone with these issues.  Instead, that is what governmental social programs are for.

Many of the arguments against a living wage apply just as well against any minimum wage.  The idea that someone would advocate for the Dickensian days before the New Deal is appalling.  The inability to feel empathy is a far greater flaw than to lack the skills to move into management.  The need to judge those less capable, or less fortunate, and consign them to struggle with multiple jobs just to have a chance at that basic dignity is . . . mean.

This is just ridiculous, over-the-top rhetoric.
Why do you think those who resist the idea of a nationwide $15+ wage indicates that we are "unable to feel empathy", or want to abolish the the minimum wage, or are " judging those less capable or less fortunate"? 
I'm saying that we should utilize social safety nets to help those people instead of having businesses bear the burden of fully providing for these people.

** For those interested in a deeper dive into what constitutes a living wage in different areas: https://livingwage.mit.edu/

This is your best contribution and proves my point that a nationwide $15+ minimum wage is ridiculous.

For example, the "living wage" for a single adult is $10.11/hr.  Yet the "living wage" goes up to $28.43/hr if a person has 2 kids.
Must a business pay worker #2 more than 2.5x the rate as worker #1, in order to ensure they can "afford food, housing, and family through the dignity of work"?
A $10/hr grocery bagger job can provide a single person with a modest living, but this same job should NOT be expected to provide a "living wage" for families.

Also, for a single adult, the lowest "living wage" in the country is ~$10/hr, with the highest going over $18/hr.
We shouldn't require businesses in LCOL areas to pay their workers $15/hr, even though the "living wage" is only $10/hr.
This is another reason why a $15 nationwide minimum wage makes no sense.

[WhiteTrashCash]

The short-sighted people (let's not name names) who fight against living wages, try to outlaw healthcare assistance, and prevent necessary financial aid from going out to American citizens during a pandemic have created a problem with Socialism expanding exponentially across the nation. We had that problem completely beaten in the 1990s at the end of the Cold War, but this group of people's selfishness and arrogance has brought Socialism back from its deathbed. Good job, guys.

[Luck12]

The short-sighted people (let's not name names) who fight against living wages, try to outlaw healthcare assistance, and prevent necessary financial aid from going out to American citizens during a pandemic have created a problem with Socialism expanding exponentially across the nation. We had that problem completely beaten in the 1990s at the end of the Cold War, but this group of people's selfishness and arrogance has brought Socialism back from its deathbed. Good job, guys.

Eh I'm about as left as you get on this board but even I'm far from a socialist.  Steinbeck was right.  There'll never be more than a small minority of Americans supporting anything close to Socialism b/c majority of Americans are temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

[GuitarStv]

The short-sighted people (let's not name names) who fight against living wages, try to outlaw healthcare assistance, and prevent necessary financial aid from going out to American citizens during a pandemic have created a problem with Socialism expanding exponentially across the nation. We had that problem completely beaten in the 1990s at the end of the Cold War, but this group of people's selfishness and arrogance has brought Socialism back from its deathbed. Good job, guys.

Eh I'm about as left as you get on this board but even I'm far from a socialist.  Steinbeck was right.  There'll never be more than a small minority of Americans supporting anything close to Socialism b/c majority of Americans are temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

It's always weird to hear Americans talking about socialism.

Socialism occurs when the means of production/distribution/exchange are owned or regulated by the community as a whole.  It's the flip side to free-market capitalism, where private companies own everything and only operate for profit.  Capitalism/socialism operate hand in hand in every successful country to help keep the excesses of each other in check.

Examples of socialist things that exist in the US:
- Public Schools
- Pollution regulations
- Health and safety regulations
- Banking regulations
- Medicare/Medicade
- Police
- Firefighters
- Public Housing/Social Security/Food Assistance

Americans always seem to jump to and stick with Authoritarian socialism as a boogeyman while ignoring the tremendous proven good of democratic socialism.

[researcher1]

The short-sighted people (let's not name names) who fight against living wages, try to outlaw healthcare assistance, and prevent necessary financial aid from going out to American citizens during a pandemic have created a problem with Socialism expanding exponentially across the nation.

Speak about short-sighted people.
You have completely dismissed a huge sector of the economy, hundreds of great occupations, and tens of millions of people working in these occupations...
- "There isn't money to be made in most trades."
- "Except for certain circumstances for very lucky people, the trades don't pay."
- "It is basically necessary to have [a college degree] if you want to have a good middle class life."

Yet you're worried about other people "creating a problem with socialism expanding"?

[habanero]

Last time I was in the US is now almost 10 years ago but I was pretty surprised by the sheer number of staff everywhere and all the jobs for which no one here would ever consider paying anyone money for. Those jobs either were never her in the first place or they have been automated or self-serviced away a long time ago.

[Villanelle]

Last time I was in the US is now almost 10 years ago but I was pretty surprised by the sheer number of staff everywhere and all the jobs for which no one here would ever consider paying anyone money for. Those jobs either were never her in the first place or they have been automated or self-serviced away a long time ago.

Can you give some examples of this?  I'm not sure what kind of thing you are referring to and would like to know more, please. 

[WhiteTrashCash]

The short-sighted people (let's not name names) who fight against living wages, try to outlaw healthcare assistance, and prevent necessary financial aid from going out to American citizens during a pandemic have created a problem with Socialism expanding exponentially across the nation.

Speak about short-sighted people.
You have completely dismissed a huge sector of the economy, hundreds of great occupations, and tens of millions of people working in these occupations...
- "There isn't money to be made in most trades."
- "Except for certain circumstances for very lucky people, the trades don't pay."
- "It is basically necessary to have [a college degree] if you want to have a good middle class life."

Yet you're worried about other people "creating a problem with socialism expanding"?

Those jobs are great if you don't want to have wealth. That is true. But if you want to have wealth, you pretty much need a college degree. I stand by that 100%.

And you have outed yourself.

[mizzourah2006]

The short-sighted people (let's not name names) who fight against living wages, try to outlaw healthcare assistance, and prevent necessary financial aid from going out to American citizens during a pandemic have created a problem with Socialism expanding exponentially across the nation.

Speak about short-sighted people.
You have completely dismissed a huge sector of the economy, hundreds of great occupations, and tens of millions of people working in these occupations...
- "There isn't money to be made in most trades."
- "Except for certain circumstances for very lucky people, the trades don't pay."
- "It is basically necessary to have [a college degree] if you want to have a good middle class life."

Yet you're worried about other people "creating a problem with socialism expanding"?

Those jobs are great if you don't want to have wealth. That is true. But if you want to have wealth, you pretty much need a college degree. I stand by that 100%.

And you have outed yourself.

Many of my friends work in the trades and they all make very good livings. Sure they aren't bringing in $250k/yr, but $70-$100k/yr in smaller cities in the midwest is a pretty good income IMO. I don't see why you think you can't create wealth on a HH income of $100-$150k/yr. That's what our HH income was until about 2 years ago and we paid off student loans, had 2 kids, and in a matter of 5 years went from basically no networth to $500k.

[researcher1]

Those jobs are great if you don't want to have wealth. That is true. But if you want to have wealth, you pretty much need a college degree. I stand by that 100%.

If you truly believe that "the trades don't pay" and you "can't have a good middle class life" without a degree, then you are COMPLETELY out of touch with reality.

[WhiteTrashCash]

Those jobs are great if you don't want to have wealth. That is true. But if you want to have wealth, you pretty much need a college degree. I stand by that 100%.

If you truly believe that "the trades don't pay" and you "can't have a good middle class life" without a degree, then you are COMPLETELY out of touch with reality.

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree. There are always outliers, just as once in a while someone wins a state lottery, but I talk in absolutes to get the point across.

[mizzourah2006]

Those jobs are great if you don't want to have wealth. That is true. But if you want to have wealth, you pretty much need a college degree. I stand by that 100%.

If you truly believe that "the trades don't pay" and you "can't have a good middle class life" without a degree, then you are COMPLETELY out of touch with reality.

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree. There are always outliers, just as once in a while someone wins a state lottery, but I talk in absolutes to get the point across.

My childhood best friend works as an electrician (and before that he was a plumber apprentice), two of my very good friends, since gradeschool are linesmen, and another very good friend does flooring. Just because they aren't on the MMM forum doesn't mean they don't exist. They also aren't very active on any social media platforms. Perhaps you should step away from your computer every once in a while and venture out into the world. My mom did my friends taxes who is a linesmen. I accidentally stumbled upon one of his returns on her computer from about 7-8 years ago. He was in his late 20s and his taxable income was just a bit over $80k and he lives in Saint Louis. I probably made about $25k that same year...but hey I did have a college degree, so there's that.

My wife doesn't have a college degree, is 35 and she'll clear $60k this year working as an office manager in Arkansas. You don't need a college degree to make a middle class income.

[WhiteTrashCash]

Those jobs are great if you don't want to have wealth. That is true. But if you want to have wealth, you pretty much need a college degree. I stand by that 100%.

If you truly believe that "the trades don't pay" and you "can't have a good middle class life" without a degree, then you are COMPLETELY out of touch with reality.

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree. There are always outliers, just as once in a while someone wins a state lottery, but I talk in absolutes to get the point across.

My childhood best friend works as an electrician (and before that he was a plumber apprentice), two of my very good friends, since gradeschool are linesmen, and another very good friend does flooring. Just because they aren't on the MMM forum doesn't mean they don't exist. They also aren't very active on any social media platforms. Perhaps you should step away from your computer every once in a while and venture out into the world. My mom did my friends taxes who is a linesmen. I accidentally stumbled upon one of his returns on her computer from about 7-8 years ago. He was in his late 20s and his taxable income was just a bit over $80k and he lives in Saint Louis. I probably made about $25k that same year...but hey I did have a college degree, so there's that.

My wife doesn't have a college degree, is 35 and she'll clear $60k this year working as an office manager in Arkansas. You don't need a college degree to make a middle class income.

I look forward to hearing about your adventures changing careers from computer programming to electrician to make the big bucks. Godspeed to you, my friend!

[ender]

@WhiteTrashCash what is a "good middle class life" to you? And what is "wealth" here? And what does a career need to make to be considered paying decently?

I'm super confused by this because it seems like your words mean very different than your intent.

[WhiteTrashCash]

@WhiteTrashCash what is a "good middle class life" to you? And what is "wealth" here? And what does a career need to make to be considered paying decently?

I'm super confused by this because it seems like your words mean very different than your intent.

Middle class where I currently live for a household of two people is calculated at about $120,000/year. Middle class on Hillbilly Mountain for two people is calculated at about $80,000/yr. Average electrician pay where I live is about $42,000/year. Average electrician pay on Hillbilly Mountain is about $37,000/yr. I don't know about you, but I don't think they'd be very successful at those pay rates.

[researcher1]

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree.

The fact that you don't personally know several people living a solid middle-class life without a degree proves you are out of touch with this country.
I can name 50+ people off the top of my head without a second though.

Just because they don't respond to your wacky posts on this forum doesn't mean they don't exist.

[WhiteTrashCash]

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree.

The fact that you don't personally know several people living a solid middle-class life without a degree proves you are out of touch with this country.
I can name 50+ people off the top of my head without a second though.

Just because they don't respond to your wacky posts on this forum doesn't mean they don't exist.

So, you are saying that this entire forum of wealth-seeking people has nearly nobody in the trades (if anyone at all) and it's completely coincidental? Sure.

[sherr]

Middle class where I currently live for a household of two people is calculated at about $120,000/year. Middle class on Hillbilly Mountain for two people is calculated at about $80,000/yr. Average electrician pay where I live is about $42,000/year. Average electrician pay on Hillbilly Mountain is about $37,000/yr. I don't know about you, but I don't think they'd be very successful at those pay rates.

I'm genuinely curious where you're getting your "middle class income" numbers from. Given that the US household median income is $68k, I have a hard time believing that you have to make $80k on Hillbilly Mountain in order to be "middle class".

[ender]

So, you are saying that this entire forum of wealth-seeking people has nearly nobody in the trades (if anyone at all) and it's completely coincidental? Sure.

I wonder what % of the posts on this forum are made during work hours.

I certainly have posted a significant amount during work hours.

[researcher1]

So, you are saying that this entire forum of wealth-seeking people has nearly nobody in the trades (if anyone at all) and it's completely coincidental? Sure.

How did you come to that conclusion?
Can you link to your forum post where you asked people without college degrees to respond?

Also, most trades don't spend their days staring at a computer screen all day.
They aren't on MMM responding to your ridiculous claims that trades don't pay.

Most people posting here are white-collar workers goofing off at work by surfing the net.

[WhiteTrashCash]

So, you are saying that this entire forum of wealth-seeking people has nearly nobody in the trades (if anyone at all) and it's completely coincidental? Sure.

I wonder what % of the posts on this forum are made during work hours.

I certainly have posted a significant amount during work hours.

Probably a lot right now with it being so close to the holidays. I typically average a little over a post a day, so today is an outlier for me.

[ender]

I think there's a lot of survivorship bias in this area. We live in a society which has for decades pushed people to college and encouraged them it's the only way to succeed in life.

People who are naturally prone to intelligence and/or hard work as a result are conditioned to choose a college degree.

What you are saying could completely be the result of this self selection.

I suspect most people on these forums who work in office jobs would have thrived even in the trades. Perhaps thriving more in office work from a financial perspective, but certainly there's correlation with analysis/research obsession and FIRE.

What you really need to answer this question is "if I took someone who went to college and pursued FIRE, but instead did the trades - would this be as effective a route to FI/RE?"



There are massive numbers of people who have college degrees and still make crappy salary, too.

[researcher1]

There are massive numbers of people who have college degrees and still make crappy salary, too.

Not to mention all of the student loan debt racked up by these people.

It is quite telling that WhiteTrashCash can't relate to anyone making a decent middle-class living without a degree.
I'd urge them to get out of their ivory tower, take a road trip, and interact with real people living real middle-class lives using real non-college skills.

I posted these links in another thread that show WhiteTrashCash is wrong on this issue.
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

[dignam]

@WhiteTrashCash what is a "good middle class life" to you? And what is "wealth" here? And what does a career need to make to be considered paying decently?

I'm super confused by this because it seems like your words mean very different than your intent.

Middle class where I currently live for a household of two people is calculated at about $120,000/year. Middle class on Hillbilly Mountain for two people is calculated at about $80,000/yr. Average electrician pay where I live is about $42,000/year. Average electrician pay on Hillbilly Mountain is about $37,000/yr. I don't know about you, but I don't think they'd be very successful at those pay rates.

Curious where you're getting those numbers.  I live in a state that is middle of the road when it comes to incomes and COL.   Rent in my county (Dane county, WI) is very high compared to neighbors, and my gf was doing fine on $40k/year by herself.  Even saving for retirement.

[Metalcat]

Those jobs are great if you don't want to have wealth. That is true. But if you want to have wealth, you pretty much need a college degree. I stand by that 100%.

If you truly believe that "the trades don't pay" and you "can't have a good middle class life" without a degree, then you are COMPLETELY out of touch with reality.

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree. There are always outliers, just as once in a while someone wins a state lottery, but I talk in absolutes to get the point across.

What the fuck?

If you don't know people without university education who are making very good money, then that's a problem with your sample.

Off the top of my head, I'm close to at least a half dozen very close friends and family who make well into 6 figures without a degree.

It usually requires a good entrepreneurial sense, but someone business savvy can easily out perform someone formally educated in terms of earnings.

[GuitarStv]

It usually requires a good entrepreneurial sense, but someone business savvy can easily out perform someone formally educated in terms of earnings.

Easily?  Really?

Then why does anyone pay for an education?  Seems like a lot of work for something that can easily be bested by any high school grad with business savvy.

I fully believe that a person can do financially well without a university education . . . but I'd argue that it's a little more difficult a path, and with a greater risk of failure.

[Optimiser]

There have been a lot of fact-free pronouncements about the catastrophic effects of a living wage on employment upthread.  While a living wage is no panacea, and there are employment impacts of increasing the minimum wage, the catastrophizing just isn't borne out.  Below is just a smattering.  I've tried to avoid more ideological citations on both the left and right.
https://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/federal-minimum-wage-research/
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/increasing-minimum-wage-would-help-not-hurt-economy-n1244586
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/02/seattle-passed-a-15-minimum-wage-law-in-2014-heres-how-its-turned-out-so-far.html

The utter lack of respect for human dignity in this thread has been, to quote another poster, flabbergasting.  The premise of the living wage movement (with $15/hour as a shorthand), is that all full time workers deserve the chance to earn enough to afford a basic, but decent, living.  We are not all born with equivalent gifts or good fortune, be it by nature or nurture.  We cannot all be above average.  But the person who was born with the 80 IQ, or experienced significant adverse childhood experiences, or whose opportunities were limited by endemic poverty, is just as entitled to be able to afford food, housing, and family through the dignity of work.

Proponents of the living wage movement are not so naive to think that an increased wage will solve all of society's ills.  We believe it will help. 

Many of the arguments against a living wage apply just as well against any minimum wage.  The idea that someone would advocate for the Dickensian days before the New Deal is appalling.

The inability to feel empathy is a far greater flaw than to lack the skills to move into management.  The need to judge those less capable, or less fortunate, and consign them to struggle with multiple jobs just to have a chance at that basic dignity is . . . mean.

** For those interested in a deeper dive into what constitutes a living wage in different areas: https://livingwage.mit.edu/

Thanks for the MIT living wage calculator link.... I could spend hours looking at it!

That living wage calculator is interesting. I was a little bit surprised to see that based on my family size and location I don't make a living wage. I don't consider myself rich, but I have managed to support myself and my family while saving a modest amount.

[havregryn]

Contrary to popular belief, even among a very large part of the "natives", socialist Norway does not have a legal minimum wage at all, to my knowledge we have never really had one and hardly anyone really wants it. The labour force is however heavily unionized and for the larger sectors there are broad agreements between business untions and labor unions which apply across the sector regardless of if a particular worker is member and pays membership fees to the union or not. One of the central points in any such acreement is pay, how much and how it adjusts with more experience, for work at odd hours, on weekends/public holidays and so on.

The wage structure is, however, much flatter than in the US.

Meanwhile Luxembourg has one of the world's highest (maybe the highest, unless Switzerland beat us to it) minimum wages and the economy hasn't exactly imploded or anything....and everything else about Luxembourg is much less like the Nordics and much more like the capitalist dream (quite big wage disparities, a lot of money being made in some sectors, public policies that generally tend to benefit the richer people a bit more than the poor etc)...so it can't be that bad.

[solon]

My son is a welder - no college degree. I am an accountant - college degree. We will both pull in about $75k this year.

[Metalcat]

It usually requires a good entrepreneurial sense, but someone business savvy can easily out perform someone formally educated in terms of earnings.

Easily?  Really?

Then why does anyone pay for an education?  Seems like a lot of work for something that can easily be bested by any high school grad with business savvy.

I fully believe that a person can do financially well without a university education . . . but I'd argue that it's a little more difficult a path, and with a greater risk of failure.

Because not everyone has the savvy or stomach for being a business owner. There's a lot of risk, but for those who succeed, they are often making quite a bit more money than their highly educated counterparts with much less relative effort than someone at megacorp.

Why do people go to school?? Because their parents hammered into their heads that that's the only way to get a "good job".

I would have been far better off financially had I followed in my parents' footsteps and not bothered with school.

[habanero]

Last time I was in the US is now almost 10 years ago but I was pretty surprised by the sheer number of staff everywhere and all the jobs for which no one here would ever consider paying anyone money for. Those jobs either were never her in the first place or they have been automated or self-serviced away a long time ago.

Can you give some examples of this?  I'm not sure what kind of thing you are referring to and would like to know more, please.

So much staff everywhere was a major difference. Baggers at supermarkets. Manned toll booths on highways. Someone selling cologne in the men's at night clubs. Doormen at residential buildings. Elevator operators in office buildings. Porters even in non-posh hotels. Valet parking. And so on.

Admittingly, I have only seen a tinytiny bit of the US as a tourist + a few days on business trips to NYC, but it's basically the same refrain from everyone I know who has lived in the US and/or worked there for extended periods. They are all astonished by how many things someone is employed to do and also frequently how many people apparently are needed to do something and how much work simple stuff can require and how the same stuff would be done with less staff here. They also generally cite everything that has to do with the government /public services etc as a very big difference, we can do pretty much everything ourselves on-line - be it applying for day care, school, university, file a building application, apply for a mortgage, file personal tax returns (for a standard personal economy everything comes pre-entered so you generally just have to click the "submit" button on the government web page and you're done). "Noone" hires a tax professional for help with personal taxes - even if you actively traded equities for example it would still all be in there by sheer magic.

Its probably part culture, part large difference in the total cost of employing someone or cost of hiring someone to do something for you that you don't want to do yourself. The flatter wage structure also means people are less inclined to hire someone to do something you can do yourself as you have fewer people with very high incomes and you have to pay more if hiring someone. And most folks work 8-16 so less need to "buy time".

So I think with significantly higher pay (and benefits) a lot of jobs would go away because the economics of employing someone would change.

[ender]

Why do people go to school?? Because their parents hammered into their heads that that's the only way to get a "good job".

I would have been far better off financially had I followed in my parents' footsteps and not bothered with school.

Plus you occasionally run into people who are convinced that college degrees are a requirement to being successful in the world.

The "prestige" factor has been build by decades of marketing too on the behalf of universities/colleges.

[habanero]

Plus you occasionally run into people who are convinced that college degrees are a requirement to being successful in the world.

The "prestige" factor has been build by decades of marketing too on the behalf of universities/colleges.

Where I work now you basically need a masters degree even to get an interview. Our biggest star doesn’t have one and it’s a tad ironic that if said person applied today his application would go straight to /dev/null

It’s even gotten it’s own term here - it’s called “masters degree disease” and refers to educational requirements not even remotly necessary for doing a specific job but according to people who hire it increases the probability of success in hiring someone and that’s why they do it. No one really think it’s an actual requirement. Guess it’s a function of a lot of people taking higher education and you need to apply some filter just to cope with applications for cool jobs. A lot of them ain’t even cool - as in highly attractive / well paid.

[Bloop Bloop Reloaded]

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree.

The fact that you don't personally know several people living a solid middle-class life without a degree proves you are out of touch with this country.
I can name 50+ people off the top of my head without a second though.

Just because they don't respond to your wacky posts on this forum doesn't mean they don't exist.

So, you are saying that this entire forum of wealth-seeking people has nearly nobody in the trades (if anyone at all) and it's completely coincidental? Sure.

There are very few tradies on this forum but that is because I suspect they don't have the chance to, or don't want to, post on intellectual forums as much as degree-educated officers workers. Not because they don't earn a middle class living.

I don't know about the states but here in Australia it's very very possible to earn $70-$120k as a tradie which does guarantee a middle class way of life.

[Metalcat]

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree.

The fact that you don't personally know several people living a solid middle-class life without a degree proves you are out of touch with this country.
I can name 50+ people off the top of my head without a second though.

Just because they don't respond to your wacky posts on this forum doesn't mean they don't exist.

So, you are saying that this entire forum of wealth-seeking people has nearly nobody in the trades (if anyone at all) and it's completely coincidental? Sure.

There are very few tradies on this forum but that is because I suspect they don't have the chance to, or don't want to, post on intellectual forums as much as degree-educated officers workers. Not because they don't earn a middle class living.

I don't know about the states but here in Australia it's very very possible to earn $70-$120k as a tradie which does guarantee a middle class way of life.

There are very few tradespeople on most forums for two very good reasons: tradespeople are very busy and don't spend much time in front of computers. My plumber (who owns the business and does very well) only has a flip phone.

Also, it's very important to note that trades aren't the only career that non university educated people go into. Trades is a very, very limited sector of that population.

There are boat loads of people without university degrees making very good money in real estate, sales, software, financial services, O&G, and owning any number of lucrative businesses.

I worked at a high end finance firm for a guy with no degree, he was younger than I was and already had a net worth that I will never achieve. ETA: he wouldn't have wasted his time on this forum either, for him time was money, I could barely get 15 minutes a week with him.

[Wolfpack Mustachian]

People keep saying that on this forum, but when I ask how many of you work as plumbers and electricians, then tumbleweeds go rolling past. Because the trades don't pay. That's just how reality is. If you want money, you almost always need to have a college degree.

The fact that you don't personally know several people living a solid middle-class life without a degree proves you are out of touch with this country.
I can name 50+ people off the top of my head without a second though.

Just because they don't respond to your wacky posts on this forum doesn't mean they don't exist.

So, you are saying that this entire forum of wealth-seeking people has nearly nobody in the trades (if anyone at all) and it's completely coincidental? Sure.

Do you really think it's that abnormal? There is a ton of self-selection here. The forum most certainly leans liberal. It's full of nerdy/techy references. The people that I personally know that are doing very well in trades are rural people who would rather go hunting or riding around on ATV's than post on an internet forum like this. And yet, they are making 60k+ sometimes as much as 6 figures in professions such as welding, electrical, maintenance, and so on.

The other side of things is, do you think that 80,000 is really necessary for middle class and/or FIRE in a rural LCOL area? I mean, sure, you likely won't be retiring at 30 with a spouse and a combined household income of 60k, but I've lived LCOL with a spouse, and I certainly didn't need 80K of expenses to live a middle class lifestyle. I wasn't making nearly that much, and we lived luxuriously on much less while still saving, I dunno, at least 10% or so (pre-MMM - it could have been optimized so much more, I am ashamed.....)

I'm just really curious about your thought process and perspective on the numbers

[Bloop Bloop Reloaded]

It usually requires a good entrepreneurial sense, but someone business savvy can easily out perform someone formally educated in terms of earnings.

Easily?  Really?

Then why does anyone pay for an education?  Seems like a lot of work for something that can easily be bested by any high school grad with business savvy.

I fully believe that a person can do financially well without a university education . . . but I'd argue that it's a little more difficult a path, and with a greater risk of failure.

I think part of it is selection bias. Not to put too fine a point on it, but if you want to succeed either in a white collar job or in a trade/entrepreneurial job, you need to be smart, or very lucky (or very good at singing/kicking a ball around). For the most part you need to be smart. And most smart people are drummed by society or parents or lured by scholarships into going to university.

[ctuser1]

I live in a working class neighborhood, and hence ‘know’ (=acquainted with) more treadies than I’d otherwise be.

They seem to have a swell lifestyle till they are 40. They are earning a lot of money, they can afford a lifestyle that office workers like me need to spend double to attain (they barter a lot for expensive labor).

However, by mid-40’s, almost all of them develop some health problem or the other that seriously affect their ability to do their physically demanding jobs. They continue doing the same line of work (almost none of them are mustachians, so I doubt they have options), but with painful quality of like/work sacrifices. The luckier of them have a spouse who is a nurse and bring fantastic healthcare. The rest even forego some medical care.

tl;dr - by the time they are 60, 80-90% of tradies have a shit life.

There are some exceptions. Some of them switch to being business owners. I hired a tree guy who climbed on a 50-ft tree himself. He was 68 at that time and way more physically capable than I will ever be, AND he owned a multi-million-$$ rental properties portfolio!! People probably tend to see the outliers and glorify trades. Similarly outlying “college educated” would far outperform the outlying tradies! At the lower end of the distribution, a back issue is less of a problem for an office worker than a tradie + the minimally health conscious office worker has much lower chances of getting it.

[JGS1980]

I live in a working class neighborhood, and hence ‘know’ (=acquainted with) more treadies than I’d otherwise be.

They seem to have a swell lifestyle till they are 40. They are earning a lot of money, they can afford a lifestyle that office workers like me need to spend double to attain (they barter a lot for expensive labor).

However, by mid-40’s, almost all of them develop some health problem or the other that seriously affect their ability to do their physically demanding jobs. They continue doing the same line of work (almost none of them are mustachians, so I doubt they have options), but with painful quality of like/work sacrifices. The luckier of them have a spouse who is a nurse and bring fantastic healthcare. The rest even forego some medical care.

tl;dr - by the time they are 60, 80-90% of tradies have a shit life.

There are some exceptions. Some of them switch to being business owners. I hired a tree guy who climbed on a 50-ft tree himself. He was 68 at that time and way more physically capable than I will ever be, AND he owned a multi-million-$$ rental properties portfolio!! People probably tend to see the outliers and glorify trades. Similarly outlying “college educated” would far outperform the outlying tradies! At the lower end of the distribution, a back issue is less of a problem for an office worker than a tradie + the minimally health conscious office worker has much lower chances of getting it.

+1

I'm a Family Doctor. I take care of these guys in their 40's, 50's, 60's. Wear and tear is real. Also, the risk of long term disability to an accident at an early age is much higher than office work.

I would support my own children getting into the trades if they had the inclination and work ethic for it. I would also insist on them developing an "exit plan" to either own and supervise other's work by their late 30's or sell their business entirely by then due to the long term physical effects of these jobs.

[Metalcat]

I live in a working class neighborhood, and hence ‘know’ (=acquainted with) more treadies than I’d otherwise be.

They seem to have a swell lifestyle till they are 40. They are earning a lot of money, they can afford a lifestyle that office workers like me need to spend double to attain (they barter a lot for expensive labor).

However, by mid-40’s, almost all of them develop some health problem or the other that seriously affect their ability to do their physically demanding jobs. They continue doing the same line of work (almost none of them are mustachians, so I doubt they have options), but with painful quality of like/work sacrifices. The luckier of them have a spouse who is a nurse and bring fantastic healthcare. The rest even forego some medical care.

tl;dr - by the time they are 60, 80-90% of tradies have a shit life.

There are some exceptions. Some of them switch to being business owners. I hired a tree guy who climbed on a 50-ft tree himself. He was 68 at that time and way more physically capable than I will ever be, AND he owned a multi-million-$$ rental properties portfolio!! People probably tend to see the outliers and glorify trades. Similarly outlying “college educated” would far outperform the outlying tradies! At the lower end of the distribution, a back issue is less of a problem for an office worker than a tradie + the minimally health conscious office worker has much lower chances of getting it.

+1

I'm a Family Doctor. I take care of these guys in their 40's, 50's, 60's. Wear and tear is real. Also, the risk of long term disability to an accident at an early age is much higher than office work.

I would support my own children getting into the trades if they had the inclination and work ethic for it. I would also insist on them developing an "exit plan" to either own and supervise other's work by their late 30's or sell their business entirely by then due to the long term physical effects of these jobs.

Absolutely.

My family who are in trades or trade like jobs all moved quickly into ownership so that they wouldn't be dependent on their bodies past a certain point.

On the average, there's no doubt that being an educated professional with an office job is more predictably secure, but the original statement I argued with was that one NEEDS to be university educated to make decent money.

That's simply not the case.