445
Election 2024: Kamala Harris on NBC vows to double federal minimum wage to $15
(www.telegraph.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
445 points (98.3% liked)
politics
19089 readers
4336 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Oh.
My minded automatically corrected that as "doubling from 15 to 30". Because that's what it needs to be, at least.
What's the basis for $30/hr? First time seeing that number in the wild.
Y'all really making this Reddit with less content. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Because we've been arguing it should be at least 15 for 10 years, and inflation is a bitch and if federal minimum wage had tracked with inflation since it was implemented, it would be closer to 30 bucks an hour than to 15.
And it should be all at once. The instant it's passed, $30/hr. None of us got eased into it when gas prices and grocery prices and rent and health insurance went up.
I understand your sentiment, but if that's your policy basis, you'd be asking for $10/hr instead of $15.
Not necessarily a bad idea, I just wanted to know how that number was generated, because without that data, it's not necessarily a good idea either.
Just read the comments, the data is there.
If you read the comments, it's actually not. Inflation alone doesn't account for pinning wages near $30, so that's not really a good explanation given that it's nonfactual. Even if he's considering the living wage instead of historical minimums, $30 is still about 30% higher than what an average living wage would be. Is there some other consideration he has that I'm missing? I wouldn't know without asking due to an unfortunate lack of psychic powers.
Anyways, sorry I asked for the policy reasoning behind a policy position. It clearly offended many, I realize my mistake, and won't bring that kind of nonsense around here again.
I think the common sentiment is that minimum wage should be rated annually tied to a major factor on how much spending power that money has like inflation or productivity.
Minimum wage started in 1938 at $0.25. if it kept up with inflation today that would be $5.59, which is far from enough to survive with even the most basic rent and groceries.
""" The dollar had an average inflation rate of 3.68% per year between 1938 and today, producing a cumulative price increase of 2,136.18%."""
https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1938?amount=0.25
Productivity however has decoupled from wages decades ago, here's the EPI graph most reference:
If we re-coupled those values for minimum wage today that would be much higher. 3 years ago CBS reported it would be about $26: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wage-26-dollars-economy-productivity/
Where did that money go instead of paying fair wages?
Nice breakdown. And I agree that the better solution would be to figure out which metric to tie minimum wage to. I don't really think throwing out a number every few years like the original reply I was responding to suggested is helpful. But it seems wildly popular here.
I'm seeing 21.50 from articles in 2020 tying min wage to productivity. Maybe that's the number basis? Or living wage? A living wage per state adjustment for one adult with one child seems to put lw around 30 in a lot of states, with the single adult needing 13-20.
All good possible points, but only one person in this thread can answer what the number basis is, so who knows.
And out comes the abacus.
Insightful