Transcript
A tweet saying "100k a year to take someone's order at Taco Bell . Totally makes sense.". It has a reply saying "Where the hell did you get that number? If someone's working enough hours to make that on $15 an hour, they deserve it. $15 an hour, a person working 40 a week makes $31,200 a year." the reply has 2 likes.
Lots of great comments in here but somehow no one brought up that the federal minimum wage is still only $7.25/hr.
7.25, including tips.
Maybe it's just an own-goal admitting it costs $100k a year to live wherever they do.
Could not get it through a coworker's head that there is something fundamentally wrong with expecting people to work at jobs lower than COL. They just say that person should get a better job if it doesn't pay bills... Not everyone gets that opportunity.
Fuck you-got mine mindset.
They're just admitting that they think that the folk who put their food on the shelves, answer phones for them and clean the facilities don't deserve a good life.
They have no problem being served by capitalism's underclass.
I'm wondering if genius twitter here didn't negociate an hour rate that he thought would get him in the 6 figures club and is learning that... hell no it won't!
$100k a year at 40 hours a week is $48.08 an hour, which might be even easier to see how far off of reality they are.
I'd vote for that as min wage
Generally everyone has two weeks off so I use $/h * 2000 to get earnings pre tax, or 15(50*40). There are also ~~sick days~~ mental health days and bank holidays, so it could be better, but 2,000 is such a nice number
I wouldn't go quite that high right off the bat, but...
Just peg a full time, min wage, locally (metro area locally), to 1/3 the median price of renting a studio apartment.
Would this be an economically perfect policy?
Fuuuuck no.
Would this actually enable, at least theoretically, an 18 yo kicked out of the family house upon high school graduation, as is the cultural norm in most of America, to actually be at least theoretically capable of providing for themselves and starting their own life?
Again, assuming jobs actually exist, yes.
This would be the bare minimum needed to make the insanely out off touch asshole boomer logic even mildly line up with reality.
...
For my next policy:
All those with student loan debt, where those students were goaded into that student debt by their parents saying they'd never have a good paying career without a college education, where those students have also been underemployed (a job or jobs not actually crtitically reliant on their degree) for a period of 5 years or more...
Congrats students! That debt is now dischargable in a bankruptcy, and it becomes the responsibility of said parents, for whom it is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.
Unrealistic?
Yes.
Fundamentally legally impossible?
Also probably yes.
... Morally correct, in spirit?
Oh, oh hell yes, yes.
...
For my third policy:
Graduated municipal landlord taxes based on how much a landlord charges a rental tenant for rent, in addition to existing property taxes.
If you are renting out a property for say, double area median rent for comparable sq ft, num bedrooms, etc? Well, now the landlord pays additional tax on that exorbitant rent.
Doesn't totally murder the profit motive, but highly disincentivizes putting high value homes and condos on the market for rent (and would thus incentivize putting them on the market actually for sale, at a reasonable price), incentivizes building modest new apartment buildings instead of only 'luxury' apartments.
All the proceeds of this tax of course go into funding housing subsidies for the poor, or directly building new, municipally operated, non profit apartment complexes.
... Just play the uno reverse card on the landlords, tax their rent extraction.
I assume you mean 3 times the cost of a studio apartment, not 1/3, unless you think every minimum wage worker should be sharing their studio apartment with 5 other roommates.
directly building new, municipally operated, non profit apartment complexes
This is the crux of the answer if you want to solve housing prices, it doesn't really matter how you pay for it...but I like your way of paying for it
If you don't get paid time off do you have to take it? Up here in Canada most full time jobs (at least all the ones I've had) have two weeks paid vacation after the first year. Here's an Indeed article being way more clear than I could be.
Min wage hourly doesn't come with guaranteed time off, but I think the pay gets added to each paycheck? Don't quote me, it's been ages since I was an hourly guy.
In the US, functionally, basically no min wage jobs get any vacation or sick days.
Nearly all these jobs have managers who will only allow you to schedule vacation in weird little blocks when its convenient for them, and then either right before you go on vacation, they cancel it, or you do go on vacation, and they claim you never scheduled it... you are fired if you do not abadon your vacation for work.
With sick days, if you take one, you aren't a team player, if you take two, your next minor infraction or dumb petty bullshit a coworker makes up about you... you are fired.
Wooo! America.
And that is on top of: Basically all min wage jobs will min max your weekly hours so you just barely don't actually pass the threshold for qualifying for any real health benefits and/or vacation/sick day accrual.
Oh and you are basically always on call, because you need to come fill some other shift that isn't filled for some reason having to do with the manager being incompetent at managing, but they'll gaslight the fuck out of everyone and say its everyone else fault.
Fucking hell. Mine, my SO's and all our restaurant/holel/ retail fam. ... and then the rest of the fuckers only hire through staffing services, which are usually a crock of shit on multiple fronts.
After some moving around over the years we were surprised to learn that Arizona of all places, gives paid sick time, accrued based on how many hours you've worked, up to 40 a year. Part or full, so it seemed like less incentive to keep employees riding just under.
Still gonna need 2 jobs or more, like fucking everywhere anymore. Oh, and wait staff gets paid more than this $1-$2 bullshit that's still so popular.
Sorry. Part of my memories got riled up. Really, just wanted to point out the oddity we found.
Apologies for inadvertently triggering you, sincerely.
I've... just myself gotten out of roughly two years of homelessness, and uh yep, I have PTSD now, can't actually handle reading well written, gonzo type depictions of what its like.
I myself have only worked a couple min wage type jobs, but have always known people who either did or still are and... yeah, seems to me its just a universal experience that they are shitty in every way possible, in addition to being shitty in ways that, prior to experiencing them, you would think are impossible.
Oh, you're good. Even old, I still get a little high strung on some topics. I've worked various forms of service jobs and, yeah, they all sucked. Food has to be one of the absolute worst, retail next. All are still varied degrees of suck. Sales is it's own separate hell hole. Trades people I've been close too don't have it much better, unless they get to a union type gig. Trying to claw out on a new degree, if ...this... is all here by the end of it, haha.
Good to hear things turned up for you, hopefully it'll keep getting better too! No one deserves to experience homelessness. I've lived in trailer parks, uptown, suburban tacky, downtown, nomadic camper, bad side of town... and my homeless stint wasn't long thankfully, compared to the rest of my life, but left the deepest hardest memory. Running closing dish on a mother's day, half staffed shift, covering for fry and bussers, would've been 100x preferred.
The real ratio is 2087.04h/year if you're paid for 40h, 1956.6h/y if you're paid 37.5h (40h - 30min breaks), that averages things out for the number of work days that can vary year to year.
After m'roads?
People opposed to a living wage honestly don't give a shit about the math.
They're not thinking. They're just regurgitating something they saw on social media or their preferred news agency.
365 days a year * 24 hours a day * $15 = $131,400. So their estimate was short by $31,000, but it was just an estimate! Stop making fun of them for being a little wrong in their math.
Who needs to sleep anyways!
Are they saying that someone actually makes 100k at Taco Bell or are they one of those dipshits that are threatened by the idea of a Taco Bell employee making 100k/year as if a job already paying 100k/year wouldn't have the bargaining power to get even more?
the top Managers (both of them) earn $100k\year I'm sure. But not the commot person.
if I'd had stayed at mcdonalds I'd still be making more per year than I do now as a staff engineer - but I'd also have a few dozen stores under me and no control large parts of my life.
Assistant GM at my local Taco Bell makes $60k/yr
I still agree with the sentiment that $15/hr is too much for that since it isn't even a real job: taking orders at Taco Bell.
Because that isn't a real job. Literally. What does this shit-fuck think happens at Taco Bell??? Some person takes the order and then stands around doing nothing at all? While they're waiting, the Hamburglar is in the back, squirting out hot McDonald's diarrhea into tortillas of various crispiness? Then the food wraps itself, jumps into a bag and then the window-gremlin throws the food into your car and auto-debits your account???
Even if this were a real position at Taco Bell, then, yes. I agree that some underutilized poor bastard better get at least $15/hr to be a seat-filler in that hellhole.
Either way, test your dumb fucking theory: go to Taco Bell and place your order. Then go to the window and tell the person who only takes orders that they have to stay and talk to you the entire time to prove that they don't do anything. Then, explain to them how they're overpaid and that $15/hr == $100K/yr. See how that goes.
I think everyone should be paid a living wage, even if their job is bullshit.
I think that bullshit jobs are almost even more damaging to a person's mental health and humanity than one that is physically taxing but not abusive.
I also hate the concept of a "living wage," because it implies that only people who work deserve to live. I want to see everyone supplied the means to live and for them to work for the things they want. Minimalists will be the new "billionaires."
And that's what the minimum wage was intended to be, a living wage no matter how bullshit your job is. FDR even wrote about it publicly, confirming that yes, even if you're pumping gas, the intent was for you to be able to live well.
Instead, we chose to impoverish everyone so we can have 700 billionaires, and we can't change it, because our government caters to those 700 billionaires and couldn't care less about the working class and poor.
Would actually get quality service at that price.
If that guy could read, he'd be super mad you called him out.
He could read the ~~conservatives~~ grifters arguing against a livable wage just fine.
It is only sixty hours per week overtime if they pay time and a half after forty.
That's less then fifteen hours per day.
There is no way that is the case.