Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492

Could you live on $8.50 per hour?

Why do you think that's relevant?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimu..._United_States

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

Why do you think that's relevant?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimu..._United_States

Because at its peak the minimum wage had the same buying power of $8.54 in 2014 dollars. That was in 1968. Is that a living wage? Could you live on $8.54 per hour?

Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492

Because at its peak the minimum wage had the same buying power of $8.54 in 2014 dollars. That was in 1968. Is that a living wage? Could you live on $8.54 per hour?

What we really need but I doubt will happen is a round of deflation, the removal of the Federal Reserve and the power to print money restored to the US Mint.

Originally Posted by jazzmanb

The biggest lazy free loaders are the Koch bros. I think you guys should seriously follow the $$$ trail and stop blaiming homeless vets on the street. The brainwashing by the right is pretty gross. The Elite are BY far the biggesr freeloaders. Damn near every government policy is For Them. So if you are gonna whine about government be realistic about who it truly benifits. The elite own government

Their laziness or ambition concerning minimum wage is about as relevant as the amount of times your drumsticks hit a drum in 2106, since the loose change in the couch in the guest house behind the garages would keep you in cheap gray canned tuna and Ramen noodles for your remaining days.

Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492

Because at its peak the minimum wage had the same buying power of $8.54 in 2014 dollars. That was in 1968. Is that a living wage? Could you live on $8.54 per hour?

I couldn't know until I tried. What makes you think that the figure you're quoting is correct?

Wiki says you're wrong.

The minimum wage had its highest purchasing power in 1968, when it was $1.60 per hour ($11.49 in 2017 dollars).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimu...rchasing_power

You still haven't said whether you think Moe made this up:

Originally Posted by Moe M.

Not to argue Goat, but at one time it was possible, for example, back in the early '60's I held a minimum wage ($1.00 per hour plus family health insurance) job, I worked 48 hours a week and brought home $41.00, with that I bought my first house, my mortage including principle, interest, taxes, and insurance came to $26.00 a month, by 1965 my wages had not changed, I was supporting my home, a wife, and three kids, I had a decent car, a motor cycle and a fairly good life, my wife was a stay at home mom, all on minimum wage.
As my skills increased and my wages went up, so did the cost of living, it's sad to see what the loss of manufacturing and the ability of most families to exist today (even with good jobs) without both parents having to hold down stressful jobs and long hours, it's the times we live in, but still sad.

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

You still haven't said whether you think Moe made this up:

He wont touch Moe's story with a ten foot pole. Destroys his theory.

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

I couldn't know until I tried. What makes you think that the figure you're quoting is correct?

Wiki says you're wrong.



You still haven't said whether you think Moe made this up:

Wiki doesn't say I'm wrong. It says Pew Research is wrong. Irregardless It was never a wage meant to raise a family and live on. Could you support a family on $22,980 per year before state, local, and employment taxes?

Originally Posted by Sherlock

He wont touch Moe's story with a ten foot pole. Destroys his theory.

Not at all. If Moe could do that on what would equate to $8.42 per hour today then good for him. I don't know anyone else who could. Could you?