Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OP, Why not tie minimum wage to FDR standards of living? Homes (median per the government) were several hundred sq feet smaller, with MORE occupants per home, outhouses were common, lack of electricity, lack of heat, and lack of any entertainment, as well as lack of personal transportation were the norm.
Rodent infested tenaments were also the norm.
How about restoring all that stuff, too?
Oh hey! Why dont we all just go live in caves!
Its 2013. Welcome to the future! We apologize that you no longer can communicate in grunts.
Its 2013. Welcome to the future! We apologize that you no longer can communicate in grunts.
The point is the OP was cherry-picking. Minimum wage was never meant to support 2013 lifestyles when implemented during FDR's term. If we would accept the living conditions under FDR, minimum wage folks would be sufficiently paid to take care of that lifestyle. If not, they need to educate themselves enough to get beyond jobs best suited for 16 year olds just entering the workforce.
And he was as completely wrong, as he was about a number of other things.
The mere fact that he believed it was true, didn't make it true.
Thank you for a response that wasnt full of dumb.
The average income in 1938 was $1780. Making a $.25/hr rate about $520 a year-ie 29%. today average income is 51K. 29% of that is 14.9K-or $7.16/hr. Pretty close to our current minimum wage.
so what was disposable income like....in 1938, and thats where my google fu fails me at the moment.
But it certainly lends credence to what you say for when it was enacted.
The point is the OP was cherry-picking. Minimum wage was never meant to support 2013 lifestyles when implemented during FDR's term. If we would accept the living conditions under FDR, minimum wage folks would be sufficiently paid to take care of that lifestyle. If not, they need to educate themselves enough to get beyond jobs best suited for 16 year olds just entering the workforce.
And the OP point (me) is that standards of living should improve as we move into the future. Thats the point of progress.
$1.40 an hour, $1.65 an hour was never a living wage even back in the 60's or 70's.
That's what we teens made in our summer jobs, same as today.
$1.60 in 1968 had the same buying power as $10.77, today.
Federal law allows employers to pay $4.25/hr. to employees who are under the age of 20 during the first 90 days of employment. State laws may or may not recognize this exception.
Than levels of education should improve concurrently. The work did not get more valuable, but by educating him/herself, the worker got more valuable.
My 15 yr old can program a computer. Probably not a common skill in 1938. I am FAR more educated then most folks in 1938 were.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
