Upon inception it was set at $0.25. It is now $7.25.

    • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Just when boomers were young (8-23 yrs old) … totally tracks!

      Looking at the linked graph, there’s a relatively clear plateau from ‘56 to ‘80 … basically from oldest boomers being age 11 to youngest boomers being age 20. I’m a little astonished at how well it lines up with the whole fucking generation. Literally all of them, from the beginning of their teens to the end of their teens (at least), enjoyed the best minimum wage of the modern age.

      It also, interestingly, justifies the seperate categorisation of the Jones generation (born 1960-1966) who were the first to see the steady decline.

  • YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Minimum wage is simply the lowest full time salary a company can legally get away with paying. Nothing more, nothing less.

    I’m primarily talking about large corporations that make millions and billions, yet claim they can’t afford to pay more than minimum wage.

    • foksmash@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can you name one? I don’t know a single person who actually makes minimum wage. Legit question.

      • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I no longer work there but in the last year I worked for a “leading global source for education materials” according to Forbes, worth 2.8 billion and I was paid minimum wage as a retail employee.

  • trailing9@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Do you remember that wages rose when unemployment was low?

    Why is there a need for minimum wage?

    Edit: downvoters, what do you want? A high minimum wage job while many are unemployed? Why focus on minimum wage when you can have low unemployment and decent wages for everybody at the same time by reducing unemployment?

    • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Federal Reserve has mandate to ensure employment doesn’t get too high, which is high enough to cause inflation. By increasing interest rates, unemployment increases because it costs more to pay people.

      Wages rose when unemployment was low because inflation was running away. The Fed was behind on its mandate shortly after the pandemic. Because interest rates were low, it was relatively inexpensive to hire people, and that’s what businesses did, especially after firing so many of them during the pandemic. But, ya know, the pandemic gave people more time to consider what was important to them…and working was pretty low on that list. Thanks to the low interest rates, businesses could pay them more as an incentive to come back to work. That whole “Great Resignation” thing was about workers finally having some bargaining power. And wages rose because workers could demand more.

      But now interest rates are having some pressure on inflation. It costs more to hire people, and it costs more to keep people hired. The bargaining power workers had is basically gone. The demand for employees to literally come back into work and stop working from home is evidence that business managers have regained the upper hand. And so, now there’s no reason to pay people more. Just threaten to fire them and watch them dance.

      So, basically, the need for a minimum wage is because there is no incentive to raise wages themselves but there’s every incentive to lower them. And the Fed has other methods of dealing with low unemployment that will kick in before businesses start raising wages to attract workers in most cases. The post-pandemic era was “unprecedented”, after all.

          • trailing9@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because I am not convinced by their arguments. It makes sense if you accept a minimum of unemployed people. But why should society settle for that? Employ everybody and find another way to prevent wages from rising too high.

            • idiomaddict@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              But the workers don’t currently have either- lowering or removing the minimum wage might reduce the unemployment rate, but those jobs are not going to be paid at a livable rate. Currently more theft is wage theft committed by companies against workers, they’re already using the power they have against workers. There’s already a clear divide between union and nonunion blue collar benefits and wages: if there were a textbook play of economic principles, all nonunion blue collar employees would quit and join union companies or form their own.

              • trailing9@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Having neither, it’s the same as the saying about liberty and security. If you don’t seek employment for all then you won’t get minimum wage.

                Let the people decide what a livable wage is. A bad job is better than no job. They can still refuse to work.

                Of course, without new ideas, things don’t change. Not the workers but the companies need a reason for full employment.

                • idiomaddict@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Let the people decide what a livable wage is. A bad job is better than no job. They can still refuse to work.

                  The people have a gun to their head. If they’re not eligible for unemployment because a $3/hour job is available, they’ll take it not to starve to death. That doesn’t make it a free or advantageous choice.

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      don’t blame them. you need the white house, the house, and 60 votes in the senate to get most legislation through and into law.

      • blazera@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        60 votes thanks to democrats being fine with the filibuster. They had the ability to get rid of it in favor of simple majority.

    • Perfide@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lmao Biden and the Democrats? Are you high? Part of Bidens covid relief bill included a $15 minimum wage. It was struck out of the bill by a vote of 58-42. A grand total of 7(well, 6, since Sinema isn’t a Dem anymore and never really was) democrats voted against it. EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN voted against it.

      Now tell me, why is it “Biden and the Democrats” fault when they actually try to improve things but fail(even if the 6/7 nay dems had voted yeah, that’s still at best 49 yeahs), but never Republicans fault when they actually DO vote in lockstep to prevent any democrat endorsed legislation from passing, and when a significant percentage of them are actively trying to strip rights away from people?

      Oh, I forgot to mention; while Biden doesn’t have the executive power to unilaterally raise the national minimum wage, he DOES have the power to raise the minimum wage for employees of the federal government, which… he did.