Can someone survive on minimum wage or near it?

[Wesley Clark]

Ive come to the conclusion that you can not only survive but have a car, an apartment, food and some medical care if

1. you are healthy and have no serious medical problems
2. live in a low rent area
3. have simple tastes
4. Are not supporting anyone but yourself
5. Have no major expenses (college or student loans)

So what do you say? $6/hr is about $1008 a month gross, maybe $890/month gross. I think it can be done. dont know for how long though.

[Master Wang-Ka]

Speaking as one who's done it, I would say that the "IF'S" include:

1. good health
2. low rent
3. reasonably simple tastes
4. not supporting anyone but oneself
5. no major expenses
6. no car. Cars include upkeep and insurance, and cheap liability insurance is durn near an oxymoron. If you're still paying on the thing, it gets even worse.

If you want a (decent) car, you get to revise #3 to "EXTREMELY simple tastes." Trust me on this one. It's either that or find a way to maximize your income somehow.

If you're a single mom, revise it to "no tastes for much of anything except basic necessities" and, almost certainly, add on #7: "second job of some sort" and #8: "cheap or free day care of some kind."

[Wesley Clark]

I dont know. my brother & his wife, when they lived together when he was in grad school had 2 cars. one was payed for and the loan for the 2nd was $150/month. Insurance was about $90/month for both

However, a car would cost about $240 a month ($120 month loan, $60 gas, $60 insurance), about 1/4 of your income.

maybe a moped would work instead.

[TeaElle]

Minimum wage isn't $6 an hour, it's $5.15. It sounds like a distinction without a difference, but working full time for minimum wage actually nets $824 (gross) per month, while that $0.85 cent difference makes $960 (gross) per month. At numbers that low, that $136 makes a huge difference. And that's all before the heavy hand of government gets a grasp on things.

[TeaElle]

Grr. I said:

but working full time for minimum wage actually nets $824 (gross) and that's confusing. Let's be crystal clear and make that:
but someone working full time for minimum wage actually earns $824 (gross)

[torie]

No, my friend isn't managing it, and she is making 7.25 an hour. It usually boils down to rent or car. This months it has to be rent, next month, car. We still end up taking her out to dinner most of the time because she has no money left over for food.




Wesley, I would also add.

6. Have good credit. Astronomical car payments and deposits have sunk my friend. Her divorce isn't final yet, and she is still bogged down with his horrible credit.

[olanv]

Originally posted by Wesley Clark
Ive come to the conclusion that you can not only survive but have a car, an apartment, food and some medical care if

1. you are healthy and have no serious medical problems
2. live in a low rent area
3. have simple tastes
4. Are not supporting anyone but yourself
5. Have no major expenses (college or student loans)

So what do you say? $6/hr is about $1008 a month gross, maybe $890/month gross. I think it can be done. dont know for how long though.

It seems like the question should be "Can someone have the stereotypical American lifestyle on minimum wage?"

There are jobless bums who survive.

[Aeschines]

In 1994 I was making 24k and barely surviving. Rent ($610) plus taxes cut my paycheck clearly in half. I bought nothing, and my parents bought me food to take back home all the time. All I had in my apartment were clothes, a stereo and records, and a PC that my dad had given me. Living as cheaply as possible, I was able to save a few grand in a year, but that was it.

Just getting set up in this luxurious lifestyle required a loan from my parents. This was Evanston, IL, btw.

Having a car and car insurance was murder, especially when you're a young male driver. Oh yes, then my car was actually stolen, so there went the $500 deductible.

I honestly don't know how young people make it these days, even at incomes sizably above minimum wage.

[The Asbestos Mango]

I actually manage to do quite well on minimum wage, back in the '80's, when minimum wage was $3.45 an hour. How? Well, I lived in a one-room apartment where the rent was $250/mo, utilities included, had no car, and worked 50 hours a week.

I actually managed to feed and clothe myself adequately (I'm a t-shirt and jeans kind of girl), buy a few little luxuries, and maintain a pretty heavy marijuana habit, and still managed to build up a pretty hefty savings account.

That was in Mishawaka, IN. The cost of living there was quite low, at least compared to major metropolitan areas. A really, really good meal at a nearby diner would cost me less than three bucks, and if I really felt like splurging, shrimp and pasta at an Italian restaurant that opened up about a block from me for about eight bucks.

[adaher]

I've done it as well.

I've noticed that most of the handwringing comes from people who have never had to do it.

[yojimbo]

Ireland minimun wage is ~$9 a hour

In Dublin that would be barely enough to get by on if you were single, not driving and living in a very simple bedsit.

I'm on a lot more and still find it hard sometimes.

[Evil Captor]

Originally posted by olanv
It seems like the question should be "Can someone have the stereotypical American lifestyle on minimum wage?"

There are jobless bums who survive.

And this constitutes the stereotypical American lifestyle how?

[TeaElle]

It should be noted that even if someone can pay rent and make a car payment on minimum wage earnings, it is highly unlikely that someone would e able to initially procure them while earning minimum wage. That level of earning makes it difficult to have the savings in the bank needed to make the deposits and prepayments of rent necessary to get into an apartment or to make a down payment on a car.

For the working poor, this "preliminary balloon" represents a massive barrier to getting into permanent, reasonably-priced housing which perpetuates a self-feeding cycle -- because one cannot afford to get into an apartment, they live in a hotel or other temporary situation which actually costs more per month than rent on a larger (and safer) apartment, and also causes them to incur higher levels of expenses for things like food and transportation. This higher outlay for basic living costs translates into even less ability to save up the nest egg needed to escape the situation.

This does, of course, once again raise the argument of what segment of the population minimum wage jobs were meant for, but that's probably another thread.

[Neurotik]

Originally posted by Evil Captor
And this constitutes the stereotypical American lifestyle how?
It doesn't. He's saying that clearly people can survive on an income less than minimum wage, so the question instead should be can someone maintain a stereotypical American lifestyle.

Homelessness was just an illustration that people can survive, strictly speaking, on less than that.

Of course, surviving in this sense pretty clearly connotes not being homeless.

[Evil Captor]

Originally posted by adaher
I've done it as well.

I've noticed that most of the handwringing comes from people who have never had to do it.

Bullshit, I've lived on minumum wage. I remember I had an abcessed tooth but had no medical insurance and couldn't pay for it. Had to go to a hospital to get it yanked eventually, but (they said) because it had progressed so far they had to yank it without the use of any anesthetics.

This was a painful experience, but not nearly so painful as the pain from the untreated abcess.

I would like to spare poor people such experiences, and they're fairly commonplace among the poor. I understand that conservatives like painful experiences, and that jibes well with my understanding of the psychological underpinnings of conservatism, but the rest of us, the sane bunch, hope for a better life and a better society.

[Evil Captor]

Originally posted by Neurotik
It doesn't. He's saying that clearly people can survive on an income less than minimum wage, so the question instead should be can someone maintain a stereotypical American lifestyle.

Homelessness was just an illustration that people can survive, strictly speaking, on less than that.

Of course, surviving in this sense pretty clearly connotes not being homeless.

Yeah, but what does he mean by stereotypical American lifestyle? Food, clothing and shelter are pretty basic in any society. The standards are higher here, but you still need a roof over your head to keep you from dying of exposure or otherwise being harmed by the elements, the ability to appear in public without causing people to look at you and point, and enough food to get going. That's the minimum just about everywhere.

[Lynn Bodoni]

To the OP: go ahead and prove it. However, let's see you start out without any cushion at all, as TeaElle has noted that this is a huge barrier. This means no savings to dip into for that rent deposit, or the utility deposit, or for car insurance. I'd allow for a savings cushion of about $500, to live on while the first paycheck is coming in. Let's not forget that sometimes that first paycheck is almost nothing, too. Also, many companies don't pay every week, and if a worker starts at the wrong time, it can be almost a month before s/he sees that first paycheck

Better hope that you don't come down with anything that necessitates a doctor's visit, as minimum wage jobs usually don't allow for sick leave. Even people in pretty good health get sick sometimes. I've had abcessed teeth, and I wouldn't wish that pain on anyone. Getting a tooth yanked and not having it replaced with a bridge is a good start on the road to dental ill-health, too. Eventually, this will take its toll on general health as well.

Girls used to have "hope chests", in which they would store linens and and other household items against the day they were married. This chest was supposed to contain enough non-perishable goods to get the couple through the first year. I think that this is a fine idea, and should be encouraged for both sexes even in this day and age, in addition to a savings account. I know that when I got married, setting up a household was a HUGE shock, even with the help of my parents and the wedding gifts.

There are jobless bums who survive. Usually on charity/handouts and/or by illegal means. Since the OP specified surviving on minimum wage or near it, I don't think that we can allow instances of people getting help from a food bank, or moonlighting as a cat burglar to make ends meet.

[Mr. Moto]

Originally posted by Evil Captor
Bullshit, I've lived on minumum wage. I remember I had an abcessed tooth but had no medical insurance and couldn't pay for it. Had to go to a hospital to get it yanked eventually, but (they said) because it had progressed so far they had to yank it without the use of any anesthetics.

This was a painful experience, but not nearly so painful as the pain from the untreated abcess.

I would like to spare poor people such experiences, and they're fairly commonplace among the poor. I understand that conservatives like painful experiences, and that jibes well with my understanding of the psychological underpinnings of conservatism, but the rest of us, the sane bunch, hope for a better life and a better society.

Bullshit right back, Evil Captor. How dare you presume what experiences I like.

What I'd like is to leave more money in the pockets of working people like you and Aeschines, so you can pay for your own abcessed teeth. Someone making 24k a year shouldn't be paying so much in rent and taxes.

[paulberserker]

I used to do it 3 years ago. I was pulling £5 an hour, 40 hour week, and that was with living in London. But then i did have all of these:

1. good health
2. low rent
3. reasonably simple tastes
4. not supporting anyone but oneself
5. no major expenses
6. no car.

£230 a month rent, about £10-15 a week on food. I was going out everynight, all day drinking on Saturdays and I smoke around 20+ a day. I wasn't saving anything, but never felt I was living in poverty. The only money I had to borrow from my parents (and payed back about 2 months later) was when I changed jobs, had to wait a month to get payed and had to lay down a deposit on a new place to be near said job. I was well short, but only temporarily.
I'd say it does help to have back up, but I'd have managed it somehow.
credit cards pretty much through the roof though.

And even if I had got sick, we don't need medica insurance in Britain, so I suppose thats something to take into account. otherwise, I am the possible police, proving its possible.

[John Mace]

I did it while in grad school, but it sure wasn't fun. And this was in Palo Alto (hardly a low rent area).

Anyway, this isn't GQ, so what's the debate here? Are we going to make another go at whether or not the MW should be raised? But just FYI, the $5.15 is the fed MW. It varies across the country. Here's (http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm) a handy dandy reference. For Example, it's $6.75 in CA.

Evil Captor:

How ever did you know that my favorite passtime is to kick back and pop in a vidoe of some poor schmo having his tooth pulled without anesthesia. :rolleyes:

[even sven]

Keep in mind that most entry level, and an increasing amount of lower managment, jobs are not full time. Companies have figured out that if they hire full time employees, they have to pay benefits, are more likely to be sued rather than the worker just quitting when things suck, don't get away with scheduling the bare minimum of workers for any given time, and generally have to act more responsibly towards their employees. Therefore it is a lot more cost effective to hire a bunch of part time employees, and employ them as needed. This means minimum wage workers may not know until the schedule is made out on Moday if they are going to work eight or forty hours that week.

[John Mace]

Keep in mind that most entry level, and an increasing amount of lower managment, jobs are not full time.

Got a cite for the "most" aspect (ie, > 50%) of that statement? I'll believe it when I see it. You are aware that without some back-up statistics, your statement is meaningless, right?

[The Asbestos Mango]

Got a cite for the "most" aspect (ie, > 50%) of that statement? I'll believe it when I see it. You are aware that without some back-up statistics, your statement is meaningless, right?

Um, I think it's called life in the real world. When you're calling in response to ads in the classifieds, or out pounding the pavement in search of a job and find that it's next to impossible to find reliable full-time work, it becomes pretty easy to figure out that most employers are now using mostly part-time help at the entry level, and even in lower management.

Also, my mom is getting close to 60, and she was looking for part-time work, because she doesn't have the stamina she had when she was younger, and found that nearly every job she applied for was right around 35 hours a week. Forty hours is full-time, and they have to pay benefits, 35 hours is part time, no benefits.

Get the picture?

I dearly love people who demand cites for real-life experience.

[John Mace]

Get the picture?

I dearly love people who demand cites for real-life experience.

> 2,100 posts over 4 years and you think that statements such as that don't need to be backed up with actual data? Astounding...

[milroyj]

I dearly love people who demand cites for real-life experience.

He wasn't asking for a cite for your "real-life" experience, but for your claim that "most employers are now using mostly part-time help at the entry level, and even in lower management."

Your experiences, or those of your mother, or even those of every worker in Las Vegas, do not rise to the level of "most".

[emacknight]

As a grad student my fellowship gave me exactly $1000 per month before taxes. I hated it but I can understand how it is possible to live assuming that one big IF, low rent. And I don't believe its possible to have a car, or moped since your first repair bill would be too much to handle.

But in theory no one should ever live off MW. That represents the bottom of the social rung. Even if you say McDonald's or Wal-mart, how long would someone stay at MW? I realize its easy for me to say that from my ivory tower. But you start as the fry guy making $5.15, you work hard and in a few months they move you to cash and give you $5.25. Keep up the good work and eventually you make your way up to some sort of management pulling down $5.35.

My point is that MW isn't meant to be lived on, its meant as some where to start. Am I wrong or just naive?

[Sofa King]

Hey, I did it, on a bag of potato chips and a six-pack of Schmidt's Red a day, at the princely sum of $5.35 an hour, although I have to admit I was pissed when the minimum wage was raised to that sum and I was merely promoted to the lordly sum of $5.50 an hour.

I got by. I lived with some guys who somehow acquired a Playstation, and some early hacker burned us some discs, and we had the Asian film connection which scored us the best Jackie Chan and John Woo pictures before they were released in America, entirely in trade because we taped everything that got played on that VCR. We even had a dog which I adored. Once a season I could afford to see a film in the theatre. I worked at a bookstore and anything which was not utter bullshit became my nighttime read.

I also stole. I stole prolifically, actually, but only from my employer, the book store. If there was something I had to read, well, I got it. You can't keep a starving drunk from the book he wants. I sometimes used my position to order 'em read 'em, and then returned 'em to the publisher. Sometimes they showed up, but were lost through clerical error. With a few valuable exceptions I returned them all, though there are a few books I retain today for which I probably should have paid.

Beer was my only real form of entertainment, because I also rightly realized (I'm still here, ain't I?) that beer is actually a valuable source of calories and, supplemented with vitamins and that crucial bag of potato chips, could sustain both life and alcoholism, apparently indefinitely. Anything I didn't have, I made; anything I couldn't make, I'd pick up broken and fix; anything I couldn't fix, I'd use to prop up the couch.

I was dating a girl who was waiting to turn 25 so she could inherit what I estimated to be somewhere between $7 and $40 million dollars. Her father was totally insane and left a 6000 square foot home in Oakton, furnished, vacant. We had a go at putting that together, but she was crazier than I and should have been born with kneepads on.

That inspired me to a level of self-sufficiency which was downright palatial, considering I could blow a day's wage on dinner and a movie done right, even in the early '90s. I didn't drive, though I holed up a set of wheels in case I needed it. I kept the woman interested primarily through sex and primitivity, which was a luxury she could (temporarily) enjoy on her costumed traipse amongst the masses. But I was awash in media, and the museums were only a river away, and I used those resources with a relish that tourists can only dream. Eventually I even squeaked a shitty job out of the Smithsonian out of it, though that was largely to my regret.

I only stole from the people who employed and severely undervalued my services. I still regret it even now, because I could have done it just as easily without being so rude. I kept everything that was given to me or left in the trash. I had well-placed friends who saw my fall from grace (I made my fortune early and squandered it with the vigor that only youth can provide) and who carefully saw me through my poverty, neurosis, and depression with occasional meals and entertainment.

Eventually, I scratched my way out of it and had a lot more fun, the fun a Horatio Alger character might enjoy, though when you start from zero, you know you never really have anything (and recently, I lost it all again). What was harder by far was scratching my way above the pack-rat mentality which dictated that a tool I forewent was the tool which would eventually kill me. I get by with a couple of screwdrivers and a sawbuck in my pocket now.

Just don't get hurt or sick, or care about anyone too much, or risk an appendage you can't afford to lose, and I suppose it's not a bad life. It's certainly better than most everyone else's, and for that, I've always been thankful.

[unixrat]

Sure, very doable.

There's a number of people I know (and a few FOAFs) who are working the minimum wage and not making it because they're trying to do it in The Big City. Dammit, if you're gonna be poor, do it in a rural location. I've got a sister-in-law living in a small (~500) town in SoDak that has rent of $125 a month for a house and can walk to work and the grocery store. If I wanted to, I could live like a freaking KING there.

Other helpful tips:
* Grow a garden! Simple, cheap, and healthy. What's not to like?
* Don't eat out. The opposite of the first point, I think.
* Limit the booze. The other root of all evil. Expensive and makes you prone to hurting yourself or others.

The biggest problem I would have is lack of a good library.

[even sven]

Sure, very doable.

There's a number of people I know (and a few FOAFs) who are working the minimum wage and not making it because they're trying to do it in The Big City. Dammit, if you're gonna be poor, do it in a rural location. I've got a sister-in-law living in a small (~500) town in SoDak that has rent of $125 a month for a house and can walk to work and the grocery store. If I wanted to, I could live like a freaking KING there.

Theres a reason why people go to cities when they are poor though- thats where the jobs are. Rural areas are often economically depressed, and don't have enough employment to support the people living there- which is why so many people go to cities in the first place. Additionally, rural areas offer little in the way of career advancement- most people don't want to be a clerk at the corner store for the rest of their lives even if it does provide a decent standard of living. FInally, whole job sectors don't exist in rural areas. My trade, for example, is filmmaking. I pretty much have to to live in a big city if I ever want to work anything but a minimum wage job.

[Jayn_Newell]

May I just add one more draw-back to rural-living? Transpostation. Rural areas don't have a developed transportation system like cities do (if any at all). Not to mention the fact that it will be harder to find a place to live that's close to wherever you end up working, provided you do have a job, since everything is more spread out.

[Lemur866]

Sure it's doable. I spent my whole twenties making less than $10K a year.

1. Give up eating in restaurants and eating prepared food. Buy raw supermarket food and cook it yourself. Yes, it takes longer. But it will be much healthier, much tastier, and much cheaper. A backyard garden helps tremendously, as long as you stick to basics and don't go insane. And visit the food bank.

2. Give up on having a car. You've got an old bicycle, right? Well get it back in shape. Ride your bike, ride the bus, hitch, ask friends for rides. Live near where you work. Everyone else is going to have a car, it is easy to get rides or help moving things. Yes, there will be 3 or 4 times a year where you will be stranded somewhere cursing the fact that you are too poor to have a car. Get over it.

3. Share housing. No, you can't afford an apartment to yourself. For years I spent under $250 a month on rent. How? Renting houses with groups of friends and/or strangers and splitting the rent.

4. Don't have medical problems. I was young and healthy. I saw the doctor twice in 10 years, and paid out of pocket a few hundred bucks for medical care. If you have a medical catastrophe, go to the emergency room and tell them you don't have any money. They'll treat you, sort of, and negotiate payment or write it off, or you can get some sort of assistance. The point is, they won't let you die.

5. You have a library card, right? Well the library is now your main source of entertainment. You don't buy books, you don't go to see movies, you don't go to live music unless it's free, you don't buy CDs. You borrow books, movies, and CDs from the library, and go to free lectures and book readings, use the internet, use the bathroom. All for free.

6. Other free entertainment. You have buddies working on a play? Get them to comp you tickets. Your friends got a band together? Get them to comp you the cover charge. You can go to book signings. You can go to coffee shops or bars and buy one drink for a night. Volunteer at the museum and get in free. Volunteer for the garden tour and ask for a ride and get it free. You get the idea.

7. Don't have kids. Wait until you're making more than minumum wage to have kids. You can't support your kids on minumum wage unless you live with your parents. You know it, I know it, the American people know it. So stop making kids. Adoption is a beautiful thing.

8. You know those stores that sell brand new clothes? And people with lots of money buy those clothes? And then they get tired of them, and throw them out? And Goodwill picks them up and sells them for a few quarters? That's where you get your clothes. And when Mom gives you underwear and new socks for your birthday you are happy!

9. You don't buy furniture, household goods, TVs, stereos, computers, chairs, fine china, trips to Cancun, drugs, jewelry, jetskis, iPods, or any other expensive objects. Fuck that. This is America. People are literally throwing away perfectly good household goods every day. Your mom's neighbor is getting rid of her old sofa? Score. Your brother doesn't want his old coat? Score. Your buddy got a job across the country and doesn't want to move his bed? Score. Cinder blocks and milk crates on the side of the road? Score.

10. You have a social network so you can borrow $20 bucks till the end of the week in an emergency. If you are a hateful antisocial loser with poor grooming, you are going to have a lot more trouble living cheaply than if you are friendly, interesting, helpful, generous, and clean. Oh, and not having severe mental problems and/or addictions helps tremendously.

That's how I lived for years on next to nothing. In Seattle in the 90s, a very expensive housing market, paying off some student loans at the same time. Working part time crappy jobs, tutoring, gardening, yardwork, etc. I had tons of free time, I read hundreds of books, and had fun. Yes, I'm making more money now. And a mortgage, and a wife, and a kid, and two cars, and this and that. But the point is, you can easily do it, assuming you speak English and don't have significant mental disorders.

[Silver Serpentine]

Well, here are my expenses:

Rent: $520/mo
Phone: $30/mo
Internet: $12/mo
Electric: $50/mo
Food: $80+/mo
Smokes: $105/mo
Gas: $60/mo
Car insurance: $140/mo
-----------
About $1,000/mo.

but someone working full time for minimum wage actually earns $824 (gross)

Even if I quit smoking, I wouldn't make it. Maybe if I stopped paying my car insurance, too.

We're just lucky that both The Cody and my cars are both paid off, and Cody's mom pays for his car insurance.

Well, and the fact that The Cody makes $14/hr with 8+ hours of overtime a week.

I live in a small city. So rent is cheaper here than it was when I lived in Austin. But there are jobs here, so we wouldn't move to an even more rural area for lower rent. Ha!

[Metacom]

Since no one has mentioned it yet, I'll mention the book Nickel and Dimed (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0805063897/qid=1074093342//ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i0_xgl14/102-8885539-0102566?v=glance&s=books&n=507846). In it, a middle-class writer decides to see how survivable the minimum wage is by moving to a series of cities and taking the sorts of jobs you can get with no qualifications (among other places, she worked in a nursing home and Wal*Mart) and little if any cash reserves.

Her conclusion is more or less that you can barely scrape by (e.g., no surplus money for savings or health insurance, etc.) if you work two jobs. Interesting read.

[erislover]

Sure it can be done, so long as you live somewhere cheap. I don't know, for instance, how all the restaraunt employees in Boston manage to live. Shit, I was paying $800 a month for a studio apartment two years ago.

Lemur
A backyard garden helps tremendously, as long as you stick to basics and don't go insane.A garden? Huh? With what property? :confused:
Live near where you work.I don't think this is idealistic, but I don't think it is the kind of suggestion that is highly reliable. In the smaller suburb I grew up in, it really was true that the business near me weren't hiring.

[Abbynormalguy]

As far as is it possible, the economic answer is "it depends."

I believe that many economists think min. wage is a horrilbe thing (which is understandable...it diminishes the "insvisible hand" of the free market to a large degree)...but that's another story altogether.

But minimum wage may or may not be a viable means of survival. In a place like Manhattan, it certainly would not be a viable solution, unless you lived in the projects (and even then...). On the other hand, if you were to live in Deep South Texas (say, along the Rio Grande), you could live quite well on minimum wage. Cost of living in Texas is much less than a place like NYC or Boston. Down there, you can get a decent apartment for as little as $300 or 400/month.

[Will Repair]

Minimum wage [is] $5.15.

Which qualifies for Food Stamps. The amount of food stamps depends upon household size, income and expenses.

[Wesley Clark]

Since no one has mentioned it yet, I'll mention the book Nickel and Dimed (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0805063897/qid=1074093342//ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i0_xgl14/102-8885539-0102566?v=glance&s=books&n=507846). In it, a middle-class writer decides to see how survivable the minimum wage is by moving to a series of cities and taking the sorts of jobs you can get with no qualifications (among other places, she worked in a nursing home and Wal*Mart) and little if any cash reserves.

Her conclusion is more or less that you can barely scrape by (e.g., no surplus money for savings or health insurance, etc.) if you work two jobs. Interesting read.

thanks for that, before i posted this i wanted to read that book but couldn't remember the title, i just remember a book about trying to survive on min. wage.

Rent is cheaper than $300 month Abbynormalguy (if you have a roommate) in some places. In some places its as low as 250/month per person for a 2 bedroom (125/person). At least here in the midwest, in an isolated town. I agree that it would be impossible to live on min. wage in a large city though, unless you had 5-7 roommates.

For the record, by 'survive' i mean having adequate transportation, nutrition, shelter, and entertainment to not feel deeply deprived (ie, not living in the car on a diet of bread and butter) or struggle endlessly to make ends meet.

[Abbynormalguy]

Rent is cheaper than $300 month Abbynormalguy (if you have a roommate) in some places. In some places its as low as 250/month per person for a 2 bedroom (125/person). At least here in the midwest, in an isolated town. I agree that it would be impossible to live on min. wage in a large city though, unless you had 5-7 roommates.


It most certainly is cheaper with roommates; in Houston, 3 friends of mine got an apartment and each paid $200/month. My above numbers were for your average 1 bedroom apartment for a person living by themselves...with roommates, the costs go down considerably (I may be moving to Waltham, MA or NY in August, and despite my desire to live alone, I've found that the only viable way for me to live up there...at first, at least, is to have roommates.)

[XT]

lol, ya, its do-able. I didn't make over 20k a year until I was nearly 30, and after highschool/during college I worked at Highs Dairy for $4.45 to start out, working up to the princely summ of $5.15. I had a car I bought 3rd hand and worked on it myself (older cars were a breeze to fix and keep repaired, especially with some judicious scavaging in the local junk yard). I didn't drink or smoke (unless it was for free at a party or such). I lived in a 3 bedroom appartment with 2 other guys at first, and moved into an appartment with my future wife later. Never ate out, and my only 'vice' was books. Later on I actually managed to get my hands on a computer by offering to write some code in exchange. My first 'real' job out of college was junior programmer/analyst for the unheard of summ of $15k/year...wooohoo, I could actually go out to dinner occationally!!

Again, I was healthy and my tastes were very modest...I didn't waste a lot of money. I was pretty happy to be honest. I certainly didn't start out with a silver spoon in my mouth by any means, nor did my folks give me any money or what have you to start...they simply didn't have it to give then. I worked like a dog the summer of my senior year while still living at home in construction to build up some money. Oh, and I shamelessly used the government and white boy guilt to pay for my college (lots of grants out there for hispanics). Hell, even at $15k/year I was a success story in my family. :)

-XT

[Dinsdale]

I definitely second the rec to read Nickled and Dimed.

As I recall, the author claimed a major problem was the relative lack of low-income housing. I believe she presented the argument that the number of low-income people was increasing far greater than the availability of housing stock.

Moreover, the available housing is generally far removed from the available places of unskiled employment.

Others have mentioned the huge hurdle of "start-up costs." If you have no job and no savings, how do you pay the first month down and security deposit for an apartment. Heck, it might even be tough to buy work clothes, if you don't get paid until after working for the first 2 weeks.

This book made it seem as tho circumstances coerced low-income folk to do things more expensively than they might otherwise do so. For example, room in a hotel, instead of obtain an apartment. Or eat fast food, if your room/apartment did not have a full kitchen.

Also, apparently different cities vary hugely in terms of the availability of unskilled work, and the labor force competing for those jobs.

My conclusion is that although one could undoubtedly survive on minimum wage, it certainly is not a lifestyle I would wish, or would wish on anyone I know - even the few folk I don't particularly care for.

[Shodan]

Lemur866 pretty much nailed it.

Sure, it can be done. But you can't have a car, you can't go out to eat, and ALL of your entertainment is going to have to be free. I did it with a bus pass, which got me to and from work, and a library card. And if you keep your eyes open, you can scrounge practically anything you need and a lot of what you want. And Goodwill is the place for clothes and such. Two dress shirts, two pair of black pants, and three ties, and you are dressed for success. You have to learn to say "No thanks - I brought mine" when everyone is going out to lunch, and figuring out free things to do on dates. (Of course, that way you know she likes you for yourself. And what free thing can you think of to do on a date? ;) )

I shared a house with four other guys. If the bus didn't go there, neither did I. And if it wasn't on my budget, I didn't buy it. If you don't buy processed or prepared food, it is much cheaper.

I managed to save up more than my wife had when we got married, and she had been earning a hell of a lot more than me.

If you have kids or health problems, forget it. But for the average healthy adult, it can be done, at least for a while.

Regards,
Shodan

[Kalhoun]

You can survive, but surviving ain't living. The stress alone can make you sick. The minimum wage will have to be raised A LOT before people can actually begin to feel like they're a part of the rest of the people around them.

[Will Repair]

You just fell off the turnip truck.

You need money today so you go to a work today get paid today employment agency. Coincidently enough they pay minimum wage of $5.15 per hour. You get in line at 4:30 am cause that's when they open and it's first come first served. Since you don't have money for breakfast and you'll need lunch to be a decent worker you buy one from the labor agency for $3.00. And they will charge you $3.00 for transportation to the job site. They may or may not charge you for safety shoes and gloves.

You work all day.
If you are really, really lucky you get to work a full eight hours.

8 hours x $5.15 per hour = $41.20 subtotal - $3.00 lunch - $3.00 transportation - $0.0 Fed W/H since you put Except on the W-4 - $2.25 FICA - $0.52 Medicade + $0.0 EIC = $32.53 net pay.

Since you had to wait from 4:30 until 7:00 when the job started and you got 1/2 hour for lunch and you had to wait for the van to take you back to get your check - it is now after 4:30 pm and you can't cash the check at a bank. (Besides, Bank of America charges non customers $5 to cash one of their checks.) So you stop at the C-store across the street that charges $1.00 plus the change to cash the check. You now have $31 in your pocket.

A room in a rooming house with common bath is $10. You'll have to buy dinner at the C-store since there are no grocery stores downtown near the labor hall. That's $5 for dinner since prices are higher for food in low income areas.

You now have $16 saved. Saved for work clothes, safety shoes, decent gloves. You might even splurge and buy a soda with lunch tomorrow.

[adaher]

This was a painful experience, but not nearly so painful as the pain from the untreated abcess.

I would like to spare poor people such experiences, and they're fairly commonplace among the poor. I understand that conservatives like painful experiences, and that jibes well with my understanding of the psychological underpinnings of conservatism, but the rest of us, the sane bunch, hope for a better life and a better society.


A society without risk, without adversity? What kind of people would that create? Adversity builds character. Do you want a whole nation of George Bushes? Pampered people with a sense of entitlement that stamp their feet when they don't get their way?

[Oregon sunshine]

for what it's worth, i lived on (whatever the current minimum wage was) for the better part of ten years, most of which i spent as a single parent. i think minimum was $3.35 when i started, and when i finally managed to graduate from college, it was $5.15. i almost always worked two or three jobs, occasionally adding in odd jobs like babysitting or house cleaning. plus, i lived in a trailer that cost me $2500, and made payments on it for five years. i never had medical insurance and paid all my medical bills $10 per month until paid off. it sucked, and i felt like i'd won the lottery when i started getting my $700-every-two-weeks paychecks as an entry-level social worker.

hi, devilsknew!

[MC Master of Ceremonies]

Is the US's minimum wage reall only $6/hr? That certinly wouldn't be enough to survive on in the UK (particularly South-East England), where the NMW is (using Friday afternoons currency rate) $8.10/hr (workers aged 22+, going down to $6.84/hr for workers aged 18-21 or for the first 6 months of workers 22+ receiving accredited training from their employer and no NMW for 16 and 17 year olds).

How common is it for workers in the US to be paid minimum wage? As somone employed by the UK government to place people into work, I know that in the South-East where NMW is paid for a full-time job more often or not free food and/or accomadation is also provided by the employer (most full-time NMW jobs are in resturants/hotels).

[Wesley Clark]

Is the US's minimum wage reall only $6/hr? That certinly wouldn't be enough to survive on in the UK (particularly South-East England), where the NMW is (using Friday afternoons currency rate) $8.10/hr (workers aged 22+, going down to $6.84/hr for workers aged 18-21 or for the first 6 months of workers 22+ receiving accredited training from their employer and no NMW for 16 and 17 year olds).

How common is it for workers in the US to be paid minimum wage? As somone employed by the UK government to place people into work, I know that in the South-East where NMW is paid for a full-time job more often or not free food and/or accomadation is also provided by the employer (most full-time NMW jobs are in resturants/hotels).

no the minimum wage is actually 5.15 in the US. in some states its higher like California or Oregon where its about 6.75 but in most states its 5.15.

i dont know how many people earn min. wage, the numbers vary greatly. And from what i understand from personal experience and listening to others most min. wage jobs do not hire full time workers so they won't have to pay benefits, they just hire alot of people for 30 hour workweeks. Consider yourself lucky to live in the UK, i think Japan is the only industrialized country with a lower inflation adjusted min. wage than the US.

[Kimstu]

MCMC: Is the US's minimum wage reall[y] only $6/hr?

The federal minimum wage is actually less than that, $5.15/hr. As has been mentioned, individual states can set their own (higher) minimum wages: as of June 2003 (http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/issuebriefs_ib195), "Since the federal minimum wage was last raised in 1997, the number of states with minimum wages above the federal level has gone from six to 13, with additional states considering action this year [...] Washington state and Oregon now increase their minimum wage moderately each year to keep pace with the rising cost of living."

How common is it for workers in the US to be paid minimum wage?

According to this report (http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/issueguides_minwage_minwagefacts), minimum-wage workers make up 5.8% of the US workforce (and those earning up to a dollar above the minimum wage constitute another 8.7%). "The minimum wage law (the Fair Labor Standards Act) applies to employees of companies with revenues of at least $500,000 a year. It also applies to employees of smaller firms if the employees are engaged in interstate commerce or in the production of goods for commerce. Also covered are employees of federal, state, or local government agencies, hospitals, and schools. The law generally applies to domestic workers."

The average minimum-wage worker provides 54% of his or her family's earnings, so we're not just talking pocket money for teenagers and homemakers here. (There is actually a separate "youth subminimum" wage of $4.25/hr which can be paid to workers under 20 during their first 90 consecutive calendar days of work, which mostly applies in the teen-summer-job category.)

[Wesley Clark]

[B]
A society without risk, without adversity? What kind of people would that create? Adversity builds character. Do you want a whole nation of George Bushes? Pampered people with a sense of entitlement that stamp their feet when they don't get their way?

Are you serious? How is denying people the ability to make a survival living by working a good thing? it will not accomplish anything as far as i can see. All it will do is build resentment. Besides, surviving on $6, 7, 8/hr is adverse in and of itself, surviving on $3/hr is almost impossible in today's inflation adjusted dolalrs.

If adversity builds character why not just get rid of everything we've built as a society for thousands of years.

[jacksen9]

Are you serious? How is denying people the ability to make a survival living by working a good thing? it will not accomplish anything as far as i can see. All it will do is build resentment. Besides, surviving on $6, 7, 8/hr is adverse in and of itself, surviving on $3/hr is almost impossible in today's inflation adjusted dolalrs.

If adversity builds character why not just get rid of everything we've built as a society for thousands of years.

Employers and producers would not find buyers for their products. This would result in lower prices, making it somewhat easier to survive. Politicians talk about raising minimum wages because they know it gets more votes. What would happen if minimum wage laws were repealed? Wouldn't consumption drop off significantly? Wouldn't surpluses force prices down making wages have relatively the same purchasing power?

[Wesley Clark]

Employers and producers would not find buyers for their products. This would result in lower prices, making it somewhat easier to survive. Politicians talk about raising minimum wages because they know it gets more votes. What would happen if minimum wage laws were repealed? Wouldn't consumption drop off significantly? Wouldn't surpluses force prices down making wages have relatively the same purchasing power?

Are you saying eliminating the minimum wage would lower prices, adjusting for the lack of funds min. wage workers make? i disagree with this for a variety of reasons.

1. just because min. wage people can't afford something doesn't mean it goes down in cost. health insurance is one major example of this fact. Housing is another. College is another. all 3 have prices that increase faster than inflation and the poor have trouble affording them.

2. Labor is only one of many costs a business must pay. cutting minimum wage would probably not make a huge difference. for example, wal-mart has 1.1 million employees and had $244.5 billion in sales in 2002.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/04/national/main581731.shtml

Wal-Mart Stores had sales last year of $244.5 billion. The company has about 1.1 million employees in the United States

Assuming 900,000 of those employees make min. wage and work 35 hours a week, (900000x5.15x35x52) that is 8.4 billion annually in labor costs for min. wage employees. barely 3% of wal-marts budget goes to them, putting them at risk of starvation and homelessness would barely change wal-marts budget by 1%. and that is an exaggeration, assuming all employees work 35 hours a week or that 80% are min. wage workers. Plus that is ignoring other sources of funding wal-mart may have (tax cuts, subsidies, etc). The real number may be even lower.

3. the only reason consumption would drop significantly would be because there would be 10 million newly homeless people. Not really worth it.

[even sven]

A society without risk, without adversity? What kind of people would that create? Adversity builds character. Do you want a whole nation of George Bushes? Pampered people with a sense of entitlement that stamp their feet when they don't get their way?

I'll keep that in mind next time I can't afford dinner. Somewhere, somehow, this is making somebody a better person.

[Epimetheus]

Not sure I qualify, as I don't make minimum wage. I am a piss poor student though, and probably only survive because of student loans and parents that are kind enough to cosign, though not loan or give any money. (probably my fault though, I am too proud to ask, and probably too proud to accept any handouts)

I have made 7 dollars an hour the last 6 months. Quite a bit above minimum wage, but I don't work full time. I can't, not with school and maintaining a 3.8+ GPA (which is important to get into the program I want) So I work 28-30 hours a week, and bring home about 700 dollars a month. I suppose I make less than 900, but I really don't pay too much attention to my gross, not untill the end of the year anyhow. I do have a bit of luxary, and am lucky to have a low rent apartment with an extra bedroom I can find a roommate for. I am now going to switch to the Pharmacy at the grocery store I am working for (which was my goal), but I will be working much less hours. 74 hours a month in fact. Saturday and Sunday, 8 hour days, and every other Friday for 5 hours. This will bring me home less than 500 dollars a month, but with student loans and low living I have paid off my car, my credit cards and everything, got a roommate and my expenses are 450 dollars a month.

Oh, I have no health insurance either. I may obtain it around May of this year, so that is temporary. FWIW, my bills are listed below:

My half of the bills:

Rent - 140 (275 total)
Utilities- 50
Phone/dsl- 35
Car Insur - 52
Gas (car) - 60
Food - 60
Interest on loan- 33

Ok, only adds up to 430, but I figure the other 20 will be a movie now and again, or a bit extra for bills in the winter, summer, or as petrolium prices increase, etc. If I figure rightly, I will get a dollar an hour raise at the pharmacy and I will actually bring home about 510 dollars a month.

[jacksen9]

Are you saying eliminating the minimum wage would lower prices, adjusting for the lack of funds min. wage workers make? i disagree with this for a variety of reasons.

1. just because min. wage people can't afford something doesn't mean it goes down in cost. health insurance is one major example of this fact. Housing is another. College is another. all 3 have prices that increase faster than inflation and the poor have trouble affording them.

2. Labor is only one of many costs a business must pay. cutting minimum wage would probably not make a huge difference. for example, wal-mart has 1.1 million employees and had $244.5 billion in sales in 2002.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/04/national/main581731.shtml

Wal-Mart Stores had sales last year of $244.5 billion. The company has about 1.1 million employees in the United States

Assuming 900,000 of those employees make min. wage and work 35 hours a week, (900000x5.15x35x52) that is 8.4 billion annually in labor costs for min. wage employees. barely 3% of wal-marts budget goes to them, putting them at risk of starvation and homelessness would barely change wal-marts budget by 1%. and that is an exaggeration, assuming all employees work 35 hours a week or that 80% are min. wage workers. Plus that is ignoring other sources of funding wal-mart may have (tax cuts, subsidies, etc). The real number may be even lower.

3. the only reason consumption would drop significantly would be because there would be 10 million newly homeless people. Not really worth it.

I don't think having a minimum wage law makes college, health care or housing more affordable. Workers do not realize any benefits from a minimum wage. Employers simply pass this increased cost on to consumers. If minimum wages were increased to $15.00 an hour, we would end up paying $6.00 for a gallon of milk and $3.50 for a loaf of bread.

As for living on minimum wage, I have done it and it isn't much fun. I rode a 10 speed bike everywhere, and lived with three other people in a two bedroom apartment.

I think the quality of life would be best improved by providing opportunities for training and education

[Kimstu]

j9: I think the quality of life would be best improved by providing opportunities for training and education.

I agree that that's important, but of course there also have to be decent jobs for the trained and educated people to get. I know quite a few highly trained and educated people who are currently looking for work or scraping by on part-time, variable-hours work at low-wage jobs that are the best they can get.

Workers do not realize any benefits from a minimum wage.

Sure they do: they make more money. The cost of living is continually going up for everyone anyway; having a modest wage floor doesn't accelerate that increase to the point where it eats up the benefit that the lowest-paid workers get from having that wage floor. Your assertion depends on the assumption that the wage/price relationship is perfectly elastic---i.e., that the cost of raising the wage floor is immediately and totally absorbed by increases in the prices paid by those who earn that lowest wage---which isn't true.

[Wesley Clark]

I don't think having a minimum wage law makes college, health care or housing more affordable. Workers do not realize any benefits from a minimum wage. Employers simply pass this increased cost on to consumers. If minimum wages were increased to $15.00 an hour, we would end up paying $6.00 for a gallon of milk and $3.50 for a loaf of bread.

As for living on minimum wage, I have done it and it isn't much fun. I rode a 10 speed bike everywhere, and lived with three other people in a two bedroom apartment.

I think the quality of life would be best improved by providing opportunities for training and education

im saying no we wouldnt be paying that much as min. wage labor is just one of many factors in a companies funds. if you use the wal-mart example about 3% of their budget (walmart is probably as good as an example as any, as most of their employees are min. wage or near it) is used to pay for their minimum wage employees. raising the minimum wage from 5.15 to 6.50 would cost wal mart an extra 2.2 billion a year, which is about a 0.7% budget increase. there is no way that would translate into radical increases of consumer goods. A 26% increase in the minimum wage in one of the biggest min. wage employers in the country (walmart) would cost that company an extra 0.7% a year max.

To show that this isn't a fluke another example is Kroger, 300000 employees & $52 billion in sales.

http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/business/6180405.htm

----------
That deal created the nation's largest supermarket operator with more than 2,200 locations in 31 states and about 300,000 employees...............Wal-Mart has surpassed Kroger as the nation's top grocer with nearly $59 billion in grocery sales to Kroger's $52 billion.
---------------

Assuming 250k of them are min wage workers 35hrs a week, 52 weeks a year that is 2.3 billion a year. 4.4% of Kroger's budget is for min. wage employees.

Anyway, even though im in favor of increasing the min wage, my main reason for posting this was to see if a person could make it on min. wage. But since this topic came up i figured i'd post that min. wage employees salaries only make up about 2-5% of a large corporations budget. Things like rent, merchandise, advertising, etc. are the large budget items not min. wage labor and increasing min. wage would not lead to a 50% increase in costs unless the corporation decided to capitalize on conservative stereotypes.

[Frank]

To show that this isn't a fluke another example is Kroger, 300000 employees & $52 billion in sales.

Assuming 250k of them are min wage workers 35hrs a week, 52 weeks a year that is 2.3 billion a year. 4.4% of Kroger's budget is for min. wage employees.

Kroger is a union operation, and likely employs few, if any, minimum wage workers. Mind you, they're not getting rich either. IIRC, from the info batted about during the last strike here, most of them fall in the $9 to $15 an hour range.

[Wesley Clark]

Kroger is a union operation, and likely employs few, if any, minimum wage workers. Mind you, they're not getting rich either. IIRC, from the info batted about during the last strike here, most of them fall in the $9 to $15 an hour range.

thats good news about kroger being unionized. a friend said one of her friends applied for a kroger job and it payed $10/hr, i thought it was just a fluke and assumed kroger payed min. wage. I guess im jaded due to walmarts union busting tactics into thinking that all large corporations are like that.

But my original argument is still sound, if a large corporation pays minimum wage then the chances are the labor costs are only about 3-5% of the budget and increasing the min. wage woudln't lead to radical price increases. If a company used 4% of its budget on min wage and there is a 26% increase that is a 1% increase passed onto consumers. Not only that but whenever there is a push to increase min. wage some lawmakers push for tax cuts for corporations to offset this so the increase may be even lower than 1%.

using jacksen9's idea of a $15 min wage would still, as far as i can tell, only lead to a 6% increase in prices at wal-mart maximum to offset labor costs.

[John Zahn]

Originally posted by Lynn Bodoni To the OP: go ahead and prove it. However, let's see you start out without any cushion at all, as TeaElle has noted that this is a huge barrier.

Most should have built up that cushion while working that minimum wage job, and still living with their parents before they moved out.

This means no savings to dip into for that rent deposit, or the utility deposit, or for car insurance. I'd allow for a savings cushion of about $500, to live on while the first paycheck is coming in. Let's not forget that sometimes that first paycheck is almost nothing, too. Also, many companies don't pay every week, and if a worker starts at the wrong time, it can be almost a month before s/he sees that first paycheck

Same as above.

Better hope that you don't come down with anything that necessitates a doctor's visit, as minimum wage jobs usually don't allow for sick leave. Even people in pretty good health get sick sometimes. I've had abcessed teeth, and I wouldn't wish that pain on anyone. Getting a tooth yanked and not having it replaced with a bridge is a good start on the road to dental ill-health, too. Eventually, this will take its toll on general health as well.

The OP did mention if one had good health. I can certainly understand if one has a major health problems, and my sympathies certainly rest with them. But having a tooth pulled isn’t a crisis situation; nor is it all that expensive for quite a few dentists if you checked around before settling on one. And it’s not that difficult to get make up time in for taking the time off for that doctor’s visit assuming one had been any decent employee at all. Been there. Others don’t show up or quit all the time on minimum wage jobs, and there is ample opportunity to make up for the time you had to miss. This wouldn’t be a problem for one that planned ahead and had their little nest egg. I think health insurance is often overrated, anyhow. Besides, by paying cash, my doctor’s visits are anywhere from 30-50% less. Some other board for that.

Usually on charity/handouts and/or by illegal means. Since the OP specified surviving on minimum wage or near it, I don't think that we can allow instances of people getting help from a food bank, or moonlighting as a cat burglar to make ends meet.

One doesn’t have to resort to being living on handouts, or doing something illegal. Hell, one really doesn’t even need a minimum wage job or even have a job to survive. Martin Sheen hosted a PBS show that did a story on some families that moved to Alaska and lived basically off of the land. They seemed to live quite comfortably, and many of them had modern conveniences including electricity by using generators. They had plenty of meat by shooting elk, and I think some had their own small gardens. Alaska also pays a couple of thousand dollars a year for each citizen for just living there which they get from their oil revenues. Of course, I understand if people don’t want to do something as drastic as this. But there are also other families that have left bigger cities, and have chosen to live in the Appalachian area in the South or other areas where land and other things are more affordable. Most don’t even bother with any full-time minimum wage jobs, but just take on odd jobs occasionally. They prefer it that way. Mother Earth News features families all the time that do this. As long as you don’t have some serious mental illness or drug problems, if you have reasonably good health, there is no reason for one not to survive in most areas. Maybe the bigger cities in America such as NYC where housing and other things are sky high it would be difficult to survive off of minimum wage. But living in smaller towns should be affordable enough. Often housing is ridiculously cheap. They won’t feature you on “Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous”, but one should be able to do just fine if they put a little thought into it.

JZ

[monstro]

My first two years in grad school were spent making minimum wage. It was rough but I survived. I didn't have a car for much of the time. Sometimes I commuted ten miles on my bike. Other days I splurged and took the train. I never went to the movies and only rarely rented movies. Entertainment consisted of sleep, library books, and net surfing (which is free for me). My only luxury was getting take-out on Friday nights. Many of my meals consisted of just one thing, like sphagetti noodles or white rice.

I was happy but there was no way I could have advanced financially living like that. I couldn't save squat and every major purchase (like plane tickets during the holidays or student fees) was accompanied by much worry. My friends constantly laughed at my abject poverty (I would eat saltine crackers for lunch and my clothes were cheap, second-hand things) and I never felt like I could go anywhere or do anything "cool". I didn't have insurance, so I always feel like I was living dangerously on the edge. I know my parents were worried for me, especially since I was riding my bike all over town.

I live in a low-income apartment (you can't make more than a certain amount to live here), but even then I needed a huge deposit to get the place. If it wasn't for the CD I cashed after graduating from college, I would have had to depend on my parents. And without them, I don't know what I would have done.

[Evil Captor]

[/b]

I'll keep that in mind next time I can't afford dinner. Somewhere, somehow, this is making somebody a better person.

Yes, but don't you see, Sven, if you survive poverty, someday you'll become a Republican and be indifferent to the suffering of others. This will be a good thing, because then you can force others into poverty and help them learn to be indifferent to the suffering of others and become Republicans. This will make for a better world, in the long world. Or at least a world that isn't particularly bothered if most of its inhabitants are suffering.

And they will be.

[adaher]

I'll keep that in mind next time I can't afford dinner. Somewhere, somehow, this is making somebody a better person.


I've been there and it's no coincidence that my work ethic got better really quick when I realized there was a direct connection between how much I worked and how likely I was to eat.

[Kimstu]

adaher: I've been there and it's no coincidence that my work ethic got better really quick when I realized there was a direct connection between how much I worked and how likely I was to eat.

Oh. Well, by that logic, we shouldn't be paying all those high salaries to rich corporate CEO's. Since they'd have plenty to eat for the rest of their lives even if they never worked another hour, their work ethic must be really shitty, huh? :rolleyes:

I trust the absurdity of such a notion needs no emphasis. There may be some logical and substantiated arguments against having a high wage floor, but "near-starvation wages are important for inspiring a good work ethic" is not among them.

[jacksen9]

I'll keep that in mind next time I can't afford dinner. Somewhere, somehow, this is making somebody a better person.


I've been there and it's no coincidence that my work ethic got better really quick when I realized there was a direct connection between how much I worked and how likely I was to eat.


The difference between high wage jobs and low wage jobs is not solely a matter of work ethic or work effort. People that are earning a minimum wage are often working extremely hard. But, the work they perform is classified as low skill and the contribution of this work is not valued.