Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Minimum Wage Clock

moonbase.lgbt

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 278 posts

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#221

Post by xtracto »

npoc wrote: post #82
kimbernator wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to make assumptions about your life or your conditions, but in scenario A you describe a reality where there are a meaningful number of people who would be content to sell their labor for less than $7.25 per hour. I do not find this believable, given how little that amount is in today's dollars. At the point that you're okay with working for, say, $5/hour, why work at all? What lifestyle permits that as…

In the case of most US states, I think it's fair to say that the minimum wage is moot. As you say, hardly anyone would consider working for less than that anyway. But why take away their freedom to do so?

I think in THEN USA the minimum wage is moot as long as companies can pay people less than that in lieu of tips.

It's nit really "minimum" if companies can pay less legally.

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#222

Post by wavemode »

beaeglebeached wrote: post #165
oh_sigh wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What examples are there of that?

As crazy as it sounds, the cuban revolution up until the late 80s. While their communist economic system was far from ideal, it saw significant rising GDP/cap vs the days when farm labor were like slaves and their output redistributed to petty farm masters under Batistas favored rich men.

Do you have a source for that? Most accounts I've read regarding that period talk about massive decreases in food production after the government took over those industries.

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#223

Post by zogrodea »

dylan604 wrote: post #199
zogrodea wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't think it's a good idea to infantilise people in their 20s further. It's not a super-fringe opinion that people generally tend to reach a certain level of maturity later than they did in the past. Some of that is pleasant as it means people can enjoy child-like comfort for longer, but too much of it seems like it would have adverse effects.

Sure, let's compare the experience of someone in their 20s to someone that has more experience than that person has been alive and then convince us the 20-somethin has the same experience. This sincere befuddlement that a 20-something has the same experience is just bizarre to me coming from anyone that's not a 20-something. Sure, there's some talented 20-somethings, but that's true of any generation. I was a 20-some…

I don't fully agree (although I do agree a significant amount of 20-somethings including myself today act kind of like children), but I do appreciate your friendly tone while expressing disagreement. Have a nice 2024.

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#224

Post by anigbrowl »

fxd123 wrote: post #218
anigbrowl wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why not just recalculate the federal MW as a function of the states' - lowest, median, or average? I ask because lots of things like welfare payments and estimates of poverty level involve comparisons with the MW. It's sometimes advantageous for a politician to say 'we give $X in food stamps, that's equivalent to Y hours [of federal MW], therefore people are lazy freeloaders' or 'Median rent is equal to Z hours at…

> I ask because lots of things like welfare payments and estimates of poverty level involve comparisons with the MW Can you give an example of such a welfare program? I'm not aware of any that use the minimum wage as a baseline. Most use the federal poverty level, which is pegged to the cost of food (and is updated yearly for inflation). > It's sometimes advantageous for a politician to say... I don't really care wha…

Not caring what politicians say is asinine, since its politicians who ultimately write the laws. The fact that their lines of reasoning may be bullshit doesn't alter this, because lots of policy is sold on bullshit arguments.

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44667 references some federal metrics that incorporate the MW as an input.

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#225

Post by dudeinjapan »

tombert wrote: post #180
dudeinjapan wrote: post #31

Next time I'm going to apply for one of those CEO jobs rather than minimum wage.

I mean, you could just ask your next job if they'll match one of those CEO salaries. Who's to say that they'll say no?

True. As Wayne Gretzky said: "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take."

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#226

Post by wizardwes »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #115
pylua wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

c) the minimum amount required to live peacefully and with dignity.

> the minimum amount required to live peacefully and with dignity. The issue is that there is no such uniform amount. If your spouse makes 85% as much as the two of you need to live with dignity, you don't need to make as much as they do and may prefer not to because the lower-paying job is less difficult or more satisfying. For someone else it could be 95%, or 99%, or 250% and the second job is pure supplemental inc…

You don't have to work full time. Your spouse makes 85% of what you need? Cool, you can work 15% of the amount of time you otherwise would. And for the person getting the training, that still doesn't affect their cost of living. Training isn't cash in hand. I think it's perfectly reasonable to pick a model citizen and work from there. I'd personally target the living expenses for a single person, living in a studio or 1 bedroom apartment, with the expected average commute for the area, and who is generally healthy. People living outside that situation can choose to work more or less as needed and possible, and people significantly outside that, such as the disabled, or those with children, can qualify for further support.

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#227

Post by vivzkestrel »

You are comparing apples and oranges, that is not how economics works

The question you need to ask is how replaceable are you in a company? If you are the guy at Mc Donalds flipping burgers at 20$/hr, literally anyone and almost everyone can replace you with low efforts. Teach me how to flip burgers and I will be able to do your job in about 4 hrs max. But put me in Sundar Pichai s place and I might actually screw the company. For example, do you have any ideas how to handle a congressional hearing on privacy violation without losing 90% of the stock value? Because I certainly don't and before your say that your lawyers crafted all the responses, let me remind you that every ounce of everything you do counts in such a scenario. Your body language, your eye contact, your tone and your gesture or lackof gestures. Open. AI suddenly announces GPT-5 tomorrow that far far outweighs Bard. What will you do? Do you know how to handle such a sudden announcement without losing 50% of the stock market value? Being a CEO is not an easy job. You can hire 999000 other people in place of Sundar Pichai but it will take them 10 years to learn the craft. That is the difference and this difference is what gets reflected in compensation.

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#228

Post by AnonC »

vivzkestrel wrote: post #227

You are comparing apples and oranges, that is not how economics works The question you need to ask is how replaceable are you in a company? If you are the guy at Mc Donalds flipping burgers at 20$/hr, literally anyone and almost everyone can replace you with low efforts. Teach me how to flip burgers and I will be able to do your job in about 4 hrs max. But put me in Sundar Pichai s place and I might actually screw th…

I agree with some points you make (I’m not downvoting you). But I believe Sundar is the wrong example to take. There are better CEOs within that short list on the site to use. I also don’t believe that Sundar wasn’t coached and trained and retrained and went through several rehearsals on responses, body language and other aspects from a bunch of highly paid consultants, experts and those with ties in Washington, DC.

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#229

Post by beaeglebeached »

wavemode wrote: post #222
beaeglebeached wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As crazy as it sounds, the cuban revolution up until the late 80s. While their communist economic system was far from ideal, it saw significant rising GDP/cap vs the days when farm labor were like slaves and their output redistributed to petty farm masters under Batistas favored rich men.

Do you have a source for that? Most accounts I've read regarding that period talk about massive decreases in food production after the government took over those industries.

tiny.cc/c0jsvz

They had a rough first 10 years breaking even vs GDP/c under Batista but there was rapid advancement after that until collapse of the Soviet Union.

Re: Minimum Wage Clock

#230

Post by LargeTomato »

madsbuch wrote: post #167
slibhb wrote: post #23

People like to talk about inequality but absolute poverty seems like a more important target. Satya Nadella having more money than me doesn't make my life worse; I'm more concerned about the availability of jobs, food, housing, etc. That said, CEO salary does strike me as strange. Who needs 8 million per year + stock? I'd think more CEOs would voluntarily take a pay cut.

> Satya Nadella having more money than me doesn't make my life worse; That is simply not true. Money is not an absolut good, but relative. When a few people own a large portion of money, that affords them the power to decide what people do and usually makes their life worse.

By your logic the following argument holds.

> Any income differential that results in a power imbalance makes the world worse.

And that might be true but I think it misses the point of the argument. Increasing the quality of life for the global poor is much more important than capping Satya's wealth. There's no equivalence here.

Post reply on HN