Live data from Hacker News

Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

ft.com

141–150 of 354 posts

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#141
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which would mean food gets more expensive, right? Regardless of the fact that a lot of poor people don't live in the areas where most of those jobs are but they do get their produce from there.. The top 4 counties in the US for agriculture production are all in the central valley in California.

> Which would mean food gets more expensive, right? Which in turn will create more pressure to increase the salaries until it reaches the equilibrium that satisfies everyone. The alternative is to use de-facto slave labor just for the sake of cheap food?

You're missing an important piece here.

The lower your income is, the bigger the % you spend on necessities like food. So when those go up, the lower incomes are again hit the hardest as they spend a higher percentage of their total income on it. And these are necessities not nice to haves

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deliberately underpaying people and then telling them their work has low value is one of the most disgusting aspects of capitalists. There's lots of CEOs who are not especially productive, they just have leverage.

The government tries hard to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand, but so far has failed 100% of the time. The government can implement wage and price controls, but those still do not set the actual value. For example, in the USSR, the price of bread was fixed by the state. But the real price of bread was how long you were willing to wait in line for it. BTW, in the US, you are free to set up a company and then pay yo…

> but so far has failed 100% of the time

Labor rights have been a raging success. 40 hour work weeks, minimum wage, sick leave, vacation leave (in non-shithole countries).

>BTW, in the US, you are free to set up a company and then pay your workers whatever you want to.

What happens when competition with deeper pockets price dumps you into oblivion? Free market is a free market only when there is competition based on the product, not how rich your investors are.

There is evidence the workers are being exploited everywhere if you bother to spend a second looking. Like the parent said, your apologism of capitalists is disgusting.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Decades of worsening conditions for the commoner is Ron Wyden's idea of a booming economy. Democrats are useful idiots. I can't anymore, folks. Republicans passed the largest tax cuts for billionaires, increased the deficit by trillions, and kicked millions of people of medicaid. Meanwhile, Trump is out there creating the most regressive tax system via tariffs we've ever seen which affect the poorest the most. Yet…

> Trump is out there creating the most regressive tax system via tariffs Tariffs incentivize domestic production. See the case of chicken tax and pickup trucks. While we do pay for tariffs now, later down the road we should not as more things would be made domestically. If you don’t do tariffs, there is no way to force producers to onshore.

Long term stable tariffs yes. But you can't pretend like trumps tariffs were not done in the worst way possible?

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This probably means that those wages were being suppressed hard for years and they finally weren't able to hire people at that wage anymore

You're probably right, but it ultimately leads to wage compression which is for most of the middle class a disaster. You don't have to look far to see everyday people complaining about the price of a burger or movie ticket. IMHO, it doesn't "lift all boats", it pulls down the middle and upper middle classes. Yeah, the lower wage jobs made more money, but they didn't gain much if anything in affordability, since all o…

[flagged]

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> absolutely do once the math of tariffs makes your manufacturing abroad not competitive with onshored one If someone bet on e.g. our Japan tariffs three months ago, they lost money. (Nobody did. The types that take Trump at his word on tariffs aren’t making economically significant decisions.)

I do not know why anyone would bet that the executive order defined tariffs would stay. It was and still clear as a day that Trump uses them to force people to the negotiation table. Obviously, negotiated deal may look different. Regardless, tariffs as an instrument have their merit with Trump or without Trump. Strategically, US has to bring manufacturing (and as much of a supply chains) back, there is no way around…

>>Regardless, tariffs as an instrument have their merit with Trump or without Trump. Strategically, US has to bring manufacturing (and as much of a supply chains) back, there is no way around it.

Well no. Not really. Not for everything anyway. Some things like electronics - sure, but it's a matter of national security not economy - it doesn't have to make financial sense, it just has to exist so that the country can have that ability no matter what happens.

As a simple(and really oversimplified) example - let's say that tariffs force clothes manufacturers to bring tshirt making back to the States. The $5 T-Shirt now costs $30 due to tarrifs. So ok, someone makes a factory in US because now it makes sense, employs american workers, pays them good wage - ok, now they make t-shirts cost $20 because they are made domestically.

Cool - that's great, but now the rest of the world still buys $5 tshirts, while Americans buy $20 ones that can't even be exported anywhere because why would anyone buy them if they have cheaper alternatives. All you've done is you increased the cost of your products to the american consumers.

Some can argue - ok, that doesn't matter, what matters is that manufacturing is now back in the states and american people have employment. And sure, there is merit to that argument - but it reminds me of how my own country used to work under communist rule, people would go "comrade party leader, people have no jobs", "ok, we'll build a factory here so you can have jobs".

Can the factory make anything that is actually worth making? Doesn't matter, what matters is that people got jobs and "manufacturing is happening here" - for an economy based on capitalist principles, that sounds like a disaster for US.

But hey, what do I know. Just an external observer.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All arguments against lower class people getting higher wages are IMHO wildly inappropriate. "you need lower wages to avoid wage compression", "you need lower wage so we can have more employed people"... If wage compression occurs, then companies have to deal with Theo senior employees seeking elsewhere - or pay them fairly.

> All arguments against lower class people getting higher wages are IMHO wildly inappropriate. This kind of emotional reasoning is wildly inappropriate IMHO. The commenter is not making an argument against lifting lower class wages. They’re making an observation of how economic theory may apply to this scenario. > pay them fairly Define “fairly”?

They said it’s bad for one group and neutral for another. How is that not an argument against it?

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They shouldn’t announce until it’s accurate then?

Normally they're accurate enough, and the revisions/refinements are small. The initial estimates haven't been accurate recently, because many workers have been completely dropping out of the economy because they're afraid of immigration raids. Information about these workers is just harder to gather and takes longer to verify.

Actually the major complaint was from last year when Biden was president (I'm not sure about this year). Every month, prior months were adjusted downward, often 100,000's thousands and wiping out the previous months positive figure.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#149
post #81

There is just no advantage to being poor in America.

Why should there be an advantage to being poor?

Presumably you might want to give the poor a systemic advantage over the rich in order to balance the system and make it more democratic. Otherwise the rich will have more influence.

Re: Poorest US workers hit hardest by slowing wage growth

#150
post #24

What slowing wage growth? For the poorest the wages have essentially not increased for a long time right? It hasn’t even kept up with inflation. The recent bill actually makes it much worse.

As far as I can tell, over the last few years at least, that's mostly not true: wages outpaced inflation, and it outpaced inflation more for lower-income workers than higher. > In stark contrast to prior decades, low-wage workers experienced dramatically fast real wage growth between 2019 and 2023 https://www.epi.org/publication/swa-wages-2023/ ("real wages" are wages adjusted for inflation)

I imagine how cost of living/inflation is calculated became a lot more complex in the past few years which skews the comparison. Especially because of cost of buying homes and cost of renting and greater disparity between rural and urban in the context of increasingly higher urban populations.

Also, predatory debt trapping, in part due to social media exposure and student loans, is way bigger thing now.

Post reply on HN