20% of us are working for what is effectively the minimum wage (or less).
$12.90 cents an hour x 40 hours work week x 52 weeks is $26, 832 .
The $12.90 figure is what the minimum wage would be today if it kept pace with the rate average wages rose in America since 1970. All wages on average have risen x 8.06 since 1970 , while the minimum wage (7.25) has risen x 4.53 ( was $1.60 in 1970).
So one could argue rather convincingly that the minimum wage today should be $12.90. Well guess what? About a fifth of all Americans make 12.90 cents or less. 20% of us are working for what is effectively the minimum wage (or less).
Does this sound like a "successful" economy to you?
related
https://www.statista.com/statistics/203183/percentage-distribution-of-household-income-in-the-us/
https://www.reference.com/history/average-salary-1970-b1c31356a944dd35
Tags
Who is online
97 visitors
We sometimes hear that only a small percentage of people work for the minimum wage. That is because the 7.25 wage is so small. Many people work for what the minimum wage should be.
I'm copying and pasting my reply to you in the other article about this, because it still pertains.
Yes, that's the average between 50 US states. However, the average does not reflect total reality. In MI, the minimum wage is currently $9.65. According to the following, it's been rising far more often than it used to; hell, from 1998 - 2007 the minimum wage stayed the same. Almost a decade. From 1981 - 1997 it shows as remaining the same. That's 16 years and that was only a $1.80 once the increase occurred. Wages under $50,000 / year, but over minimum wage remain virtually the same in many instances (automotive companies are famous for not doling out raises for several years - see last paragraph). It's logical to assume that at some point, the middle-class will be wiped out in some areas.
$15 / hr. is a yearly gross income of $31,200 (your example of national average of min. wage or what it should be at $12.90 / hr. is a yearly gross salary of $26,832). After deductions (average is 25%) and assuming a 40 hour work week @ $15 / hr. = $23,400 annual net [$1950 monthly net]. After deductions as previously stated and assuming 40 hour work week @12.90 / hr. = $20,124 annual net [$1677 monthly net]. In Detroit Metro Area, making $15 / hr. as a single person without dependents is considered middle-class now. Hell, at $12.90 / hr., single without dependents is considered middle-class in the Detroit Metro Area.
Source:
I understand that this income does not cover expenses the same way in every state. For example, $15 / hr. in metro areas throughout California likely means poverty.
I'm not saying that minimum wage shouldn't increase, but shouldn't there be something for those that are above minimum wage, but not making much more? I was making $18 / hr. for several years with two dependents. That's considered poverty according to the link I provided above.
The automotive companies in Southeast MI, are pretty stingy with wage increases... most of the time, you're laid off before any merit raise can be given. I went 6 years without a raise ($23 / hr.) and then had to take a job that paid less ($18 / hr.) for two years before I got my degree in my 30s (in student loan debt for $55,000) just to break $50,000 / year gross in a different company.
There seems to be lots of angst over minimum wage.
Fact is that only about 2% of working Americans make the federal minimum wage.
Just seems like a lot of hollering over a tiny fraction of people.
I dont disagree with anything you said. My figures are generalities and would not apply equally to all parts of the country.
I don't know what the "right" number is for a minimum wage, but the national figure should be as low as we can make it. Local minimums can - and often should - be much higher because a living wage is higher locally.
Federal minimum wage shouldn't be based on what people living in big coastal cities think is reasonable. The cost of living is much higher in New York or San Francisco than it is in, say, Kalamazoo, Memphis, or Joplin. Employers in towns like that won't be able to afford to pay significantly higher wages.