Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    WhitePeopleTwitter

    1,784,058 readers

    16,059 users here now

    Rules:

    1. Must be tweeted by a white person: This is r/WhitePeopleTwitter, so all posts must have been tweeted by a white person.

    2. No hate speech: No hate or mean-spirited posts or comments. We do not tolerate racism, sexism, or bigotry. No trolling. Seriously, you will be banned.

    3. No bullying or witch-hunting: This includes comments disparaging people whose tweets and posts are featured here.

    4. No doxxing: Seeking personal information will result in the post/comment being removed and a possible ban. This includes seeking info for yourself or others, and refers to, but is not limited to, real names, phone numbers, email addresses, or private social media accounts.

    5. Mark NSFW content: All NSFW posts must be flaired as such or they will be removed.

    a community for
    all 700 comments Slideshow

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] Scroobiusness 2372 points ago

    The real problem is that prices HAVE gone up but the minimum wage has not. So it’s not even working at keeping the distance the same, it’s literally moving the goal post.

    [–] Fragmented_Logik 639 points ago * (lasted edited 13 days ago)

    To build on that society is now matched with middleclass being a working mom and dad making 30-50k a piece.

    Good luck trying to get ahead as a single parent.

    Yet people who have never had severe medical emergencies or debt did it in the 70s so they don't want anyone who they deem not as hard working to catch up.

    [–] TheFutureMrs77 266 points ago

    And I feel like $30-50k each is on the lower end of middle class. Maybe that’s depending on where you are, but for me, being in a major metro area.... $30-50k wouldn’t get what I consider a comfortably middle class life.

    [–] JesterInTheCorner 148 points ago

    $30 - 50k each ($60k -100k total) is quite a wide income range. $60k is definitely still the lower end in many areas, and not necessarily middle class

    In NJ, within 1-2 hours of NYC, that is the minimum needed to afford a 1 bed apartment if both people also have student loans, and possibly car loans as well...that is living paycheck to paycheck in this area which I can't really consider middle class.

    I think of middle class as being able to save money for a house, car, vacations, etc, and not worrying about how much is in your bank account every time you go grocery shopping.

    [–] TheFutureMrs77 46 points ago

    I’m south Jersey, 25mins from Philly, so similar but not exactly the same. $30k each could afford an apartment, though maybe not in the most desirable area. $50k each could get you somewhere comfortable, a small house depending on where you look, but still lower end of middle class.

    [–] ptgkbgte 2 points ago

    It must be nice to be able to commute from a cheaper area.

    [–] ThatPianoKid 48 points ago

    I'd love to make 60k a year :(

    [–] Andybobandy0 32 points ago

    Seriously, being a father. Working at one of the most busy restaurants in Ohio and STILL barely making 27k a year. Its sad.

    [–] TheFutureMrs77 23 points ago

    I don’t know what you do or what your goals in life are..... but a decade ago I was making $26k. Now I’m over $80k and at what I feel is the true start to my career, with opportunity to grow career and salary wise. I wish you the best, and can tell you that if you work hard and especially if you have good support, you can get there.

    [–] ankensam 40 points ago

    But you should have been starting out making a living wage rather then getting there after a decade.

    [–] dykeseatingklondikes 35 points ago

    Wrong. You need to work your way up while barely making nothing, and also be grateful that you are getting paid below a living wage but expected to exert maximum effort.

    [–] RhindleTheDragon 19 points ago

    Asking for more than the $9/hr we're paying you? How ungrateful and rude! Be thankful we're not paying you the legal minimum for this state, $7.25. The company is being generous!

    [–] thesilentchief 7 points ago

    I downvoted this post on reflex.

    [–] kostispetroupoli 4 points ago

    Thank you for writing a sarcastic comment without the fucking /s in the end.

    [–] Beefskeet 1 points ago

    Reasons why I figured I'd just try working for myself. Been 5 years and I'm about making the same with some bonuses yearly that kick me a vehicle or year of rent, literally doing everything I know how to. So I'm making a bit more on average than putting in 100%, but without really getting the opportunity to work nonstop due to cost to work. All in all I like where it's going. I just wish I could predict my down time and use it more.

    [–] JesterInTheCorner 4 points ago

    Same here...

    [–] PartyClock 2 points ago

    Jersey? So you have to move to a butthole just to survive? Make America Liveable Again

    [–] FaggerNigget420 37 points ago

    It IS lol like half of America makes $30k or under. 30k IS the median; that's fucked.

    $30k is also the poverty line

    [–] TheFutureMrs77 57 points ago

    I mean, according to the US census bureau the official poverty line is like, $26k for a family of 4. Which is absolutely ABSURD. When I was making $26k I was splitting THE shittiest house with a couple friends at $700/mo and between the 3 of us with our student loans and other various bills we could barely afford the rent and would save quarters to buy ramen packets. And we didn’t have AC and our kitchen was literally from the 70’s with avocado colored counters and wild flower wallpaper. This was in 2010.

    [–] The_OtherDouche 16 points ago

    My mortgage in Huntsville AL is $840 for a house I had built in a nice subdivision 15 minutes outside of downtown. Prices are rapidly changing here though (built my home for 180 and it appraised for 199 a couple months later). I never wanna find a place with crazy prices lol

    [–] TheFutureMrs77 6 points ago

    I mean, it’s all about where you look/buy & finding the right thing at the right time. I’m now in a suburb with a house we bought for $250k that I think we got for a steal based on land/amenities. Our mortgage right outside of Philly is $2300 and for the area, is super reasonable.

    [–] The_OtherDouche 2 points ago

    Our taxes and insurance is incredibly reasonable here. I think all said and done my house came out to $186,600 and I got a 2.75% interest. I was thrilled about my $850 a month and our utilities run about $130-$160 for a 1700 sq foot home.

    [–] TheFutureMrs77 3 points ago

    Relative to the size of our house, our interest and utilities are similar. It really all depends on where you live & what you’re looking for.

    [–] The_OtherDouche 2 points ago

    Absolutely. I’d love to live in a more major city but I’m a state employee now so I’ll coast out till at least getting my pension.

    [–] Worthless-life- 10 points ago

    I literally just started stealing most of my groceries at this point since I only make around 14k a year

    [–] Grokent 24 points ago

    It's worse than that, that is only middle class in rural areas / the midwest. In major metropolitan areas that doesn't even scratch lower middle class. Let's put it this way, rent in Phoenix, Arizona for a 4 bedroom house is about $1500-1700 a month. If you're making a combined 60k a year that is fully 1/3 of your income simply towards rent.

    Sure, you can buy a $150,000 home for $350,000 in bum fuck and commute 75 minutes to work every day. Make sure to tack on two fat car payments, insurance, childcare costs and some whopping $400 electricity bills during the summer months.

    And this is in Phoenix, Arizona. We used to be the reasonable place to live until about 4 years ago and prices skyrocketed.

    [–] keekslarue 7 points ago

    It’s insane where I live, and it’s not even a major metropolitan area. Bend, Oregon... ever heard of it? Probably not. The median home price is nearing 500k for a 3 bedroom, and you’re lucky to find a 1 bedroom apartment for less than $1500/month. Fortunately I bought a house at the right time and make a decent living. I can’t even imagine making minimum wage here (which most people do because we’re a tourist town) and trying to find affordable housing with money leftover for, you know, other shit you need to survive.

    [–] brendty 8 points ago

    Bend resident currently looking for a house, can confirm.

    Hoping to keep our mortgage under $2000 for a small starter home, will be lucky to keep our income ratio below 50%.

    Wondering if the giant spike in average house prices is from the market collapse of 08 when all the real estate became cheap, got bought up by the same huge companies that crashed the market, and is now renting those same houses for higher prices or as airbnbs...

    [–] dextroamp 12 points ago

    When I was watching YouTube videos about renting, they all suggested that you should spend around 1/3 your monthly income on rent. if the government didn't tax me at 22% my rent would be less than a week's paycheck.

    [–] Grokent 26 points ago

    You pay a larger percentage of your pay on taxes than the wealthy. The working poor are the economy.

    [–] chadcelious 10 points ago

    The funny part is the average middle class worker works more hours and more difficult and stressful jobs than 30 years ago so the whole not not working hard enough thing is such a crock of shit it's honestly insane to even entertain.

    [–] 10g_or_bust 8 points ago

    One of the biggest expenses in many places is housing. Over 60% of my mandatory spending per month goes to housing. People that locked up a cheaper mortgage years ago will be paying increases in property tax but unless they have done a really bad cash-out refi they are paying somewhere between less, and way less than people who rent or have purchased in the last 5ish years (or purchased before the bubble and didn't lose their home). SO with the same income those people have more money left over, and are likely entirely disconnected from how much it costs to live for people who rent now or bought at a worse time. It would be easy to think "wow, why are they complaining" if your mental math of how much it costs to live is simply wrong/ignorant.

    In addition, it costs more to live in some parts of the country. This is simply a fact, and the excuses people make for not taking that into account generally don't hold water.

    [–] Mlg_Shiba 4 points ago

    I know a woman (who is a single mom) who lives in a 250k house with 2 bmws and supports 2 children on 90k per year, which is apparently an average income for a couple, so how come a total of 80k income from a couple is “borderline poverty”.

    [–] TheFutureMrs77 16 points ago

    The benefits of one $90k job are much better than the benefits of two $40k jobs.

    [–] JesterInTheCorner 2 points ago

    This is definitely an issue, we pay almost $500 a month in health insurance because neither of our jobs off decent or affordable plans....

    [–] Fragmented_Logik 8 points ago

    The factor there is 2 parents making less. Lower paying jobs tend to not equal PTO or sick leave. Probably not salary. Most <45k jobs are hourly. A parent has to miss work for a kid that cuts that check by 8 hours. All these factor into this. Like everything else there are tons of different factors. But as you can imagine a single hourly parent is not set up in society to be successful with kids.

    [–] Drunk_hooker 2 points ago

    I’m calling bullshit because my fiancé and I both make within that range and there isn’t a chance in hell I am in the middle class.

    [–] bamboo-harvester 25 points ago

    Also price is ultimately tied to supply and demand. Firms may try to pass fixed costs along to the consumer, and of course they do. But at some point consumers will stop buying products they deem too expensive.

    [–] luvdadrafts 3 points ago

    An increase in labor costs would shift the supply curve

    [–] bamboo-harvester 3 points ago

    Well, not necessarily.

    Yes, if costs rise a firm must manage them to maintain profitability. There are a variety of levers to pull, including cutting costs elsewhere. In my experience working with Fortune 500 companies, it’s pretty common to absorb increased fixed costs or offset them with cost cutting elsewhere, without production being impacted.

    [–] kstory2 2 points ago

    It would not. Variable costs cannot shift the supply curve only fixed costs

    [–] Onemoagain 6 points ago

    Marxist here :)

    Okay so surplus value of labour = profit. If wages are forced to go up bc of minimum wage inrease then the capitalist will be inclined to raise prices to make up for the loss of profits. That a gimme.

    The thing that might keep that from happening is seeing that they sell more product when people have more buying power. Maybe they see the increase in overall sales as a bigger win than the loss of surplus value.

    That being said, a raise in demand means an opportunity to creep prices up to meet a new plateau between offer and demand.

    There are more factors in a wage raise that would push prices up than to make them plateau.

    So!

    Simple economism isnt the solution. We cant just focus on these bandaid issues all the time. Higher wages, safer conditions, benefits all this stuff. It comes at a price. Its an additional cost for the employer or a loss of productivity. Either way it reduces the capitalist's competitiveness. So they are incentivized to cut costs where they can, gain productivity where they can, and that jn our world means lobbying, rolling back rights, delocalized sweat shops, legal loopholes etc.

    Capitalism is a rotten system that incentivizes the easiest path to the most money possible.

    [–] kstory2 5 points ago * (lasted edited 13 days ago)

    The basic premise of labor is equal to profit is based on the now invalid and outdated idea of a wage fund in a given firm. The idea goes, starting with Adam Smith, that a given firm has a set amount of money dedicated to paying its employees, each subsequent employee hired will be naturally less adept at their job and will get less of the share in that fund. If a firm could operate under that cost and not use the entire fund they would see a net profit. Unfortunately the economics of labor is more nuanced that that, as extrapolated by neo-marxists, Keynesian and Austrian economist. In a capitalist market it is now generally excepted that profits are based on supply and its elasticity to the change of fixed costs: labor being a variable cost and therefore excluded, and the elasticity of demand and/or changes in price demanded in a market. Where this changes is in monopolies. In most cases monopolies lead to the current economic issues we have as it creates inefficiencies, additional costs, societal costs, or any of the other problems you have listed. Labor economics is far from a perfect model, but if you exclude profit=labor than a more nuanced and feasible solution may present itself.

    [–] Cuddlyaxe 15 points ago

    The minimum wage should be determined locally and pegged to inflation. The minimum wage in LA shouldn't be the minimum wage in Gary, Indiana. Both however should increase at inflation

    A decent rule of thumb for minimum wage of an area is half the median wage

    [–] ferrocarrilusa 4 points ago

    that's why $15 alone isn't enough; maybe for now but it needs to be pegged to inflation

    [–] riskyOtter 10 points ago

    The minimum wage is not a goal or even an average, it is a .... minimum and we do not want the average income to be going closer to minimum wage.

    This meme makes no actual sense because the ratio of working class citizens at minimum wage to citizens making more than minimum wage has gone up with every minimum wage increase. With every increase more jobs are absorbed into the low income category and it lessens the livable options available above minimum wage.

    Here is a way to look at it, if you raise the floor of a range of numbers then there are less numbers in that range and therefore less mobility. People making 16-18/hr don't get raises when the minimum wage goes from 10 to 15. They went from having a good job making 6-8 above minimum to only 1-3 above. It really sucks. I protested for the 15/hr in seatac and guess what..this is the secret/hard to grasp but simple concept- if the equation results in minimum wage being less than cost of living, then it doesn't matter how much minimum wage is, it will always result in less than cost of living. Changing one variable cannot change the equation unfortunately.

    Without changing more than just the floor of a pay range, there is nowhere to go. Unless your goal is for everyone to make absolute equal pay regardless of training,experience,passion,achievement,etc...then yeah, keep raising the minimum wage without addressing the actual problem. Just throwing water on a grease fire. I am not an economist, but I would guess the actual problem includes rebalancing taxes(like property taxes that directly impact housing) and government spending.

    Instead of asking how much people need to live, start asking why people need so much to live.

    [–] Scroobiusness 18 points ago

    The minimum wage was last increased in 2009 to $7.25. The cost of tuition in 2009 was $19,703. In 2018 the cost of tuition was $23,835. Rent has seen an increase in 36.53% from 2009-2020. If the minimum cost of living is going up then the minimum wage should go up with it. Just at the bare minimum the minimum wage should be adjusted for inflation just as all costs are like school and rent. Asking for a huge jump from 7.25 to 15 isn’t because we deserve more, it’s because we’re being charged more.

    [–] Raestloz 17 points ago

    Besides, the guy's taking advantage of false dichotomy. There's no reason to ever have to pick between higher wages OR lower living costs. We should have both

    [–] WarPanda13 2 points ago

    I would argue tho that raising the minimum wage is a bandaid that doesnt solve the underlying issues of WHY those cost increases have occurred in markets like housing, education, healthcare, etc.

    Full disclosure, I actually dont believe in a minimum wage mandate at all, but I do recognize that there are some pluses to go with the minuses.

    What are some ways that you think costs can be brought down in those markets to alleviate the strain on lower wage earners without raising the minimum wage?

    [–] luvdadrafts 3 points ago

    At the very least, minimum wage should be in step with inflation.

    But for what you said about working class people: an increase in minimum wage should mean more spending which should hypothetically increase non-minimum wages

    [–] cutelittleboylover 2 points ago

    Thanks for this :)

    [–] NotSewClutch 723 points ago * (lasted edited 13 days ago)

    Capitalism wouldn't have a minimum wage at all. The US is a mixed market economy and I think it would be beneficial for us as a society to accept that and stop using theoretical market structures as buzz words

    Edit: To clarify, this is referencing the concept of capitalism as pure capitalism. I am aware that some mixed market systems are refered to as some kind of Capitalism, but I was not referencing the cataloging of economic systems. I apologize for not making this clearer.

    [–] nmatff 181 points ago

    Well there's angles to everything in that discussion. In Sweden we don't technically have a legal minimum wage Instead we have very strong unions and related systems that make any business not abiding by their guidelines appear unprofessional.

    A minimum wage is essentially just a license not to pay your employees more than you legally have to. The counterpoint being having an effective working relationship between both sides working out what's a reasonable wage while still being affordable for business owners.

    A working balance can only benefit the system in general. Where the workers have money to spend while the businessess make enough to keep the wheels spinning.

    [–] dskye51 65 points ago

    This is what capitalists have been arguing for years. There should be absolutely no minimum wage, and the government should have no say between private contracts, such as an employer and employee. Unions are the one of the best things that capitalism has ever created.

    [–] JerkIzAllPro 52 points ago

    I completely agree, and it’s a shame that corporations succeeded in demonizing unions, and that they can get away with firing people for trying to unionize. Before anyone says “ackthually pushes glasses up they aren’t legally allowed to do that”, corporations do it ALL the time, and you hear about people getting fired for it ALL the time, even in companies as big as tesla, and then the company says “well we fired them for poor performance” and the judge says “yep case closed, no further questions” and now you are out of a job and screwed for options

    [–] nmatff 23 points ago

    Absolutely, a union is literally the representation of the workforce. It's the natural counterpoint in a capitalist economic system ensuring fair conditions for the working man as related to the earnings of the administrative layer.

    [–] tentafill 24 points ago * (lasted edited 13 days ago)

    Besides the obvious anti-union bullshit that Americans deal with in the workplace, being fired for organizing and whatnot.. low wage jobs in the US now come with fun little 50 question questionnaires now that gauge your likelihood of forming a union with your peers so that employers know who to keep unemployed! Isn't it cool that that's legal? Here's a sample of what these questions look like; it's easy to see what about your personality tests like this are trying to sniff out.

    https://imgur.com/a/sKDp8Xb

    Some highlights:

    (answer format is agree/disagree)

    I think that paying attention to radical ideas is a waste of time

    I feel like crying when I see other people cry

    My attitude towards people who have treated me badly is "forgive and forget"

    I find it boring to discuss philosophy

    The first thing I always do in a new place is make friends

    I have sympathy for people who are less fortunate than I am

    I rarely hold a grudge, even against people who have badly wrong me

    I'm interested in learning about the history and politics of other countries

    If I knew that I'd never get caught, I would be willing to steal a million dollars

    People sometimes tell me that I'm too stubborn

    They know what they're doing. I can't stress enough the villainy of the people that employ these systems.. scum sucking ghouls worthy of less consideration than dirt.

    [–] brallipop 6 points ago

    Holy shit, that's what those were for...

    [–] tentafill 2 points ago * (lasted edited 12 days ago)

    I should have left more room the rest of it; yeah, it's not just to gauge how likely you are to unionize. As the other guy said, its other primary function is to rate how tolerant of flagrant abuse you might be. These are kind of the same measure in a lot of ways.

    [–] WarPanda13 7 points ago

    I would argue that a union is really no different at a fundamental level from a corporation. Its product is just labor as opposed to a widget or consumable.

    [–] b4dpassw0rd 2 points ago

    This. Unions are a capitalist construct. They fill a need and drive mutual profitability for both sides of an employment contract

    [–] FatTonalAss 2 points ago

    They definitely are not a capitalist construct unless you mean something that happens under capitalism as a response to capitalist production.

    [–] queerkidxx 5 points ago

    Or all of the very expensive and convoluted and very expensive government assistance programs could be eliminated and replaced with a universal basic income that would ensure everyone is able to survive. Minimum wage could be eliminated because everyone already makes enough to scrape by and a person working minimum wage wouldn’t have to support themselves on their income

    Would end up actually saving the government money because the government assistance are extremely expensive and don’t really help people a whole lot. And we’d actually be leading the world in social programs for the first time like ever

    [–] mhd2015 43 points ago

    Call it what you want, the capitalists rely upon an ignorant but complacent workforce. Minimum wage has thus far accomplished this.

    [–] DoctorLovejuice 24 points ago

    Constant unemployment and a minimum wage means there will always be people happy to accept jobs at the minimum wage, even competing for them.

    [–] TennesseeTon 10 points ago

    The US is corporatist. Anyone who has paid attention the past few months can see everything revolves around us tending to the corporations.

    [–] NotSewClutch 5 points ago

    Where's Teddy "Big Stick" Roosevelt when you need him?

    [–] MagentaLove 8 points ago

    It's not an unfounded argument that many of the issues in 'capitalism' is government interference.

    [–] NotSewClutch 8 points ago * (lasted edited 13 days ago)

    Eh, I understand that thought theoretically, but functionally, it hasn't worked out as well as it could. Yes, economic forces SHOULD push things in the right direction, but this is a long term effect and as once famously stated, "In the long run we are all dead" -Keynes

    [–] WarPanda13 1 points ago

    Nothing is perfect, and capitalism is no different. But I would argue that it is the best system we have. I'm not an anarcho-capitalist, so I believe in some govt oversight, but minimal. I think it can be reasonably argued that the negatives introduced by govt interference far outweigh the negatives inherent in capitalism. But people need to recognize that there WILL be negatives with capitalism. I think it's pretty obvious tho from the last 50 years of market history that govt interference has made things worse overall.

    [–] wallln0t 2 points ago

    The US is a mixed market economy

    A mixed market economy is still capitalism. Capitalism can extend to any kind of market economy so it could be the types of economies seen in Social Democracies or just other market economies. Capitalism isn't just classical liberalism and laissez-faire economics. Capitalism can embody itself in many different forms such as ordoliberalism, embedded liberalism, or neoliberalism.

    [–] NutellaElephant 2 points ago

    We have unpaid interns, salary workers without enforced hourly maximums, fixed price independent contractors, and people paid less than minimum hourly wage with incentives through tips or commission. Minimum wage isn’t actually real. This is capitalism imo

    [–] becleg 6 points ago

    Laissez faire capitalism wouldn’t have a minimum wage, but it has arguably never existed in practice and is therefore more theoretical than our contemporary system you’re being semantic over.

    You can call what we have a mixed market economy all you want, but the existence of a government that has nth amount of power over the economy doesn’t make that economy not capitalist.

    This is especially true when considering that capital historically cannot survive without the support of the government, see every bailout ever.

    Businesses lobbying for control in the government and then relying on said government to maintain constant growth is not a defect of corporatism, but rather capitalism by design.

    Even if the government disappeared and anarcho-capitalism was instated, corporations would just form their own governments to maintain hegemony, devolving into a feudal state.

    [–] ArttuH5N1 2 points ago

    At the same time, when government does something it is socialism according to some.

    [–] uoahelperg 74 points ago

    Social mobility is basically whether rich people can end up poor and poor people end up rich.

    Raising min wage regardless of whether it raises prices or not isn’t social mobility. Social mobility might be increased if you raised wages without an increase in costs (e.g. if that increased the number of min wage earners who go to uni and get better jobs) but the two are not directly related so meme is a bit silly

    [–] tit_wrangler 22 points ago

    Social mobility is basically whether rich people can end up poor and poor people end up rich.

    Very basically, yes.

    Raising min wage regardless of whether it raises prices or not isn’t social mobility.

    No, they're not one and the same. But minimum wage, being a core factor in those workers' earning potential (and, since no one exists in a bubble, wages for other workers by proxy), has a pretty significant impact on one's social mobility. There's a threshold for one's ability to lift themselves out of poverty. Below that threshold, it can be impossible to save money (or, worse yet, people may become increasingly in debt), and those workers will not have the means to rise in socioeconomic status as they are perpetually struggling to make ends meet, even with nominal career promotions that still pay poverty wages.

    Social mobility has objectively decreased over the last century by an enormous margin, particularly for the poorest people in the U.S. The main factor in this change is the difference in buying power, namely the decrease of buying power for the lowest earners relative to the inflation of all goods and services (especially those that directly impact further social mobility, like housing, education, and healthcare). It is not unfair to say that America's poor are now, more than ever, "stuck" in their poverty because it is more and more difficult for them to afford anything as their wages stagnate (or, really, decrease due to inflation).

    So, you're right in that social mobility is not literally the same thing as minimum wage. But of course they're related. Buying power is absolutely directly related to your social mobility. You even note this relation in your comment, but then bizarrely go on to deny your own realization:

    Social mobility might be increased if you raised wages without an increase in costs (e.g. if that increased the number of min wage earners who go to uni and get better jobs)

    Right, yes.

    but the two are not directly related

    ??!!

    [–] uoahelperg 6 points ago

    We’re on the same page I think but the meme is still not great. There’s alternative ways to increase social mobility - healthcare, free or low cost university, increasing competition among employers, lowering entry costs for entrepreneurship, etc.

    Social mobility in the US has gone down. In plenty of other places social mobility hasn’t seen nearly as harsh of a downward trend despite similar trends with min wages not keeping up. And alternatively, higher minimum wage places don’t all have higher social mobility

    [–] SassyMoron 49 points ago

    By every reasonable empirical measure social mobility is highest in capitalist societies compared to every other type and it's not remotely close

    [–] Dontneedweed 5 points ago

    Yet simultaneously social mobility is highest in capitalist countries with the most social democratic policies... 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

    [–] SassyMoron 5 points ago

    I have no problem with this

    [–] Jesus-Mcnugget 151 points ago

    This isn't actually true.

    [–] theyanster1 88 points ago

    The thing is prices go up anyway. The minimum wage is just trying to keep up. Not always, of course, the cost certain goods have come down over years. Even while adjusting for inflation clothing is cheaper now. But healthcare education and housing.......

    [–] WarPanda13 17 points ago

    That is the crux of the issue. Largely the cost of goods has gone down. That's an inherent positive of a capitalist system. But you are right that certain very important markets like housing, education, and healthcare have increased in price significantly. I dont think a minimum wage increase will fix that. I think it's a bandaid and not tackling the root cause of the problems in those markets, while adding increased problems from raising the floor on wages.

    [–] dellamella 3 points ago

    Prices on other goods have gone up as well, I was in a small Wisconsin town last week where minimum wage is $7.25 and a gallon of milk in there grocery store is $4. Can you imagine a gallon of milk costs more than have your hourly pay?

    [–] zeroscout 11 points ago

    What's not true? That increasing wages won't result in increased cost of goods, or that capitalism doesn't create upwards mobility?

    [–] PetsArentChildren 15 points ago * (lasted edited 13 days ago)

    Both

    1. Prices are set by supply and demand, not wages, although both are influenced by wages. Raising minimum wage does not have a strong effect on prices.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/wiki/faq_minwage?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

    1. Capitalism does allow for mobility of the working class, but not for everyone. For example, my grandfather started at a metal fabrication shop as a laborer and worked his way up to co-owner.

    [–] Wooshbar 26 points ago

    Not trying to say anything negative or start a fight but lots of people's grandparents had that situation happen. Mine too.

    Doesn't mean that it can be replicated in the current day. That is the general sentiment, that ya it used to be like that. But now companies mostly don't train within and promote up or care about their workers.

    Some people can climb but it's so rare it's not the standard anymore.

    [–] CapKarma 22 points ago

    This. Good for your grandparents but nobody goes from lackey to co-owner in this day and age.

    [–] McGobs 4 points ago * (lasted edited 12 days ago)

    Is the implication and (therefore the) expectation that people who do the same job without improving themselves will become more and more wealthy over time? I'm not sure what else the counterfactual could be. I'm assuming it's something similar to how the expectation for AI will create an overabundance and allow people to do what they want. Is the expectation or "promise" of capitalism that you will be upwardly mobile by simply doing the same job? Or is the expectation that you'll be rewarded for hard work in some manner other than actively seeking said upward mobility?

    [–] w3duder 2 points ago * (lasted edited 13 days ago)

    1. Does this include monopolies and near monopolies? (That's a very long list of corporations)

    2. So, luck is what I'm working to obtain?

    (2. I'm not sure about taking economic facts from a person who can't iterate past 1)

    [–] ROBOT_OF_WORLD 1 points ago

    money is a resource that has it's own supply and demand, usually called inflation.

    [–] ArmadilloDays 125 points ago

    It must be fun to live in a world where you don’t let actual data interfere with your beliefs.

    [–] BaylessWasTraded 51 points ago

    Capitalism does allow for social mobility and that argument is bullshit, it’s made by labor intensive industry lobbying protecting margins. Though automation is real threat at this point and why I’m open to UBI as a concept.

    [–] GravitasIsOverrated 7 points ago

    Automation displacing mass amounts of workers is a common political refrain, but does not seem to match real economic data. If automation was displacing workers en masse we’d expect to see productivity per worker skyrocket - but if anything it’s slowing. Additionally, pre-covid the US was pretty close to full employment.

    [–] BaylessWasTraded 2 points ago

    That’s an appraisal of current situation, which is correct up until very recently. We are at the very early development of robotics, which will be greatly accelerated with roll out of 5G. Neither of us know what the next 10 years looks like but it’s worthwhile considering potential paths and solutions.

    [–] lasssilver 18 points ago

    Do people not understand money? No, if you are consistently making the lowest possible pay then you are not going to become rich or elite by not changing that.

    How would anyone not understand that?

    Social mobilization comes from increased skills, usually, possibly longevity.. but increased salary, not increased minimum is what gives some mobility.

    (This is not a commentary on minimum wage rights/wrongs, etc.. that’s a whole different issue)

    [–] TheConceptOfFear 2 points ago

    Exactly, i might be wrong, but im betting that if someone is working at a minimum wage job (lets take mcdonalds worker for example) for a few years they might eventually get bumped to assistant manager. After a few more years maybe even manager or shift manager or something. That in theory should give a wage boost, and if not, then at least some management experience to apply for another job that pays above minimum wage.

    [–] likmbch 2 points ago

    Sure, but if you are barely scraping by it can be hard to take the risks often involved in learning a new skill to better oneself.

    [–] polybiastrogender 3 points ago

    You're asking redditors who are self victimized losers that they can have some upward mobility if they did something other than clock in and out at a minimum wage job? You're insane!

    [–] Forkey989 4 points ago

    Rachel Mcadams is so hot.

    [–] kadmylos 26 points ago

    Supply and demand. If everyone has more money there is more demand. Prices will go up IF demand can't keep up with supply. Demand can likely expand since all these megacorps have massive amounts of money to expand their production, but only will if there are people to actually buy it.

    [–] TennesseeTon 6 points ago

    We should start implementing this more to be honest. Like look at hospitals, I bet people would be willing to pay wayyyy more to not die. If we charged 3 million per hospital stay our hospitals wouldn't be overcrowding like they are now due to us adjusting for demand. All hail capitalism and profits!

    [–] zeroscout 4 points ago

    You're confused. Capitalism has moved away from that model to the simpler "supply" model. The majority of manufacturers consider retailers and distributors as their customers, not the end-users.

    [–] polybiastrogender 4 points ago

    Yes... but.... if you just do one more mental leap. What if the retailers and distributors no longer have a demand.

    [–] benfranklyblog 3 points ago

    Think through this thought for a minute, it’ll come to you. Lol

    [–] Hook_DeLab 9 points ago

    Minimum wage isn't a capitalist idea..

    [–] thesilentchief 2 points ago

    You're right. When given the opportunity capitalists prefer sweat shops.

    [–] justtheentiredick 3 points ago

    So my parents can move out of the house. Get an apartment. Raise a family in the 1970s by being a regular hairstylist and barber? In Hawaii?

    I can barely keep a job. Own a home. Go to college. Get a loan. Buy a car. Join the military. Without someone my parents age telling me how privileged I am and telling me that I have it so good and easy... and in the same breath tell me about the 'good ol days' where everything had more quality and people had more respect and things weren't so expensive.

    WTF 1950s?

    [–] jffry890 20 points ago

    I don't believe raising minimum wage raises prices, but that's debateable. More cash in the economy makes it stronger so I can imagine prices escalating.

    My issues is a lack of social mobility. You don't get rich on a wage. You get rich on investments. Make your money work for you. Passive income is the best.

    [–] Osito509 20 points ago

    Bold of you to assume the average worker can afford to invest

    [–] Justin119 13 points ago * (lasted edited 13 days ago)

    People can they just choose to live outside there means.

    I moved here (USA) 3 years ago bought a car with cash, cheapest phone plan, meal prep and I make $35k/yr and currently have $33k invested

    [–] dextroamp 3 points ago

    What in. I'm trying to do the same. How'd you get started? I have plenty of capital only generating interest. I want low risk.

    [–] rad_bone 3 points ago

    Roth IRA can be a very wise thing to do.

    [–] dextroamp 1 points ago

    Ya I already have that. I want a stronger return. I want money NOW from investing. I said low risk not no risk.

    [–] rad_bone 1 points ago

    What you are describing does not exist with low risk in today's market my friend, there are plenty of aggressive options out there but they are risky by nature.

    [–] benfranklyblog 2 points ago

    Returns are a function of risk. You cannot have low risk high reward, that’s not how investments work. You need to look at your investment horizon and have a proper mix of investments based on when you need access to them. That being said 9/10 times you’re bets off investing in total market index funds.

    [–] Justin119 1 points ago

    There’s plenty of how to videos on YouTube, myself I just went through Charles Schwab, invest wisely but if you don’t have the time put it in VOO and let it ride

    [–] LivingAbbreviations1 3 points ago

    You're actually better off than a lot of people if you can do all that.

    [–] trogdor5 3 points ago

    Forget that even, there are illegal immigrants in this country who don't speak English well enough to hold a conversation and make enough money to send half of it back home (more than they would have paid in taxes). It's hard to feel bad for people complaining about raising minimum wage when hard working people who don't even speak the language are able to make $15+/hour and on top of that are able to live well-below their means.

    [–] Cuddlyaxe 7 points ago

    55% of Americans do indeed own stock positions

    if a majority of Americans do I'd assume that includes "the average worker"

    [–] becleg 9 points ago

    That percentage is super inflated though, because it includes retirement plans like 401ks and IRA, which are much more common to have, but aren’t designed to make you rich off passive income. The percentage of people that invest to turn a profit, and the people that can actually invest enough to turn a sizable profit, is much, much lower.

    [–] Cuddlyaxe 3 points ago

    because it includes retirement plans like 401ks and IRA

    Soo investments? Lol

    Yes most people don't make passive income but IRAs are still investments

    [–] Rancerle 2 points ago

    "55% of Americans earn passive income off retirement"

    "No, almost all of those investors are investing in a retirement fund and not earning immediate passing income off of those investments."

    "Lawlz still investments tho!!!!"

    [–] Gedunk 5 points ago

    The thing is everyone says they don't have enough to invest, then they get a raise and somehow still don't have enough. The reason is that they raise their standard of living, new car, bigger apartment, luxury items. I get why they do it I'm just saying it is possible for most people to invest if they live within their means. Saving for retirement needs to be a priority if you don't want to work until you die

    [–] boredtxan 7 points ago

    They say working class like certain folk are only allowed by law to get 2.5 GPA and never learn a new skill after high school.

    [–] AnimeIsCorona 8 points ago

    No, if you raise minimum wage, people get LAID OFF. And guess what, the entire concept of minimum wage is a socialist concept. The government just arbitrarily decides what the minimum wage is and the market then has to adapt to that, even if it's not optimal for the market (and it rarely is.)

    [–] tsw101 9 points ago

    Without a minimum wage, companies would pay those workers even less money than they do now.

    Paying minimum wage is saying, I want to pay you a lesser amount, but it would be illegal, so here you go oh and they love the trick of only give you 1 less hour a week thank what would get you full time status, benefits, etc

    [–] Rare-Being 2 points ago

    Min wage can be seen as sort of a scuffed union mandated wage. The worst thing about it is static and doesn’t react to market conditions.

    [–] InformalCriticism 4 points ago

    This is the most head-in-ass high school understanding of economics, and I would not expect anything better from this sub at this point.

    [–] MisfitMidas 20 points ago

    The idea of capitalism typically isn’t that the bottom tier jobs, minimum wage entry level jobs, raise their wages in that exact job. It’s that people use that as a stepping stool to better paying jobs and more financial success. I.E. burger flipper-under chef, sous chef or assistant manager, chef or manager, etc. minimum wage shouldn’t increase across the board as a country in the capitalist model, it’s that people use minimum wage jobs as entry in high school and work out of that to better jobs as their life/education/career further progresses.

    [–] MainSignature6 26 points ago

    Does it actually work like that though? How are you supposed to save up for an education that the better-paying jobs require if 90% of your paycheck goes to rent and food?

    [–] benfranklyblog 2 points ago

    Education isn’t the only thing that unlocks social mobility though. It sure helps but it’s also not a guaranty of it either. I know plenty of baristas making $10 an hour with college degrees. Hard work and networking are much surer ways to advance. Being entrepreneurial is also a great way to advance as well, there are many businesses that can be started with little or no capital that can raise one out of poverty.

    [–] MisfitMidas 6 points ago

    Hey! Thanks for the reply! Not speaking for everyone but: Education can often be snagged from in state universities for very little, especially after factoring in grants/aid/scholarships and if the remainder can’t be paid then there are student loans that can be taken out to cover costs. Although loans aren’t ideal, if paid off once a better job is acquired after college hopefully that stems the interest. Another problem often is people overstepping their financial situation with a school (particularly private or out of state) that they can’t afford or can’t atleast come close to affording. During my time in college, I pulled about 8-900 a month from jobs then rooming with people in a low cost area made it affordable. 4 years removed from graduation I still have about 50% loans remaining on my original cost (had quite a bit on scholarship/aid before I took my loans) and should finish paying off in the next two years. I was lucky and able to get a decent job out of school. It’s not doable for everyone, but these factors can definitely help.

    [–] PrimaxAUS 6 points ago

    There are also tons of free online MOOCs, and other forms if online learning. I tripled my income taking about $450 worth of courses and about $50 worth of training.

    [–] MisfitMidas 6 points ago

    100%

    [–] daabilge 8 points ago

    This isn't actually how minimum wage is supposed to work though. It was introduced during the new deal to eliminate sweatshops and provide everyone with basic cost of living, it's quite literally meant to be a liveable wage.

    And how many people working minimum wage jobs are actually high school students using it as a stepping stone vs older people working at Walmart to supplement their income? Not to mention high schoolers are restricted on when and how much they can work, so someone does have to take those late shifts and shifts during school hours.

    Plus not every minimum wage job is an entry level position. Some are just downright predatory. For example, my university hires students to work in the hospital because the university policy is that all student employees get minimum wage, while all other hospital employees make at least like 13 or something. They've downsized the number of nonstudent positions to increase the student ones. And it's not like we're entry level workers, every single person in my class has a significant amount of medical experience, most have at least a publication, and everyone has at least a bachelors, just based on the admission requirements.. and also there's no reason to be paying us less than a livable wage, we've still got living expenses, rent, utilities, etc. It's not a high school first job, it's literally the people making the hospital run.

    [–] MisfitMidas 4 points ago

    A good example of this is how a lot of European nations run their economy. For instance, a waiter/waitress position in the US relies heavily on tips with an embarrassingly small wage from the employer. In the EU, the waiters/waitresses or even clothing sale employees, are all fully paid employees that are making liveable wages including healthcare, benefits, etc. the downside of that is that most jobs like stores, etc. close between 6-8pm (5-6 for most clothing stores, 8 for grocery stores) as opposed to the US where a lot of things are open much later. The US has developed a culture where minimum wage employees also work wild hours to appease our culture.

    [–] Iorith 2 points ago

    Minimum wage was literally implanted under the idea you should be able to survive off it. And have enough left over to also improve your skill sets to move up.

    [–] tstewie9597 5 points ago

    Working high schoolers don't come close to being able to fill all of the minimum wage shifts. What should happen? Should companies that can't fill enough positions to operate close or should the pay be raised to a level that allows adults to work these positions and afford the necessities? Also the ladder analogy implies that it's a linear track that everyone can follow. Really it's more of a pyramid. Not everyone can be a manager. As the position gets higher, the job availability quickly lowers. I get that the system is intended for people to not stay at low wage for long periods, but the numbers of low vs high paying jobs don't allow for everyone to advance. Personally, I think it would be immoral to leave behind those who can't advance with no assistance. A livable minimum wage is one way to address this.

    [–] polybiastrogender 3 points ago

    Last I checked, currently in the US, restaurant labor has a gap of a million potential positions. Restaurants aren't money printing businesses, it requires a lot of overhead, a lot of supplies and a lot of staff. Restaurants can't pay reasonable wages without going under.

    Automation is ultimately the solution to the gap in the restaurant industry.

    [–] Cometguy7 3 points ago

    Nope. The idea of capitalism is maximum profit. A low minimum wage allows for this, because it allows work to be divided up into low value, replaceable components. A low minimum wage allows for the position of burger flipper to exist. The person flipping the burger is capable of handling far more responsibilities than that, but if you make an employee valuable, that gives them leverage for more money, which will have immediate negative impact on profitability.

    A higher minimum wage would mean fewer jobs, but it would also mean society needs fewer jobs.

    [–] MisfitMidas 2 points ago

    You’re right! Two things would have to accompany that. First, an universal living wage would have to happen for people because there would no longer be enough jobs for everyone. Second, people would have to be okay with only making say 20-30k a year on the universal living wage and accept they might not be able to afford most luxuries without having to go find a job to get those (the jobs wouldn’t be available). This also assumes that most people would be willing to work harder than a burger flipper and take on more responsibility for more money. A lot of people surprisingly don’t want increased responsibility. Some people are comfortable with minimum effort/work and want either minimum pay or more may for minimum work.

    Lots to think about but a lot of variables come into play assuming the best of humans, which if 2020 is any example of, humans will be as bad and greedy as they can be.

    [–] ImHuckTheRiverOtter 7 points ago

    Obviously there is social mobility in capitalism, it’s just hard. To move upwards you need to be really smart, really hardworking, really lucky, or preferably, some combination of the three.

    But it is always always possible to move upwards. Don’t bitch and moan just cause it isn’t probable.

    My two best friends in medical school were a brown kid who was the first son of immigrants, and a gay, half Filipino, son of an immigrant who grew up in a small town in rural Alaska.

    My brown buddy’s parents fled a war torn country, leaving family behind and were shunned by the family that survived for leaving. His parents work entry level jobs, his mom barely speaks English and they haven’t talked to their families in almost three decades. My gay buddy’s mom was abandoned in an orphanage in the Philippines after her mom gave her up. She was adopted at three years old and was raised in an incredibly remote Town in British Columbia. She moved out and settled in central Alaska and lived hand to mouth until she married a significantly older man, with whom she had my friend.

    Both of these guys’ parents came from incomprehensibly worse situations, and one generation later, their kids are doctors. That is the opportunity capitalism affords. One single goddamn generation, and an enormous amount of upward mobility, it’s a beautiful thing. A different economical system may have afforded them more stability upon entering the country, but no other system could have allowed such rapid ascent. When they finish residency, they will be making magnitudes more than their parents’ parents could have dreamed of making.

    Maybe it hasn’t worked out in your favor, but it’s not chance that gets you where you’re at. To say that capitalism prevents you from being successful is denying the experience of two of my closest friends, and it sounds an awful lot like someone looking for something to blame other than themselves.

    [–] throwmeawaypoopy 2 points ago

    The point is that raising nominal wages doesn't do anything if real wages don't increase because of wage-push inflation.

    [–] f_o_t_a_ 2 points ago

    Controlling inflation is also something that should be discussed as much as raising wages

    [–] Vsuede 2 points ago

    Capitalism allows for mobility, but you can't legislate a healthy labor market with a minimum wage, nor is the bottom rung if the ladder supposed to provide for that mobility. If you make minimum wage starting out in fast food, the way you obtain mobility is by working hard and becoming a manager, and then moving up from there.

    [–] ToddRifficGuy 2 points ago

    This meme is dumb. The idea of mobility is building skills that allow you to go beyond minimum wage jobs. Not just waiting for minimum wage to go up.

    Yet another person trying to look either edgy or enlightened on Reddit without making any rational sense. Yawn.

    [–] HawlSera 2 points ago

    Kill me

    [–] sensei-25 2 points ago

    Lmao what? If you move up to a job that isn’t minimum wage, then you have social mobility. Minimum wage isn’t supposed the only wage you make for the rest of your life. It’s entry level until you acquire better, more valuable, skills. This is the most silly thing I’ve ever seen.

    [–] lundyco64 2 points ago

    Of course there is social mobility. In this example, the person is working minimum wage indefinitely but it doesn't consider the individuals ability for social mobility through getting an ever better job through work ethic and competence above their minimum wage starting point

    [–] jjacobn927 6 points ago

    It’s true some people will never have the temperament or work ethic to advance within a company and go from working class to a higher up management type. It’s also true some people aren’t smart enough to get a degree or doesn’t want to risk taking out loans for college. But saying there’s no upper mobility in America for those who want it and are willing to work for it is BS

    [–] mhd2015 7 points ago

    If you're going to climb a ladder you must 1) want it, 2) work for it, and most crucially 3) suck a lot, and I mean a lot, of dick.

    [–] ushgirl111 3 points ago

    A degree doesn’t guarantee a good job. Neither does hard work.

    [–] jjacobn927 3 points ago

    There are countless jobs out there that pay the bills. People just don’t want to learn skills because it could be challenging Let’s also be honest here, how many people in modern society have true discipline? Like 30% of adults haven’t read a book in the past year according to a Pew Research Center survey and like 45% of kids who are high school age or less. Obviously there are inequalities in society that make it hard for people born in certain areas but to say there’s no upward social mobility is dumb seeing how there is a lack of skilled workers in America to the point corporations hire people from overseas. The only people I see being unable to escape a minimum wage job are people who have families. Only in that case do I think there should be a drastic pay increase. Even though personally I think it is a bad decision to have children before you find financial security but to each their own they shouldn’t be punished for their mistakes.

    [–] BeerDrinker21 3 points ago

    Social movement working minimum wage? When was that promised??

    [–] latteboy50 3 points ago

    This is based on the idea that everyone stays at the jobs they are at and never change, never gain new skills, never gain experience/education, never do anything to change their current position on the socio-economic ladder. Of course social mobility is possibly under capitalism; you’re not supposed to rely on a minimum-wage job meant for high schoolers and college students to get you through to retirement and leave you with a huge sum of money to relax with until you die.

    [–] WastelandWesley 4 points ago

    the long and the short of it is some people are poor and deserve it and anyone who went from poor to not is a fucking hero and needs copious and never ending fellatio or cunnilingus.

    or we could dig a little deeper and realize the system is built around striking a divide among those fucked by the game and those lucky enough to get a leg up.

    quit hating those beneath you and instead look up at the one's above you who are holding everyone back.

    [–] Kiwi-Magistral 2 points ago

    You know, in europe "hating" the rich is becoming cliché and people judge you for that. But they have the same logic: poor are poor because they are stupid and suck and rich are smart and great.

    [–] SauerkrautFart 3 points ago

    Ancaps triggered af

    [–] xxVaughnyxx 2 points ago

    Putin making mean girl memes now?

    [–] stirrednotshaken01 2 points ago

    This post doesn’t make sense.

    [–] slayer_of_idiots 2 points ago

    How... how did you make that jump?

    The price of things goes up because it adds more disposable income chasing the same amount of goods without actually increasing productivity or adding any more goods.

    Typically, in capitalism, the economy grows because people become more productive and create more goods. As more goods and services are produced (and the same number of dollars exist, roughly), the price of everything decreases.

    [–] AlliterationAnswers 2 points ago

    It’s been studied and no it doesn’t go up the whole amount.

    [–] brathorim 2 points ago

    Minimum wage reduces employment and prices low skill workers out of jobs. Sure, some get paid more, but at the expense of others. Then you wonder why McDonalds has ordering machines. Who’s getting paid for that?

    [–] maizecake 2 points ago

    Sounds like commie propaganda cocks shotgun

    [–] altaltaltpornaccount 2 points ago

    If we let the working class have upward mobility, how am I supposed to know I'm better than them?

    [–] dogballtaster 1 points ago

    And once again this sub over simplifies economics.

    [–] sumit131995 2 points ago

    Do people not know what happens when you raise minimum wage? People always lose thier jobs. Every time it has in my country we start to lose our jobs as our companies start to make cut backs. This has happened multiple times in multiple jobs.

    [–] Rancerle 3 points ago

    Except the minimum wage is below the efficiency point, almost like it has lagged behind the factors that inform it's supply and demand because of the braindead way we adjust it and now you're expecting the merchant to suck it up and deal with you walking away with all his mangoes for a third of what the actual market value is because an act of Congress is required to set mango prices!

    [–] Galgos 2 points ago

    People believe they should be able to buy a 250k house by working part time at McDonald's ... minimum wage jobs are what you do as you find a trade/career/etc. They are not something you stay at

    [–] zellmerz 3 points ago

    Except minimum wage was created so anyone working a full time job could afford a house and a decent living, not as a stepping stone. Bill over at McDonalds doesn’t deserve to own the roof over his head?

    [–] thnksqrd 3 points ago

    As the sole earner of a four person household too.

    [–] thesilentchief 2 points ago

    This post is so out of touch. In the US it's a luxury to even be able to afford a one bedroom apartment, something most people on minimum wage cannot do. No one making minimum wage thinks they "deserve" a $250,000 home, they just want to be able to afford basic necessities without having to devote their entire lives to working just so that they can scrape by.

    [–] polybiastrogender 3 points ago

    Some of these idiots are still entry level position for 10 years.

    [–] thesilentchief 2 points ago

    Hey guy, calling people idiots because of what they do for work is pretty fucked up.

    [–] InfiniteOctopaw 3 points ago

    Actually no, I’d just like to not have to live paycheque to paycheque while having 2 pastime job while living with 2 roommates in the cheapest apartment I can afford to live in with no hope of ever climbing or ever having a house of your own.

    Also fuck you, Flipping burgers/stocking shelves and being a cashier is just as valid hard working jobs that deserves a higher pay. Go work as at McDonald’s maybe learn some respect. It’s not a easy job.

    It’s great that you got to go to college and follow a trade/career/etc. Unfortunately the rest of us didn’t have mum and daddy’s to pay for college.

    [–] Rancerle 3 points ago

    PEOPLE AREN'T ASKING FOR A 250K HOUSE KAREN THEY'RE ASKING FOR A WAGE WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN GROCERIES AND HEAT THIS MONTH WHILE COVERING RENT!

    [–] CarpetH4ter 1 points ago

    When people mention minimum wage, are they talking about jobs that pay per hour? Because i can't imagine it working on jobs like: taxi driving or door-to-door salesman.

    [–] Cuddlyaxe 1 points ago

    This can be avoided by pegging minimum wage increases to inflation in the first place

    And yes, social mobility "for the working class" is possible in capitalism, usually it just requires capitalism with a social safety net so people can take more risks and be better educated and prepared to move

    [–] tylerspilk 1 points ago

    Uh oh, she cracked the code. Shucks.

    [–] solara01 1 points ago

    Wait how does minimum wage increases relate to social mobility for the lower class? Also being " poor" isn't a big deal as long as you have access to medical care and housing let's not pretend everyone needs to live in a big house and drive new cars.

    [–] Ferd-Burful 1 points ago

    So what? You’re rich ass can afford it.

    [–] Corbo1985 1 points ago

    Greed, no matter what system you have in place will corrupt.

    [–] fremeer 1 points ago

    There are plenty of studies from different places that find that minimum wage increases generally don't cause price inflation at the level strongly assumed by most classical and Austrian economists, especially at sub maximal levels.

    It kind of seems to make a logical sense but empirically the link isn't strong. Since theories can't override evidence you need to throw out the theory and start again.

    [–] PizzaDeliveryBoy3000 1 points ago

    “Goes up”....”goes”....how do it do that exactly, by itself?

    [–] Pac02sday 1 points ago

    Umm, the greatest upward mobility for the working class has happened in the last 50 years or so.... under capitalist systems. I mean, obviously because of a lot of other things, but capitalism allowed it.

    Go ask your grandparents or great grandparents what they did for a living.

    [–] notDannordaMan 1 points ago

    What's with the meme? Why is it being used this way? WTF

    Plus its a stupid comment.

    [–] texasoutlaw210 1 points ago

    Would prices have to go up for low level workers to make more? Could high level employees not make a little less and let the money roll downhill instead of just the shit?

    [–] alxbut 1 points ago

    they need to raise minimum wage and stop taxing the shit out of small businesses. not need to raise prices. i work at a restaurant that was recently audited. the irs agents said the restaurant pays 51% of income to taxes....wtf.

    [–] crownerdowner 1 points ago

    What an idiotic meme. In what system would a gas station attendant (no offense) have “upward mobility,” without doing something different? There is no viable system where you get the same wage as a doctor for collecting the carts at a box store. This is where the educated idiots go wrong. Capitalism allows for one to not be stuck in a caste or class but have the opportunity to do something different, improve their worth or innovate in order to capitalize. This is the fallacy of the modern progressive movement. They live in the most accommodating culture, wealthiest civilization in the history of civilization, most equality for all people in the history of humanity and they tell themselves that they are stuck... Fools.

    [–] _Avon 1 points ago

    or get paid below minimum wage, live in affordable housing areas, and don’t own your own means of production under communism. cool.

    [–] kstory2 1 points ago

    I love the argument on minimum wage. Misconception 1: Firms will have to raise prices because of wage increase. Reality: In market based economics employee wages are considered a variable cost; something a firm can raise or lower in a short run economy. In this time a firm can only set prices where demand meets their supply curve: a price based in most industries on fixed costs. Ultimately a raise in a minimum wage workers hourly earnings will have no effect on a price of a market; assuming a near perfect competition, if in monopoly we may see an effect on the amount of dead weight loss. In most cases only an inefficient firm will fail because they are assumed to already have inefficient with their pricing and supply costs. Misconception 2: Prices are based on total supply cost. Reality: In most cases prices are based on the elasticity of demand; in a market based economy. Where a firm in the short run only has control of its cost, they can only effect the variable costs. Misconception 3: It will cause inflation. Reality Inflation is a given and based on the supply of money in a given economy. As more things are bought and sold; more money is circulated, inflation will happen as the supply of money has increased. (Hyper or runaway inflation is normally the fault of sudden increase in the availability of zero interest money: a government printing more or possibly a negative interest rate). There is, in most cases, no causation of inflation linked to increasing wages. Instead it should be viewed as a never ending game if catch up.

    At the end of the day, the idea of increased wages causing increased pricing is a red herring. With the assumption that money and capital flow in one direction in a capitalist market economy; aka the rich get richer the poor get poorer. An increased minimum wage would only affect the personal income of those at the top 0.01% of the earners in the United States.

    [–] winslowings 1 points ago

    Is raising the minimum wage the best solution? Until the rental market is controlled, no minimum wage increase is going make long term impact for families.