wealth inequality

[Shadowferal]

This notion in response to my comment would only make sense if most of the US were ghettos.

Again, showing your ignorance.
Where do you imagine a lot of poverty is?

How is it invalid? Slaves formed a significant percentage of the population; just because they weren't granted citizen status, doesn't mean they don't make for a good example of inequality.

Again..revealing to me...
Slaves aren't people. They were property.
You're comparing livestock to the wealthy. Except the livestock was treated better than slaves.

[May90]

Again, showing your ignorance.
Where do you imagine a lot of poverty is?

Ugh... Read the comment you originally responded to. It is your ignorance, dude, or, rather, inability/unwillingness to read attentively.

Again..revealing to me...
Slaves aren't people. They were property.
You're comparing livestock to the wealthy. Except the livestock was treated better than slaves.

So, if they were considered property back then, we shouldn't consider them humans now? I'm lost in your argument. Do you disagree that inequality between slaves and rich folks was higher than inequality between the poorest and rich folks now?

Yeah, this whole, "Everything is fine because slaves were bad off." logic is kinda perplexing.

We are not talking about "everything is fine", we are talking about the title in the OP...

[Captain N]

There are plenty of trade skill positions out there that pay higher. But the effort it takes to get into them requires.... effort.

People tend to forget that many of those tradesmen also ended up out of work when the Housing Market crashed and there are reports we're heading down that path again.. Nothing saves anyone from going for good job to crap job -- not skills...not experience....not education. Having a wage that allows folks to still maintain a basic lifestyle if things get bad for them should be a priority in this country.

[May90]

But that's what you've been doing all thread: Pointing at third world nations and the US under slavery and saying, "See? Things are fine because at least we're not that!"

Sigh... That's not what I've been doing at all. But people on these forums surely like to take statements out of context.

[Captain N]

Indeed.

But "The Ballad of Hard Work" would have you believe that this is impossible. They just didn't work hard enough.

I like the Ballad of Hard Work -- It's usually sung by people with their own wages so abysmally low for their skills or education they're threatened that the lowest level of our workforce is seeking betterment for everyone. There's at least four people in this thread that preach that ballad yet cry foul about me personally being overpaid for my position despite the fact I have licenses in both the US and Canada. It's like that song only seems to apply to those who are making less money than they are.

[Austilias]

Modern definitions of 'poverty' in First World countries don't usually deserve to be dignified with a response.

[May90]

Um, that's exactly what you've been doing. Your very first post in the thread compared inequality today to inequality of "slaves vs. rich people" and you went on to talk about how people in third world nations make less than us, so we don't have "shit wages".

If your point isn't, "Slavery and third world nations are worse, so everything is fine!" then you're doing a bad job of showing it.

I was talking that people in almost all nations make less than us, not just in third world nations. I think there are only 2 or 3 western nations that make more than people in the US currently. So, when people talk about "shit wages", I ask for the thousandth time: compared to what?

And slavery is just an example to counter the commonly made point: "Inequality nowadays is all time high!". No, it's not; it's actually much lower than at most points in history (maybe at all of them), but ratings do not reflect that, since they evaluate only quantitative and not qualitative differences. The difference between a poor person being a second class citizen because they are black and a rich person is much higher than the difference between a poor regular citizen and a rich person.

[May90]

The absolute amount of a wage is largely meaningless without all the economic context.

Okay, let's look at PPP then:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_average_wage

Among the 1st world countries, it makes the US #2 (#4 considering only disposable income), after Luxembourg. Meaning, roughly (but not exactly), that people in the US averagely can afford more goods than people anywhere else in the 1st world, except for Luxembourg.

The US also features #14 highest minimum salary in the world, which means it is in top 10%. If that's "shit", then what is not?

[Kraenen]

Just a bit over 150 years ago there was slavery in the US, and the inequality between slaves and the richest citizens was magnitudes higher than the inequality we are facing nowadays. Even 60 years ago black population was waaaaaay worse off than the poorest free whites, so... People who say that inequality nowadays is the highest in the history of the US probably haven't studied the history in question much.

Actually it's interesting you mention that. At about that time (pre-1960s) blacks had approximately the same unemployment rate as whites and other measures such as fatherless children were significantly lower (about 20-30%, now about 70-80%). Part of what changed this was mass migration to the north.

[Sorrior]

Common sense would dictate that if you cannot afford something, don't do it. We have a society that has become dependent on Credit Cards and Payday Loans and who have no idea how to save money and not live within their means. Hard Work can actually work, if you have a realistic view on what it will accomplish. Don't think you can work a $12 an hour job and raise a family, that's just ignorant. There are plenty of trade skill positions out there that pay higher. But the effort it takes to get into them requires.... effort.

...You DO realize minimum wage used to let you di just that. Raise a family

[Endus]

What then? The answer is simple - stop being a low end person, learn some skills, and become a better person. Automation actually helps low paid workers, because it gives them motivation to NOT work at McDonald or other junk job.

This falsely presumes that there's an infinite number of higher-end jobs for skilled employees, so that there are guaranteed jobs they can get when they earn that education, every single one of them.

That isn't how the labor market works. These people would learn those skills, flood the market with employees with those skills, and those skills would become the new baseline for minimum-wage earners, due to competition among workers to secure those jobs.

That's how it's happened every time beforehand. It used to be that most people didn't bother with secondary school; that's why we still have the label "secondary" on it. Nowadays, a high school diploma qualifies you for only the most basic stuff, and not having one will leave you unqualified for many minimum-wage positions.

I was talking that people in almost all nations make less than us, not just in third world nations. I think there are only 2 or 3 western nations that make more than people in the US currently. So, when people talk about "shit wages", I ask for the thousandth time: compared to what?

And slavery is just an example to counter the commonly made point: "Inequality nowadays is all time high!". No, it's not; it's actually much lower than at most points in history (maybe at all of them), but ratings do not reflect that, since they evaluate only quantitative and not qualitative differences. The difference between a poor person being a second class citizen because they are black and a rich person is much higher than the difference between a poor regular citizen and a rich person.

Including slavery isn't really an honest comparison, since slaves weren't really an economic class of people in the USA; they were classified as essentially livestock. It wasn't that they had less wealth, it's that they weren't considered capable of owning anything, any more than a cow would have been.

Valid comparisons would be to situations like France, just prior to the French Revolution, which occurred largely due to the massive imbalance of wealth between the aristocracy and everyone else. And the wealth inequality in the USA today is more extreme than it was in France at that time.

[Endus]

"Average" is a pretty pointless metric when speaking about the gap between the top and the bottom, don't you think?

Yeah, that's using a mean average, not a median, when a median is more useful. Mean averages take the sum of all wages, and divide by the number of participants; this means incredibly high wages for a minority skew the numbers way too high. A median takes the numerically middle number on the ordered list.

Take a set of hourly wages;

$7, $7, $7, $7, $8, $8, $10, $13, $100,000

The mean average wage there is $11,118/hour. Clearly, that's not descriptive of most people, because that $100,000/hour skews everything. The median would be $8. That's more reasonable.

[May90]

Including slavery isn't really an honest comparison, since slaves weren't really an economic class of people in the USA; they were classified as essentially livestock. It wasn't that they had less wealth, it's that they weren't considered capable of owning anything, any more than a cow would have been.

I disagree; I think it only makes my comparison more relevant.

"Average" is a pretty pointless metric when speaking about the gap between the top and the bottom, don't you think?

Well, there are two things we've been considering so far. The gap in the US apparently is higher than in most other 1st world countries. The average quality of life is higher too, however, so when we talk about abstract "shit wages", I think mentioning it is appropriate.

Again, largely meaningless without economic context.

Living in the US and making twice as much as a Chinese sweatshop worker probably doesn't actually make you ok.

Okay, then:

http://www.ibtimes.com/minimum-wage-...age-us-1402417

"Minimum Wage And Purchasing Power Parity: Only Nine Countries Have A Higher Minimum Wage Than The US"

Which makes the statement about "shit wages" look even weirder.

---

See, I agree that many things in the US could be improved on, that this economy is very-very far from ideal, that there are strong negative sides to it. However, when people belonging to the 10% wealthiest population on this planet talk about how the oppressive government mistreats them... You know, I just can't take this seriously.

[Machismo]

whoa so false there buddy. the country with the highest GDP before america was CHINA... and before that was INDIA.

highest gdp = strongest economy

No, not even close.

GDP means nothing unless you relate it to the total population.

- - - Updated - - -

...You DO realize minimum wage used to let you di just that. Raise a family

The current minimum wage is slightly above the historical average in this country. Calls to increase it to $15 an hour, or even more, are not based on historical reality.

[May90]

The current minimum wage is slightly above the historical average in this country. Calls to increase it to $15 an hour, or even more, are not based on historical reality.

They are based on current reality though; what wasn't affordable in the past, is affordable now.

[Endus]

Okay, then:

http://www.ibtimes.com/minimum-wage-...age-us-1402417

"Minimum Wage And Purchasing Power Parity: Only Nine Countries Have A Higher Minimum Wage Than The US"

Which makes the statement about "shit wages" look even weirder.

Most other Western nations include health care coverage as part of the tax burden they're evaluating. Your comparison is ignoring that additional cost for health care completely, in its comparisons. If you get minimum wage here in Canada (hell, even if you aren't employed at all), you still get full medical coverage if you need heart surgery or break your leg or whatever. Just walk in, get diagnosed, get treated, pay nothing.

In the USA, you're either paying extra for that, by buying insurance, or you're paying out of pocket when it crops up, which is a huge financial burden.

[Endus]

The current minimum wage is slightly above the historical average in this country. Calls to increase it to $15 an hour, or even more, are not based on historical reality.

That the minimum wage has been historically screwed is not an argument that it shouldn't be fixed.

The minimum wage, when it was instituted in the US, was meant to be a living wage.

FDR (the President who oversaw the implementation of the minimum wage), from his Statement on National Industrial Recovery Act;

"No business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country."
"By living wages, I mean more than a bare subsistence level — I mean the wages of a decent living.”

[Machismo]

They are based on current reality though; what wasn't affordable in the past, is affordable now.

There's a ton of cherry picking of data in this thread, and it's entertaining to watch. Wealth inequality is getting worse, no matter what the OP tries to pull by citing Rockefeller. It was also a disingenuous attempt to try and use average wages, instead of median ones. Then there's also the crowd spouting misinformation about the minimum wage and purchasing power, but then ignoring the comparison to inflation year over year.

[Sorrior]

No, not even close.

GDP means nothing unless you relate it to the total population.

- - - Updated - - -



The current minimum wage is slightly above the historical average in this country. Calls to increase it to $15 an hour, or even more, are not based on historical reality.

.....The historic average WITHOUT compensating for both productivity and inflation.

Our minimum wage is FAR lower then it should be

[May90]

Most other Western nations include health care coverage as part of the tax burden they're evaluating. Your comparison is ignoring that additional cost for health care completely, in its comparisons. If you get minimum wage here in Canada (hell, even if you aren't employed at all), you still get full medical coverage if you need heart surgery or break your leg or whatever. Just walk in, get diagnosed, get treated, pay nothing.

In the USA, you're either paying extra for that, by buying insurance, or you're paying out of pocket when it crops up, which is a huge financial burden.

That is true. I suppose it would be hard to account for that though, exactly due to the difference in the healthcare systems. But yes, I think we can all agree that the healthcare system in the US could use some improvement, to say the least.

That logic is useless, though. You sound like Fox News informing us that "99% of poor households have a REFRIGERATOR!" as if that means something.

I mean, sure, 1000 years ago even kings couldn't eat half the shit that we have easy access to today, that doesn't mean that we're all Super-Kings now.

I meant something completely different: since the US economy is much stronger now than it was in the past, it can afford increasing minimum wages significantly, way above what was possible previously. So yes, I am advocating for significant increase of minimum wages: I think a country such as the US can very well afford $15/h, and probably much more. Granted, some businesses might need governmental help then, since not all can afford to pay their workers that much.