[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

And nearly half are under 24. I have a hard time buying that a 20 year old with no kids paying $200 a month rent for a decent place as someone raising a family in a DC suburb.

$200/month for rent? Where in the US are you finding $200/month for rent? I've had friends with roommates here in Pittsburgh, which doesn't have exorbitant housing costs in line with DC/Boston/NYC/LA--they were all paying between $500-700/month to share an apartment. $200/month isn't even close to normal, unless the kid is still living at home. And if you are in one of those bigger cities, $200 might buy you a car to sleep in.

At some level, a high enough minimum wage will kill jobs. You can't argue that a $50 minimum wage wouldn't be devastating in the amount of jobs it kills.

Has anyone advocated for a $50 minimum wage? I've heard that bandied about before on places like Fox News, and it's so incredibly tone deaf. No one is saying we need to suddenly make all minimum wage workers 6 figure/year earners. No one is saying we need them to suddenly be upper middle class. But no one can survive on under $20k a year in this day and age. Period, end of story. I don't care how well you budget or how hard you scrimp and save, $20k/year isn't viable for even a single person with no dependents. And by the way, $20 is still nearly $5000 higher than 40 hrs/52 weeks a year on minimum wage.

There's also the issue with a lot of those minimum wage employers refusing to give workers 40 hours, and also refusing to give them regular schedules so that they can get a second job to to make ends meet around that insufficient wage from the first job.

The fact is though, it is hard to figure out that right number that strikes the balance where the benefits are greater than the risks. In my opinion $15 is above that line nationally. There are regions in the US where it makes sense, but there are regions where it would have very negative effects. Are there countries in the world that have $15USD min wages that haven't seen negative affects? How does their cost of living compare?

Australia's minimum wage for workers over 21 is over $15/hr. I can't speak to their exacts for their economy, but it doesn't seem like they're doing all that bad.

There's also a rate at which income is so low that the federal government is forced to step in and help the people who aren't making enough to survive on their own, despite working full time (or at least wanting to work full time if given the opportunity). Income has gotten to that point. It could easily be made a state issue, and some states have actually stepped up to the plate.

For example, Minnesota has their minimum wage set to increase from $9 last year to $9.50 next year (with exceptions for trainees, small businesses, etc). Minnesota has also seen strong economic growth in the last few years under progressive leadership. Directly next door, Wisconsin has passed laws to bust up unions, has become a "right to work" state, and they're facing budgetary shortfalls and painfully slow job growth.

There is no one who is championing a $50 minimum wage, that's preposterous. The change in quality of life from making $15k a year and making $25k a year is dramatic. By the way, to make that $25k a year a possibility, the minimum wage would only need to be around $12/hour, which is likely the actual end goal of the campaigning of people like Bernie Sanders. Again--do it the way Minnesota did it. Leave exceptions for trainees, leave exceptions for businesses with fewer than 50 employees, leave exceptions for those under say 21 years of age. I'd love to let states deal with it, but more states are working to abolish minimum wage than to bring it in line with current cost-of-living realities.

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

Of course someone can go to college, provided that they have the academic record to support admittance. Financial aid exists and it is given out to many (if not most) students. Cheaper community colleges exist, and financial aid works there too.

My boss has two children in college right now, at a mid-size school. Despite getting pretty sizable scholarships, they're paying over $30k/year each for their children to go to college. Fortunately my boss is upper middle class enough to afford it. If you're coming from a family where your parents are already in poverty? That isn't an option. Just flat out isn't an option. You want people to be responsible with their money, but at the same time you're advocating that they just go to college despite the massive costs involved?

Even Penn State, a state school, for in-state tuition charges over 17k a year, so for four years of school, you have nearly 80k in debt. That's fiscally responsible, right?

And what about all of the people who go 80k+ into debt to go to college as you suggest, who then can't manage to get a job making enough money to repay that debt? They can't default on a student loan, there's no bankruptcy to get out of that student loan debt (though again, Donald Trump has repeatedly made poor investments and put companies into bankruptcy while himself coming out scot-free). They'll come after you no matter what to get that money back for those loans.

It's not as simple as "go to college, get a good job, pay your bills responsibly." If it were that easy, everyone would do it.

None of this helps me personally, by the way. My taxes would be raised under Sanders plan. I also went and got my education and paid for every last penny of it by myself. I worked my butt off to get where I am today and I'm damn proud of it--I also came from a middle class family to start with. I wasn't starting off behind the 8-ball, I got a running start because I'm a white girl who grew up in a decent neighborhood and got a decent education and also got really lucky to know the right people to help her succeed.

Success is a lot of hard work, certainly, but it's also a whole lot of luck.

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

Generally speaking, yes.

ETA: I saw a quote a few days ago that I think speaks to this matter:

Rich people plan for three generations. Poor people plan for Saturday night

Rich people can afford to plan for three generations (and the two generations after don't really have to plan, because everything was given to them. Look at the Waltons. Daddy did all the work and left them millionaires through no real work of their own.). Poor people have to focus on surviving.