Let's Talk About Minimum Wage, Class Warfare, Wage Gaps, etc.

[WCan_Kid]

Originally Posted by rubecube

It can be pretty difficult to find the energy and time to grocery-shop and meal prep when you're working two jobs.

It was, but I survived.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Well for a 10 year old vehicle under $5000 there are 229 choices in the Calgary area. It was one example. The point is, there are smart choices you can make that don't have you forking out $600 as month on an unnecessary vehicle cost.

I chose then ewer vehicle initially to show for half the price you can get a safe, reliable choice. For much less than that you can get something that may not be as reliable, but even with repair costs you'd still be miles ahead of a new one.

As I said in my previous post

You can make it work, in Calgary, but its extremely tight.

An average, dual income home shouldn't have to just "make it work". They should be afforded you know.... an average lifestyle. Nice home, good car, safe and reliable childcare, savings, food on the table, internet, etc.

These aren't luxuries. Working full time in a fairly average job should allow you to provide the basics that I described above. If that's not happening, then there's something seriously broken with our economy.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Make it easier for exploited workers to unionize. If anyone can think of any other option that has historically had a bigger proven impact in addressing low wages, income inequality and class warfare, I’d like to hear it.

French Revolution.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Sliver do you know that your kids want your money?

I am at the point where my parents (mid-80's) and my MIL (mid-70's) are openly talking about how much money they will be leaving behind. They are saying things like "Well we can't do X because we want to leave you money".

The message from my wife and I is, #### no. Spend what you have on yourselves. There is no and there shouldn't any expectation that my parents leave me any $.

They're too young and naive to want it right now. They also didn't grow up in a house where the furnace crapped out and it was -30 and their mom burst into tears because she had no money to fix it. They honestly are blissfully unaware of how hard it can be when you don't have enough money.

I'm finding as I get older major diminishing returns in how happy a new cool purchase makes me. Planning for my kids puts a smile on my face, so maybe it isn't as altruistic as I'm making it sound. I like to plan to be able to help them because I like it, not because I feel I'm giving anything up.

If they end up being financially well off and not in need of my help, fata it, I'll buy a Rolex and a Porsche to celebrate.

If your parents have extra money, pitch buying a "legacy property" to them. I love that term for a family cabin/condo somewhere fun. Everybody gets to enjoy it (including them) and you can create some awesome memories. Invermere, Canmore, Radium...lots to choose from.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by WCan_Kid

It was, but I survived.

Not saying it's impossible, just that I understand the struggle. I also know quite a few people my age and younger who just flat out don't know how to cook. Totally boggles my mind.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Upzoning alone isn't going to fix the housing market without greater restrictions on speculation. If you allow speculators to continue buying up supply without renting back to the local population, you're just exacerbating the problem.

That might happen, because humans are irrational, but doesn't make sense rationally.

If you upzone, you pop the bubble. Who wants to speculate on that?
If you buy investment property, why forego rental income?

But anyways, my argument wasn't that other measures aren't necessary. Only that upzoning is. There is no successful affordable housing program possible without addressing the root issue, which is that housing is not market-priced because of legislated supply restrictions.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Sliver

They're too young and naive to want it right now. They also didn't grow up in a house where the furnace crapped out and it was -30 and their mom burst into tears because she had no money to fix it. They honestly are blissfully unaware of how hard it can be when you don't have enough money.

I am aware. I tell the kids stories about growing up with no money.

If your parents have extra money, pitch buying a "legacy property" to them. I love that term for a family cabin/condo somewhere fun. Everybody gets to enjoy it (including them) and you can create some awesome memories. Invermere, Canmore, Radium...lots to choose from.

Yeah Nah, I'd rather they travel the #### out of themselves or hell become crackheads if that's what they want.

A "legacy property" sounds too self serving to me.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Make it easier for exploited workers to unionize. If anyone can think of any other option that has historically had a bigger proven impact in addressing low wages, income inequality and class warfare, I’d like to hear it.

Taxing the rich. Inequality has exploded because we stopped doing that.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I am aware. I tell the kids stories about growing up with no money.

Yeah Nah, I'd rather they travel the #### out of themselves or hell become crackheads if that's what they want.

A "legacy property" sounds too self serving to me.

Travel sucks. Going to a place and all your stuff is already there and a bidet already installed on the toilet is where it's at.

[GirlySports]

there no reason in today's age not to know how to cook or not know how to fix simple stuff, there's Youtube!

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

there no reason in today's age not to know how to cook or not know how to fix simple stuff, there's Youtube!

Oh I agree. It still baffles me though that some kids were never taught any of these things by their parents.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by SebC

Taxing the rich. Inequality has exploded because we stopped doing that.

This statement is immensely simplistic, completely naïve and absolutely correct.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Oh I agree. It still baffles me though that some kids were never taught any of these things by their parents.

Nice that you had good parents, but not everyone does. Or, as identified in this thread, perhaps they had two parents that were working full time and couldn't spend much time teaching them things. Or, maybe they only had 1 parent and that parent had to work extremely hard to keep life moving.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

But a lot of consumer behaviours have increased dramatically across the board. Meals purchased outside the home have increased five-fold in the last 30 years. It isn’t just rich people going out to Earl’s, it’s 20-somethings who work in retail getting pho, schwarma, or pizza 5 days a week instead of bringing a bag lunch. Clothes used to be so expensive that people actually patched and mended them instead of picking up three new t-shirts for $20. Airplane vacations used to be an occasional indulgence of the affluent. I know some people still can’t afford them today, but a far broader segment of the population got on a plane to go somewhere hot for a vacation in 2018 than in 1982.

Most 30 year olds today would find the average standard of living in 1982 pretty dire. Everything except real estate and education was more expensive, less accessible, and came in far less variety. I’m not sure people really appreciate now dramatically discretionary consumer spending has increased in recent decades. The working class today eat at KFC and shop at Winner’s. 40 years ago they made tuna casserole last four days and most of their clothes were hand-me-downs.

I don't think 1982 is as different as you make it out to be.

In May 1982 retail sales were totalled at $10.318B, or about $25.049B in today's dollars. In May 2021 retail sales were totalled at $53.8B.

Against population in today's dollars, that's about $1000 per person, per month in 1982 vs $1,415 per person, per month.

Consider the average weekly earning in 1982 was about $934 in today's dollars, and today it sits at around $1,200, it's really only a difference of people today spending 27% of their monthly income on retail and people of 1982 spending 25% of their monthly income on retail.

That means a person making $60,000 today but with retail spending habits like someone from 1982 would be spending about $100 less per month, or $1250 instead of $1350.

I'm not sure that's a dramatic difference over the course of 40 years. Things may have become cheaper in some respects, but other things have increased in price, things don't last as long, etc. etc.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Nice that you had good parents, but not everyone does. Or, as identified in this thread, perhaps they had two parents that were working full time and couldn't spend much time teaching them things. Or, maybe they only had 1 parent and that parent had to work extremely hard to keep life moving.

Oh, my parents weren't great. My point was more "I can't believe how many of us had ####ty parents/parents who worked too much," than blaming the kids who didn't get taught.

[GirlySports]

Back on topic, here's my view on minimum wage, it was never meant to be a sustainable, living wage. Most of us here are say, over 35. I'm not sure anyone in our age range who say, graduated high school in Calgary 15+ years ago is still working a minimum wage job. Minimum wage jobs were meant to be a stepping stone to gain experience. A 16 year old working at a Safeway for $7 an hour in the 90s, that was a lot of money! That money was saved up for the future, leaving home, going to post-secondary, continuing to work, starting a family etc...

At some point minimum wage jobs became careers so to speak, and I don't know why. I don't know why that logjam occurred. Some possible reason.

1. Kids no longer want to do those jobs so they went to adults
2. Only immigrants now do minimum wage jobs
3. Population increased, more people in above minimum wage jobs pushing people down to minimum wage jobs to survive
4. My favorite argument (too many degrees). The qualifications keep increasing, there are people with degrees being cashiers at Walmart
5. The minimum wage circle is larger. When minimum wage was $10 a decade ago, there were $15 jobs. But when minimum wage was increased incrementally to $15, those already existing $15 job didn't increase, so they are now lumped in.


I realize that cost of living has spiraled. I don't know if Minimum wage will ever catch up. At $15 in Alberta it still seems low. Is $20 the answer? Can businesses afford it?

[GGG]

People spending the same % makes a lot of sense. To make a comparison though you would need to understand what they purchased with that money.

How many pairs of shoes does the average person own compared to 1982.

I have trouble comparing because I’m more well off then my parents were at my age.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Nice that you had good parents, but not everyone does. Or, as identified in this thread, perhaps they had two parents that were working full time and couldn't spend much time teaching them things. Or, maybe they only had 1 parent and that parent had to work extremely hard to keep life moving.

If you had one parent, there was no way you were home. You were out working at 14 to support that one parent. So i guess everyone was too busy to cook. 99c burritos it is.

[81MC]

Originally Posted by _Q_

As I said in my previous post

You can make it work, in Calgary, but its extremely tight.

An average, dual income home shouldn't have to just "make it work". They should be afforded you know.... an average lifestyle. Nice home, good car, safe and reliable childcare, savings, food on the table, internet, etc.

These aren't luxuries. Working full time in a fairly average job should allow you to provide the basics that I described above. If that's not happening, then there's something seriously broken with our economy.

But the ‘average’ is clearly not sustainable (if debt load warnings are your thing).

Why is ‘nice’ home and ‘good’ car average, and what’s makes them ‘nice’ or ‘good’? I look around city streets, and the ‘average’ car isn’t just good; it’s a ####ing technological marvel, a modern automobile with shiny paint, aluminum wheels, power everything and a dealer sticker on the back. And clearly people are paying for them, future prospects be damned.

Average? The only thing average about them is the average monthly payment is more than the average monthly food bill. That’s not the result of broken economy, it’s the result of broken priorities.

Add in a three story house with 2.5 baths for your family of 4?

Man, that’s not struggling to get ahead. That’s literally living like you are ahead without the work to get there.

And I’m not better man. I got in serious debt in like 2 years by acting a fool. business and marketing beat me, that’s my fault alone.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Back on topic, here's my view on minimum wage, it was never meant to be a sustainable, living wage.

This is entirely wrong and shows ignorance of history. Here's what President Franklin Roosevelt said about the minimum wage when he passed it as part of the New Deal (large portions of which were subsequently copied by Canada and other nations) back in the 1930s:

"It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By 'business' I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level - I mean the wages of decent living."

Source: http://docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/odnirast.html